3 LP's - D167D3 - (p) 1982
2 CD's - 417 140-2 - (c) 1986
19 CD's - 480 2577 - (p & c) 2009

The Symphonies - Vol. 1





Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791)





Long Playing 1
46' 52"
Symphony No. 1 in E flat Major, K. 16 12' 53"

- [Allegro molto · Andante · Presto]


Symphony No. 4 in D Major, K. 19 8' 52"

- [Allegro · Andante · Presto]





Symphony in F Major, K. 19a / Anh. 223 13' 26"

- [Allegro assai · Andante · Presto]


Symphony No. 5  in B flat Major, K. 22 6' 35"

- [Allegro · Andante · Allegro molto]


Symphony in D Major, K. 32 5' 06"

- [Molto allegro · Andante · Menuetto & Trio · Finale]


Long Playing 2
48' 09"
Symphony in D Major, K. 97 / K. 73m 10' 29"

- [Allegro · Andante · Menuetto & Trio · Presto]


Symphony in D Major, K. 95 / K. 73n 12' 38"

- [Allegro - · Andante · Menuetto & Trio · Allegro]





Symphony in D Major, K. 81 / K. 73l 11' 16"

- [Allegro · Andante · Allegro molto]


Symphony No. 10 in G Major, K. 74 7' 55"

- [Allegro-Andante · Rondeau (Allegro)]


Symphony in D Major, K. 87 / K. 74a
 5' 51"

- [Allegro · Andante grazioso · Presto]


Long Playing 3
43' 48"
Symphony No. 11 in D Major, K. 84 / K. 73q 8' 51"

- [Allegro · Andante · Allegro]


Symphony No. 13 in F Major, K. 112 15' 05"

- [Allegro · Andante · Menuetto & Trio · Allegro molto]





Symphony in D Major, K. 120 / K. 111 / K. 111a
6' 24"


- [Allegro assai · Andante grazioso · Presto]


Symphony in C Major, K. 96 / K. 111b
 13' 28"

- [Allegro · Andante · Menuetto & Trio · Allegro molto]





 
THE ACADEMY OF ANCIENT MUSIC (on authentic instruments) A=430 - directed by
Jaap Schröder, Concert Master
Christopher Hogwood, Continuo



Violins Japp Schröder (Antonio Stradivarius 1709) - Catherine Mackintosh (Rowland Ross 1978 [Amati] & Ian Boumeester, Amsterdam 1669) - Simon Standage (Rogeri, Brescia 1699) - Monica Huggett (Rowland Ross 1977 [Stradivarius]) - Elizabeth Wilcock (Grancino, Cremona 1652) - Roy Goodman (Rowland Ross 1977 [Stradivarius]) - David Woodcock (Anon. circa 1775) - Joan Brickley (Mittewald, circa 1780) - Alison Bury (Anon. England, circa 1730) - Judith Falkus (Eberle, Prague 1733) - Christopher Hirons (Duke, circa 1775) - John Holloway (Sebastian Kloz 1750 & Mariani 1650) - Polly Waterfield ( Rowland Ross 1979 [Amati]) - Micaela Comberti (Anon. England circa 1740) - Miles Golding (Anon. Austria, circa 1780 & Roze, Orleans 1756) - Kay Usher (Anon. England, circa 1750) - Julie Miller (Anon. France, circa 1745 & Rowland Ros 1979 [Amati]) - Susan Carpenter-Jacobs (Jacobs-Franco Giraud 1978 [Amati] & Rowland Ross 1979 [Amati]) - Robin Stowell (David Hopf, circa 1780) - Richard Walz (David Rubio 1977 [Stradivarius]) - Judith Garside (Anon. France, circa 1730 & Joseph Hill(?), London 1766) - Rachel Isserlis (John Johnson 1759) - Robert Hope Simpson (Samuel Collier, circa 1740) - Catherine Weiss (Rowland Ross 1977 [Stradivarius]) - Jennifer Helsham (Alan Bevitt 1979 [Stradivarius]) - Jane Debenham (Anon. German, 18th century) - Roy Howat (Henry Rawlins, London Bridge 1775) - Christel Wiehe (John Johnson, London 1759) - Roy Mowatt (Rowland Ross 1979 [Stradivarius]) - Roderick Skeaping (Rowland Ross 1976 [Amati]) - Eleanor Sloan (German(?), circa 1790) - June Baines (Nicholas Amati 1681) - Stuart Deeks (Saxon, circa 1770) - Graham Cracknell (Anon. England 1780)



Violas Jan Schlapp (Joseph Hill 1770) - Trevor Jones (Rowland Ross 1977 [Stradivarius]) - Katherine Hart (Charles and Samuel Thompson 1750) - Colin Kitching (Rowland Ross 1978 [Stradivarius]) - Nicola Cleminson (McDonnel, Ireland, circa 1760) - Philip Wilby (Carrass Topham 1974 [Gasparo da Salo]) - Annette Isserlis (Ian Clarke 1978 [Guarnieri]) - Simon Rowland-Jones (Anon. England, circa 1810) - Judith Garside (Hill School, England 1766)



Violoncellos Anthony Pleeth (David Rubio 1977 [Stradivarius]) - Richard Webb (David Rubio 1975 [Januarius Gagliano]) - Mark Cuadle (Anon. England, circa 1700) - Juliet Lehwalder (Jacob Haynes 1745) - Susan Sheppard (Peter Walmsley 1740)



Double Basses Barry Guy (The Tarisio, Gasparo da Salo 1560) - Peter McCarthy (David Techler, circa 1725 & Anon. England, circa 1770) - Keith Marjoram (Anon., Italy circa 1560)



Flutes
 Stephen Preston (Anon. France, circa 1790) - Nicholas McGegan (George Astor, circa 1790) - Lisa Beznosiuk (Goulding, London, circa 1805) - Guy Williams (Monzani, circa 1800)



Oboes Stanley King (Rudolf Tutz 1978 [Grundmann]) - Clare Shanks (W. Milhouse, circa 1760) - Sophia McKenna (W. Milhouse, circa 1760) - David Reichenberg (Harry Vas Dias 1978 [Grassi]) - Robin Canter (Kusder, circa 1780)



Bassoons
 Jeremy Ward (Porthaus, Paris, circa 1780) - Felix Warnock (Savary jeune 1820) - Alastair Mitchell (W. Milhouse, circa 1810)



Natural Horns William Prince (Courtois neveu, circa 1800) - Keith Maries (Anon. Germany(?) circa 1785 & Courtois neveu, circa 1800) - Christian Rutherford (Kelhermann, Paris 1810 & Courtois neveu, circa 1800) - Roderick Shaw (Raoux, circa 1830) - John Humphries (Halari, 1825) - Patrick Garvey (Leopold Uhlmann, circa 1810)



Natural Trumpets Michael Laird (Laird 1977, German) - Iaan Wilson (Laird 1977, German) - Stephen Keavy (Keavy 1979, German)



Timpani David Corkhill (Hawkes & Son, circa 1890) - Charles Fullbrook (Hawkes & Son, circa 1890)



Harpsichord Christopher Hogwood, Nicholas McGegan, David Roblou (Thomas Culliford, London 1782 & Rainer Schutze 1968 & Jacobus Kirckman 1766)
 





Luogo e data di registrazione
St. Jude-On-The-Hill, London (United Kingdom):
- maggio 1980 (K. 16, 19, 22, 32, 74, 87)
Kingsway Hall, London (United Kingdom):
- settembre 1980 (K. 97, 95, 120, 96)
- novembre 1981 (K. 19a)
St. Jude's, Hampstead Garden Suburb, London (United Kingdom):
- dicembre 1979 (K. 81, 84, 112)

Registrazione: live / studio
studio

Producer / Engineer
Peter Wadland & Morten Winding / John Dunkerley & Simon Eadon

Prima Edizione LP
Oiseau Lyre - D167D3 (3 LP's) - durata 46' 52" | 48' 09" | 43' 48" - (p) 1982 - Analogico

Prima Edizione CD
Oiseau Lyre - 417 140-2 (2 CD's) - durata 68' 02" | 70' 27" - (c) 1986 - ADD

Edizione Integrale CD
Decca (Editions de l'Oiseau-Lyre) - 480 2577 (19 CD's) - (p & c) 2009 - ADD / DDD

Note
-













Mozart and the symphonic traditions of his time by Neal Zaslaw
The London Symphonies
Leopold Mozart realized early that he had on his hands what he later referred to as "the miracle that God permitted to be born in Salzburg." Acting with vigour and imagination to carry out what he conceived to be a sacred trust, he virtually abandoned the furtherment of his own career in order to devote himself to his son’s education. This meant, among other things, that from January 1762 when little Wolfgang was just turning six, the Mozart family was frequently on the road, visiting the courts and musical cenhes of western Europe. These trips were intended to raise money, to spread the fame of the infant prodigy, and to educate Wolfgang by exposing him to the important music and musicians of the day. Thus it was that toward the end of April 1764 the Mozarts found themselves in London. By the beginning of August the eight-year-old Wolfgang had to his credit some four-dozen unpublished keyboard pieces, as well as three collections published in Paris and London containing ten sonatas for keyboard with violin. How he came to write his first symphony was recalled in the years following his death by his sister N annerl, herself a precocious keyboard player who was thirteen at the time:
'On the 5th of August [we] had to rent a country house in Chelsea, outside the city of London, so that father could recover from a dangerous throat ailment, which brought him almost to death’s door... Our father lay dangerously ill; we were forbidden to touch the keyboard. And so, in order to occupy himself, Mozart composed his first symphony with all the instruments of the orchestra, especially trumpets and kettledrums. I had to copy it as I sat at his side. While he composed and I copied he said to me, "Remind me to give the horn something worthwhile to do!"... At last after two months, as father had completely recovered, [we] returned to London.'
Leopold and his family moved back to London around the end of September, and Wolfgang and Nannerl resumed their round of public and private concerts and appearances at Court, while Wolfgang received instruction in singing from the Italian castrato Giovanni Manzuoli. From 6 February 1765 notices appeared in London newspapers for a 'Concert of Vocal and Instrumental Music’ for the benefit of 'Miss MOZART of Twelve and Master MOZART of Eight Years of Age; Prodigies of Nature.' (Note that Leopold misrepresented his children's ages.) On 8 February Leopold wrote to his Salzburg friend, patron and landlord, Lorenz Hagenauer:
'On the evening of the 15th we are giving a concert, which will probably bring me in about one hundred and fifty guineas. Whether I shall still make anything after that and, if so, what, I do not know... Oh, what a lot of things I have to do. The symphonies at the concert will all be by Wolfgang Mozart. I must copy them myself, unless I want to pay one shilling for each sheet. Copying music is a very profitable business here.'
The concert was postponed until Monday the 18th, however, because a performance of Thomas Ame's oratorio Judith had been put back from the 7th to the 15th, tying up some artists upon whose services the Mozarts had counted. A second postponement occurred for unstated reasons. From 15 February notices appeared in London newspapers reading:
'HAYMARKET, Little Theatre.
THE CONCERT for the Benefit of Miss and
Master MOZART will be certainly
performed on Thursday the 21st instant, which
will begin exactly at six,
which will not hinder the Nobility and Gentry
from meeting in other Assemblies
on the same Evening.
Tickets to be had of Mr. Mozart,
at Mr. Williamson’s in
Thrift-street, Soho, and at the said Theatre.
Tickets delivered for the 15th will be admitted.
A Box Ticket admits two into the Gallery.
To prevent Mistakes, the Ladies and Gentlemen
are desired to send their
Servants to keep Places for the Boxes, and give
their Names to the Boxkeepers
on Thursday the 21st in the Afternoon.

The notices published on the day of the concert contained an additional sentence: 'All the Overtures [i.e., symphonies] will be from the Composition of these astonishing Composers, who are only eight Years old.' (An error made Wolfgang and Nannerl the same age and both composers.) Some weeks later Leopold sent Hagenauer a report of Wolfgang's symphonic debut, which, disappointingly for us, dealt with financial rather than artistic matters:
'My concert, which I intended to give on February 15th, did not take place until the 21st, and on account of the number of entertainments (which really weary one here) was not so well attended as I had hoped. Nevertheless, I took in about hundred and thirty guineas. As, however, the expenses connected with it amounted to over twentyseven guineas, I have not made much more than one hundred guineas.'
The programme of 21 February 1765 has not come down to us, but extrapolating from programmes preserved from similar occasions, we can make an educated guess about the shape of the event. Concerts began and ended with symphonies, which might also have been used to complete the first half, to launch the second, or to serve both purposes. Between the symphonies there would have been performances on the harpsichord or chamber organ by Wolfgang and Nannerl, together and separately, improvised and prepared. Some of London’s favourite instrumentalists and singers would have contributed solos, as was the custom at benefit concerts. (We know which of the virtuosos active in London were associated with the Mozarts because Leopold listed their names in his travel diary.) The symphonies performed on 21 February 1765 must have been from among K. 16, K. 19, and K. 19a, all of which are thought to date from this period in London. In addition, we should not rule out of consideration two other symphonies (K. 16a and 19b), now lost and known only from their incipits in an old Breitkopf catalogue; these are also believed to have been composed by Mozart in London:


From 11 March a series of notices appeared in London newspapers announcing the Mozarts' final concert appearance there, on 13 May. The programme again included 'all the OVERTURES of this little Boy’s own Composition'.
As early as 19 May 1763 a letter from Vienna had reported that, '...we fall into utter amazement on seeing a boy aged six at the keyboard and hearing him... accompany at sight symphonies, arias and recitatives at the great concerts...'. That Wolfgang was not only able to direct his own symphonies from the keyboard but that he did so in London, is confirmed by one of Leopold's newspaper announcements stating that the concert of 13 May would 'chiefly be conducted by his Son.'
Mozart's London symphonies reveal how perfectly the boy had absorbed and could imitate the most up-to-date, galant style of the period. His models were primarily the cosmopolitan group of German-speaking composers active in Paris and London: Johann Gottfried Eckard, Leontzi Honauer, Hermann Friedrich Raupach, Christian Hochbrucker and Johann Schobert in the former city; Johann Cluistian Bach and Carl Friedrich Abel in the latter. The care with which the little Mozart studied one of Abel’s symphonies is indicated by the fact that he copied it out himself. More than a century later, the existence of Mozart’s manuscript of Abel’s symphony caused it to be published in the old Complete Works as one of Mozarts own early symphonies (the Symphony No. 3 in Eb major, formerly K. 18, now K. Anh. A51).
Though there is no evidence for the assertion that Mozart received formal instruction from J. C. Bach, the two were closely associated in London and the music of the older man influenced the younger throughout his career. J. C. Bach was one of the few musicians about whom only praise appears in the Mozart family correspondence. When Bach died, Mozart paid him tribute in the slow movement of the piano concerto, K. 414/385p, and when Abel died he did likewise in the finale of the violin sonata, K. 526 - in each case basing his memorial on a work by the man whom he wished to honour.
We do not know the make-up of the undoubtedly modest orchestra that Leopold Mozart assembled for the concerts of 21 February and 13 May 1765, but we do have information about other ensembles of the period. We have therefore based our interpretation of Mozart's three London symphonies on a characteristic small English orchestra of the mid-1760s: the strings 6-5-2-2-1, with the necessary wind (pairs of oboes and horns) as well as harpsichord continuo and a bassoon doubling the bass line.

Symphony in Eb major, K.16
The manuscript score of this work is found in the collection that was in Berlin until World War II and is now at Kraków. Unlike several other very early works which are in his father’s hand, this one is in Wolfgang’s. At the top of the first page is written 'Sinfonia, di Sig. Wolfgang Mozart a london 1764.' The manuscript begins tidily, as if intended to be a fair copy, but extensive corrections were then entered by Mozart in a larger, cruder hand, creating the appearance of work-in-progress. This symphony has always been considered Mozart’s first, but can it really be the one described in Nannerl’s account? As we have seen, Nannerl mentioned that she copied the symphony and that it called for trumpets and kettledrums, neither condition applying here. Of course, many symphonies of the third quarter of the 18th century did circulate shorn of their trumpet and kettledrum parts, which were often considered optional and sometimes separately notated and absent from the score. Mozart’s usual trrunpet keys were C, D, and Eb major, so this symphony could indeed have included those instruments. Furthermore, one might speculate that perhaps Nannerl did copy a score but that Wolfgang so thoroughly revised it that it became illegible, forcing him to make another copy - the one we now have - before continuing his revisions.
Another fact, the meaning of which is still unclear, is that the cover for the original parts to the Symphony in D major, K. 19, has notations on it, in Leopold’s hand, indicating that it had orignally served first as the cover for parts to a symphony in F major (presumably K. 19a) and then for parts to one in C major (presrunably the missing K. 19b) - but there is no mention of a symphony in Eb. As for giving the horn 'something worthwhile to do,' that is perhaps satisfied by the passage in the andante of K. 16 where the horn plays the motive do-re-fa-mi, known to everyone from the finale of Mozart's 'Jupiter' symphony. Considering all of the evidence, however, we are forced to conclude that the Eb symphony, K. 16, is probably not the work described in Nannerl's anecdote, and that Mozart's 'first' symphony must be lost.
The first movement of K. 16 opens with a three-bar fanfare in octaves, immediately contrasted with a quieter eight-bar series of suspensions, all of which is repeated. This leads to a brief agitato section, and the first group of ideas is brought to a close by a cadence on the dominant. At this point the wind fall silent and we hear the initial idea of the second group, which is extended by a passage of rising scales in the lower strings accompanied by tremolo in the violins. A brief coda concludes the exposition, which is repeated. The second half of the movement, also repeated, covers the same ground as the first, working its way through the dominant (Bb) and the relative minor (c) to reach the tonic (Eb) only at the beginning of the second group.
The andante - a binary movement in C minor - is a remarkably successful bit of atmospheric writing. The sustained wind, the mysterious triplets in the upper strings, and the stealthy duplets in the brass instruments, combine to create a scene that would have been perfectly at home in an opera of the period, perhaps to accompany a clandestine nocturnal rendezvous.
With the beginning of the presto, the sun rises and another fanfare launches us into a vigorous jig-like finale in the form of a simple rondo. The refrain of the rondo is committedly diatonic in character, but the intervening episodes are filled with delightfully piquant touches of chromaticism in the latest, most galant manner.
Those writers who have been at considerable pains to point out the great differences in length, complexity and originality between this earliest surviving symphony of Mozart and his last, may have missed a crucial point: there is little difference in length, complexity or originality between Mozart's K. 16 and the symphonies of J. C. Bach’s op. 3 and Abel’s op. 7, which he took as his models.

Symphony in D major, K.19
This symphony survives in the Bavarian State Library in Munich as a set of orchestral parts in Leopold Mozart's hand, in the cover mentioned in the discussion of K. 16. The manuscript also contains what is described in the Mozart literature as a 'keyboard reduction' of the second and third movements written in a childish hand. It is disputed whether or not this 'keyboard reduction' may have been the original notation from which those movements were subsequently orchestrated, and whether or not the unidentified hand may be Nannerl's.
The first movement opens with the kind of fanfare, used for signalling by posthoms or military trumpets, which never returns. The timbre of the movement is noticeably brighter than that of the previous symphony, due to the resonance that D major gives to the strings. The movement proceeds on its extroverted way, in a kind of march tempo, with no repeats. An especially nice touch is the unanticipated. A sharp with which the development section begins.
The andante in G major 2/4 evokes a conventional, pastoral serenity. Its 'yodelling' melodies and droning accompaniments were undoubtedly intended to evoke thoughts of hurdy-gurdies and bagpipes. The finale, 3/8, although marked presto as in the previous symphony, is however not quite as rapid, as the presence of demisemiquavers reveals. It is an energetic binary movement with both halves repeated. An occasional 'yodelling' in the melody ties it to the previous movement.

Symphony in F major, K.19a
At the beginning of February 1981 Mozart lovers were suprised and delighted to read in their newspapers press dispatches from Munich describing the rediscovery of a lost Mozart symphony. A set of parts in Leopold Mozart's hand, found among some private papers, proved to be the Symphony in F major, K. 19a, the existence of which had been known from the incipit of its first movement, which was notated on the cover of the Symphony in D, K. 19, discussed above. That K. 19a was a completed work and not a fragment had also been known, because its incipit occurred in an early-19th-century Breitkopf & Härtel catalogue of manuscripts, with an indication that the work was for strings and pairs of oboes and homs. The newly-discovered parts were acquired by the Bavarian State Library, and the work has now been published. It was given its modern British première by the Academy of Ancient Music in a BBC broadcast of 2 August 1981. Thus a stroke of good fortune restores to us a work from Mozart's London sojourn thought to be irretrievably lost.
Leopold entitled the work, 'Sinfonia in F/à / 2 Violinj / 2 Hautb: / 2 Cornj / Viola / e / Basso / di Wolfgango Mozart / compositore de 9 Añj.' As Mozart turned nine years old on 27 January 1765, the creation of the symphony must be placed after that date but in time for either the concert of 21 February or that of 13 May. Quite exceptionally for Mozart's symphonies, the basso part is figured throughout - that is, numerical symbols indicating which chords to play have been provided for the continuo harpsichordist. (The score of K. 16 has a very few figures in its first movement and none in the rest; the other symphonies are unfigured.)
The first movement, allegro assai in common time, opens with a broad melody in the first violins, accompanied by sustained harmonies in the winds, broken chords in the inner voices, and repeated notes in the bass instruments. A brief but effective bit of imitative writing then leads to a cadence on the dominant and the introduction of a contrasting 'second subject.' Tremolo in the upper strings accompanying a triadic, striding bass line carries us to the closing subject. The second half of the movement presents the same succession of ideas as the first, and both halves are repeated. As the harmonic movement is from tonic to dominant in the first half, and from dominant to tonic in the second, with little that could be described as 'developmental' in the use of themes or harmonies, the fomr is closer to simple binary form than to sonata fonn as it is generally understood.
In the second movement, andante 2/4 in Bb major, the oboes are silent. Like the first movement, this consists of two approximately equal sections, both repeated. Although the texture is simple and the ideas not unconventional, the movement exhibits a polish and élan quite remarkable in the work of a child.
The finale is a rondo, marked presto 3/8. Finales in 3/8, 6/8, 9/8, or 12/8 were extremely common at the time this work was written, and usually took on the character of an Italianate giga. Here, however, little Wolfgang must have had his eye on pleasing his British public, and the refrain of his rondo has some of the character of a highland fling, bringing the symphony to a suitably jolly conclusion.

The Dutch Symphonies
The Mozarts' original intention upon leaving London was to return directly to Paris, where they had left some of their luggage. Not long after arriving in London, Leopold had informed Hagenauer,'... we shall not go to Holland, that I can assure her [Hagenauer's wife]'. The Dutch ambassador to the Court of St. James sought Leopold out in Canterbury around 25 July 1765, however, at the beginning of the Mozarts' return journey. As Leopold later wrote to Hagenauer from The Hague, the ambassador 'implored me at all costs to go to The Hague, as the Princess of Weilburg, sister of the Prince of Orange, was extremely anxious to see this child, about whom she had heard and read so much. In short, he and everybody talked at me so insistently and the proposal was so attractive that I had to decide to come...'. The Mozarts remained in Holland from September 1765 to April 1766.
This detour on their homeward journey resulted in performances in Ghent (5 September), Antwerp (7 or 8 September), The Hague (three concerts between 12 and 19 September, *30 September, *22 January), Amsterdam (*29 January, 26 February), the Hague (*mid-March), Haarlem (early April), Amsterdam (16 April), and Utrecht (*21 April). From newspaper announcements, archival documents and correspondence, we learn that at least five of these thirteen performances (indicated by asterisks) included performances of symphonies by Mozart. A typical newspaper announcement is the following, taken from the 'S-Gravenhaegse Vrijdagse Courant:
'By permission, Mr. MOZART, Music Master to the Prince Archbishop of Salzburg, will have the honour of giving, on Monday, 30 September 1765, a GRAND CONCERT in the hall of the Oude Doelen at The Hague, at which his son, only 8 years and 8 months old, and his daughter, 14 years of age, will play concertos on the harpsichord. All the overtures will be from the hand of this young composer, who, never having found his like, has had the approbation of the Courts of Vienna, Versailles and London. Music-lovers may confront him with any music at will, and he will play everything at sight. Tickets cost 3 florins per person, for a gentleman with a lady 5.50fl. Admission cards will be issued at Mr. Mozart's present lodgings, at the corner of Burgwal, just by the City of Paris, as well as at the Oude Doelen.'
The 'overtures' performed at the Dutch concerts must have been the London symphonies discussed above, and the Bb symphony, K. 22, written in The Hague in December 1765. These works received further performances on the journey homeward to Salzburg. We have more or less certain evidence of symphonies being performed in Paris (sometime between 11 May and 8 July 1766), Dijon (18 July), Lyons (13 August), Lausanne (mid-September), Zurich (7 and 9 October), Donaueschingen (between 20 and 31 October), and finally Salzburg itself where, on 8 December, just over a week after the Mozarts’ triumphal return, 'at High Mass in the Cathedral for a great festivity [The Feast of the Immaculate Conception], a symphony was done which not only found great approbation from all the Court musicians, but also caused greatastonishment...'.
A list of the orchestral personnel of the Schouwburg Theatre in Amsterdam survives for the year 1768. The orchestra consisted of 3 first and 3 second violinists, 2 violists (both of whom doubled on clarinet), 1 cellist, 1 bass player, 2 oboists (most likely doubling on flute), 1 bassoonist, 2 horn players, 1 harpsichordist, and a supernumerary who played kettledrums when needed - thus a total of 16 or 17 musicians. We have modelled our performance of Mozart's two Dutch works on this ensemble.

Symphony in Bb major, K.22
At the top of Leopold Mozart’s score of this work, to be formd in the State Library, West Berlin, is the inscription 'Synfonia di Wolfg. Mozart à la Haye nel mese Decembre 1765.' Despite the suggestion by several of Mozart's biographers, it is unlikely that it was written for the installation of William V as Regent of the Netherlands, an event which occurred some three months later (see the notes for the following work). Rather, its creation was probably connected with public perfonnances at The Hague: the Mozarts’ concert there on 30 September must have shown off the London symphonies, and its success led in tum to the concert of 22 January, for which new music would have been required.
The opening allegro in common time is without repeats. It begins with a pedal in the bass for fourteen bars, in a manner associated with the Mannheim symphonists but heard in many parts of western Europe by 1765. The contrasting second subject consists of a dialogue between the first and second violins, followed by the apparently mandatory theme in the bass instruments accompanied by tremolo in the upper strings. A brief but effective development section puts the opening idea through the keys of F minor and C minor, returning to the home key shortly after the reappearance of the second subject, with the rest of the exposition then heard essentially as before.
The G-minor andante, 2/4, exhibits stuprising intensity of musical gesture, with its brooding chromaticism, imitative textures, and occasional stem unisons. Abert thought that he heard foreshadowings here of the andante of Mozart’s penultimate symphony, K. 550. The movement's form is a simple A-B-A structure with coda.
As if such intensity of feeling were 'dangerous' in a work intended for polite society, the rondo finale makes amends by leaning in the other direction. No tension mars its frothy lightheartedness. Marked allegro molto, 3/8, it has the spirit of a brisk minuet, its opening bringing to mind that of the quartet 'Signore, di fuori son già i suonatori' in the finale to the second act of Figaro.
In Leopold’s travel diary he noted two Amsterdam musicians named Kreusser. Johann Adam Kreusser had been leader of the Schouwburg orchestra since 1752, and his younger brother Georg Anton had, from 1759, taken lessons with him while playing in that ensemble. The latter must have heard Mozart's Bb-major symphony, K. 22 (probably as a member of the orchestra that performed it), because he paid it the compliment of stealing the opening of its first movement for his own Eb-major symphony, op. 5, no. 4, published in Amsterdam in 1770.

Symphony in D major, K.32
For celebrations connected with the installation of William V, Prince of Orange, as Regent of the Netherlands, the ten-year-old Mozart composed a suite of pieces for small orchestra and obbligato harpsichord, under the title Galimathias musicum, which was performed on 11 March 1766. This was a 'quodlibet'; that is, some movements were based on tunes well-known to Mozart and his Salzburg compatriots, and others on tunes familiar to his Dutch audience. The work survives in two versions: a preliminary draft in which Wolfgang’s and Leopold’s hands are found intermingled, and a fair copy apparently made by a professional copyist for a perfonnance in Donaueschingen some months later. From the draft version it seems that Mozart originally thought of the first four movements as forming a kind of miniature introductory sinfonia, and these movements are indeed found together in a 19th-century manuscript labelled 'sinfonia.' (In the Donaueschingen version the order of the movements has been altered, however, and the introductory sinfonia dispersed. It is the four movements of the preliminary draft that are presented here.
The opening allegro in common time is nothing more than a few happy noises - repeated notes, loud chords, rapid scale passages, etc. - here played twice. The D-minor andante in binary form is strangely orchestrated, with the melody in the violas.
For a minuet, there is a G-major piece in which, over a rustic drone, is heard the melody of the popular German Christmas carol, 'Joseph, lieber Joseph mein' (also known to Latin words: 'Resonet in laudibus'). The melody is presented in a particular version - not the one usually found in hymn books, but one known to every denizen of Salzburg because it was played in the appropriate season by a mechanical carillon in the tower of the Hohensalzburg Castle that dominated (and still dominates) that city. (There also exists an 18th-century Salzburg arrangement for wind band of this version of the carol, and Leopold Mozart himself published an arrangement of it for harpsichord. Wolfgang retumed to it in 1772, quoting it in the original slow movement of his symphony, K. 132.) This movement was suppressed in the Donaueschingen manuscript. The contrasting D-major trio takes the form of an attractive horn duet with merely a bass-line accompaniment.
The 2/4 allegro finale offers us another bright noise, to close as we began. It is a tiny, two-part movement, with lively, al fresco hom duets at the beginning of the second section.
····················

Performance Practice
The use of 18th-century instruments with the proper techniques of playing them gives to the Academy of Ancient Music a vibrant, articulate sound. Inner voices are clearly audible without obscuring the principal melodies. Subtle differences in articulation are more distinct than can usually be heard with modern instrtunents. At lively tempos and with this luminous timbre, the observance of all of Mozart's repeats no longer makes movements seem too long, and restores them to their just proportions. A special instance concems the da capos of the minuets, where, oral tradition tells us, the repeats should be omitted. But, as we were unable to trace that tradition as far back as Mozart's time, we experimented by observing those repeats as well. Missing instruments understood in 18th-century practice to be required have been supplied: these include bassoons playing the bass line along with the cellos and double basses, kettledrums whenever trumpets are present, and the harpsichord continuo. No conductor is needed, as the direction of the orchestra is divided in true 18th-century fashion between the concertmaster and the continuo player, who are placed so that they can see each other and are visible to the rest of the orchestra. As there was wide variation in orchestral practice from region to region in western Europe, no allpurpose classical orchestra could be recreated; consequently, we have attempted to present the several kinds of ensembles for which Mozart wrote, whose peculiarities he had in mind when composing.

Musical Sources and Editions
Until recently performers of Mozart’s symphonies have relied solely upon editions drawn from the old Complete Works, published in the 19th century by the Leipzig firm of Breitkopf & Härtel. During the past three decades, however, a new complete edition of Mozart’s works (NMA) has been appearing, published by Bärenreiter of Kassel under the aegis of the Mozarteum of Salzburg. The NMA has been used for those works for which it was available (in this volume: K. 19a, 32, 74a/87, and the overture to K. 111). For the other symphonies, editions have been created especially for these recordings, drawing on Mozart's autographs when they could be sen, and on other 18th-century manuscripts in cases where the autographs were unavailable.

A Note Concerning the Numbering of Mozart's Symphonies
The first edition of Ludwig Ritter von Köchel's Chronological-Thematic Catalogue of the Complete Works of Wolfgang Amaadé Mozart was published in 1862 (=K1). It listed all of the completed works of Mozart known to Köchel in what he believed to be their chronological order, from number 1 (infant harpsichord work) to 626 (the Requiem). The second edition by Paul Graf von Waldersee in 1905 involved primarily minor corrections and clarifications. A thoroughgoing revision came first with Alfred Einstein's third edition, published in 1936 (=K3). (A reprint of this edition with a sizeable supplement of further corrections and additions was published in 1946 and is sometimes referred to as K3a.) Einstein changed the position of many works in Köchel's chronology, threw out as spurious some works Köchel had taken to be authentic, and inserted as authentic some works Köchel believed spurious or did not know about. He also inserted into the chronological scheme incomplete works, sketches, and works known to have existed but now lost. These Köchel had placed in an appendix (=Anhang, abbreviated Anh.) without chronological order. Köchel's original numbers could not be changed, for they formed the basis of cataloguing for thousands of publishers, libraries, and reference works. Therefore, the new numbers were inserted in chronological order between the old ones by adding lower-case letters. The so-called fourth and fifth editions were nothing more than unchanged reprints of the 1936 edition, without the 1946 supplement. The sixth edition, which appeared in 1964 and was edited by Franz Giegling, Alexander Weinmann, and Gerd Sievers (=K6), continued Einstein's innovations by adding numbers with lower-case letters appended, and a few with upper-case letters in instances in which a work had to be inserted into the chronology between two of Einstein's lowercase insertions. (A so-called seventh edition is an unchanged reprint of the sixth). Hence, many of Mozart's works bear two K numbers, and a few have three.
Although it was not Köchel's intention in devising his catalogue, Mozart's age at the time of composition of a work may be calculated with some degree of accuracy from the K number. (This works, however, only for numbers over 100). This is done by dividing the number by 25 and adding 10. Then, if one keeps in mind that Mozart was born in 1756, the year of composition is also readily approximated.
The old Complete Works of Mozart published 41 symphonies in 3 volumes between 1879 and 1882, numbered 1 to 41 according to the chronology of K1. Additional symphonies appeared in supplementary volumes and are sometimes numbered  42 to 50, even though they are early works.

Bibiography
  • Abert, Anna Amalie: 'W. A. Mozart, Sinfonie KV 84 = 73q. Echtheitsfragen,' Mozart-Jahrbuch (1971-72)
  • Allroggen, Gerhard: 'Zur Frage der Echtheit derSinfonie KV. Anh. 216 = 74g,' Analecta musicologica (1976), xviii
  • Anderson, Emily: The Letters of Mozart & His Family, 2nd ed. (London, 1966)
  • Anon., 'Wiederauffindung einer verschollenen Jugendsinfonie Mozarts durch die Bayerische Staatsbibliothek,' Acta Mozartiana (1981), xxviii/1
  • Barblan, Guglielmo, et al.: Mozart in Italia (Milan 1956)
  • Beck, Hermann: 'Zur Frage der Echtheit vonMozarts Sinfonie in D, KV 84/73q,' Mozart-Jahrbuch (1972-73)
  • Della Croce, Luigi: Le 75 sinfonie de Mozart (Turin,1979)
  • Deutsch, Otto Erich: Mozart: A DocumentaryBiography, 2nd ed. (London, 1966)
  • Eibl, Joseph Heinz, et al.: Mozart: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen (Kassel, 1962-75)
  • Framery, Nicolas Etienne: 'Quelques réflexions sur la musique rnoderne,' Journal de musique historique, théorique, et pratique (May 1770)
  • Galeazzi, Francesco: Elementi teorico-pratici di musica con un saggio sopra l'arte di suonare il violono (Rome, 1791-96)
  • LaRue, Jan: 'Mozart or Dittersdorf - KV 84/73q,' Mozart-Jahrbuch (1971-72)
  • Mila, Massimo: Le Sinfonie de Mozart (Turin, 1967)
  • Saint-Foix, Georges de: Les Symphonies de Mozart (Paris, 1932)
  • Scheurleer, Daniel François: Het Muziekleven in Nederland in de tweede helft der 18e eeuw in verband met Mozart's verblijf aldaar (The Hague, 1909)
  • Schmid, Ernst Fritz: 'Zur Entstehungszeit von Mozarts italienischen Sinfonien', Mozart-Jahrbuch (1958)
  • Schultz, Detlef; Mozarts Jugendsinfonien (Leipzig, 1900)
  • Terry, Charles Sanford: John Christian Bach, 2nd ed. by H. C. Robbins Landon (London, 1967)
  • Wallner, Bertha Antonia: 'Ein Beitrag zu Mozarts Londoner Sinfonien,' Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft (1929-30), xii
  • Zaslaw, Neal: 'The Compleat Orchestral Musician,' Early Music (1979), vii/1
  • Zaslaw, Neal: 'Mozart, Haydn and the Sinfonia da chiesa,' Journal of Musicology (January 1982), i
  • Zaslaw, Neal: 'Toward the Revival of the Classical Orchestra,' Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association (1976-77), ciii
The Italian Symphonies
Mozart's youth in Salzburg was punctuated by three journeys to Italy, which lasted from 13 December 1769 to 28 March 1771, 13 August 1771 to 15 December 1771, and 24 October 1772 to 13 March 1773. Thus during the period from just before Mozart's fourteenth birthday until shortly after his seventeenth, he spent a total of about twenty-two months in the land that many of his contemporaries considered the fount of modern music. In so doing, Mozart and his father were following a well-beaten path, for generations of German composers had served apprenticeships in Italy, including Handel, J. C. Bach, Hasse and Gluck. The primary goal of such journeys was usually mastery of Italian opera, but training in other musical genres was not neglected. This was the situation discussed in an essay of 1770 by Nicolas Etienne Framery entitled 'Some Reflexions upon Modern Music,' from which the following fragments are taken:
'While the French and the Italians were disputing which of them possessed music, the Germans learned it, going to Italy for that purpose... The German artists filled the public conservatories of Naples... They had all the raw materials required of great musicians; they lacked only the discipline to organise those materials, and they had no trouble acquiring that... Upon leaving the schools, the Italian pupils remain in their own country... The Germans, on the contrary, return to their country. They have carefully preserved their prodigious accumulation of  [musical] science. They have tested the very fortunate use of wind instruments of which their nation makes much use, and they have known how to draw the most from them... They have realized that all expression does not suit vocal melody; that there are a thousand nuances which the orchestra is much more fit to render [than the voice]. They have tried, they have succeeded, and have raised themselves far above their masters, who now rush to imitate them...'.
From the letters that Mozart and his father wrote home during these travels (for Mozart's mother and sister remained in Salzburg), we learn that they had need of symphonies for public and private music-making, that they brought some symphonies with them from Salzburg, and that Wolfgang composed others while in Italy.
The first such concert - which took place in Verona on Friday, 5 January 1770, in the Teatrino della Accademia Filarmonica - was probably typical of many of them. Leopold described the occasion in a letter to his wife:
'In all my life I have never seen anything more beautiful of its kind... It is not a
theatre, but a hall built with boxes like an opera house. Where the stage ought to be, there is a raised platform for the orchestra and behind the orchestra another gallery built with boxes for the audience. The crowds, the general shouting, clapping, noisy enthusiasm and cries of "Bravo!" and, in a word, the admiration displayed by the listeners, I cannot adequately describe to you.'
A newspaper account confirms the enthusiasm with which Wolfgang was received, mentioning 'a most beautiful introductory symphony of his own composition, which deserved all its applause.' A similar programme given in Mantua at the Teatro Scientifico on 16 January 1770, to acclaim equal to that received in Verona, demonstrates the characteristic function usually assigned symphonies in concerts of the second half of the 18th-century, that of 'framing' the event:
1. First and second movements of a symphony by Mozart
2. Harpsichord concerto played at sight by Mozart
3. Aria sung by the tenor Uttini
4. Harpsichord sonata played at sight and omamented by Mozart, and then repeated in a different key
5. Violin concerto by a local virtuoso
6. Aria improvised by Mozart upon a poem handed him on the spot, sung by him to his own harpsicord accompaniment
7. Two-movement harpsichord sonata improvised by Mozart on two themes given him on the spot by the concertmaster; at the end the two themes were 'elegantly' combined
8. Aria sung by the soprano Angiola Galliani
9. Oboe concerto by a local virtuoso
10. Harpsichord fugue improvised by Mozart on a theme given him on the spot
11. Symphony accompanied by Mozart on the harpsichord from a first violin part given him on the spot
12. Duet by two professional musicians
13. Trio 'by a famous composer' in which Mozart performed at sight the first violin part, ornamenting it
14. Finale of the opening symphony.
As for his fellow musicians in Mantua, Wolfgang wrote in a letter, 'The orchestra was not bad.' The only drawback to these otherwise brilliant events was explained by Leopold to his wife:
'...neither this concert in Mantua nor the one in Verona were given for money, for everybody goes in free; in Verona this privilege belongs only to the nobles who alone keep up these concerts; but in Mantua the nobles, the military class and the eminent citizens may all attend them, as they are subsidised by Her Majesty the Empress. You will easily understand that we shall not become rich in Italy...'.
The symphonies played at Verona and Mantua must have been brought from Salzburg. The first hint of symphonies composed in Italy is found in Wolfgang’s letter of 25 April 1770, written from Rome to his sister: 'When I have finished this letter I shall finish a symphony which I have begun... A symphony is being copied (father is the copyist, for we do not wish to give it out to be copied, as it would be stolen).' On 4 August, writing from Bologna in another letter to his sister, Mozart remarked, 'In the meantime I have composed 4 Italian symphonies...'. This expression 'Italian symphonies' has usually been taken to mean three-movement symphonies, that is to say, symphonies without the minuet and trio characteristic of the so-called Viennese symphony of the period. Hence it has frequently been asserted, concerning those of Mozart's symphonies thought to originate in Italy which do have minuets, that the latter must have been added later for use in Salzburg. But Mozart wrote to his sister of his desire to introduce to Italy minuets in the German manner because, according to him, Italian minuets 'last nearly as long as an entire symphony' and 'have many notes, a slow tempo, and are many bars long.' By 'Italian symphonies,' therefore, Mozart may simply have meant symphonies written in and for Italy, without reference to the presence or absence of minuets.
Two symphonies (K. 73l/81 and 73q/84) exist in sets of non-autograph parts in Vienna with indications of their provenance. The parts for the former symphony are labelled 'in Roma 25. April 1770.' The parts for the latter bear the inscription at the top 'In Milano, il Carnovale 1770,' but at the bottom this is contradicted by another inscription: 'Del Sig[no]re Cavaliero Wolfgango Amadeo Mozart à Bologna, nel mese di Luglio 1770.' Nevertheless, the two symphonies written in Rome in April are probably K. 73l/81 and 73q/84, and the four symphonies mentioned in Bologna in August most likely include those two works plus two others, the identity of which is unclear.
For five other symphonies which may date from Mozart's Italian journeys, neither autographs nor other 'authentic' sources survive K. 73m/97,73n/95, 74g/AC11.03/A216, 75 and 111b/96). These have been given their chronological positions in the Köchel Catalogue on imprecise stylistic grounds and, in fact, cannot even be proven to be by Mozart. Problems of attribution are severe among the symphonies of this period. Four symphonies have attributions to both Leopold and Wolfgang in various sources (K. 73l/81, 73m/97, 73n/95, and 73q/84), and the last of these is attributed also to Dittersdorf.
Of Mozart's eleven Italian symphonies, eight are in D major. A clue as to why this is so may be contained in a cryptic remark Mozart made to his father in 1782 about his 'Haffner' symphony: 'I have composed my symphony in D major, because you prefer that key.' This may be because D major is simultaneously a brilliant yet easy key for string players, which, unlike the other 'easy' keys (G and A major) is also one of the trumpet keys, permitting the addition of those instruments whenever they were available. It remains only to add that Mozart's D major symphonies of the 1770s seem more conventional and less personal in character than several of those he wrote in other keys.
The most famous Italian orchestras in the early 1770s were those of the opera houses of Turin, Milan and Naples. We have pictures of the Turin orchestra in performance, as well as seating diagrams of the Turin and Naples orchestras. The players sat facing one another in long rows, half toward the audience and half toward the stage. Leopold wrote in December 1770 that the Milan orchestra consisted of 28 violins, 6 violas, 2 cellos, 6 double basses, 2 flutes who doubled on oboe, 2 oboes, 2 bassoons, 4 horns, 2 trumpets, kettledrums, and 2 harpsichords. How such orchestras rearranged themselves when performing concerts rather than operas was described by Galeazzi (1791):
'The best placement for good effect is to arrange the players in the middle of the hall with the audience all around them; but the visual impression is more satisfying if you arrange them to one side, against one of the walls of the drawing-room (supposing a rectangular-shaped area), because the audience thus enjoys the entire orchestra from the front. The violins are then placed in two rows, one opposite the other so that the firsts are looking at the seconds... With regard to the bass-line insuuments, if there are only two, place them near the harpsichord (if there is one) in such a way that the violoncello remains near the leader of the first violins and the double bass on the opposite side, and between them the maestro or harpsichordist; but if there are more bass-line instruments, and if they are played by good professional musicians, place them at the foot- that is, at the other extremity - of the orchestra, otherwise you should place them as near to the firsts as you possibly can. The violas are always best near the second violins, with whom they must often unite in thirds, in sixths, etc., and the oboes are best alongside the firsts. The brass can then be placed not far from the leader. In this disposition all the heads of sections - namely, the leader, the principal second violin, the principal cello, the maestro, the singers, etc. - are neighbours, by which means perfect ensemble cannot but result.
For smaller orchestras, a semi-circular arrangement of the players was also employed. A passe-partout title page used by the Florentine publisher Giovanni Chiari in the 1780s shows this particular orchestral layout. The orchestra is rehearsing either on a stage with sets representing a formal garden, or in an actual garden with topiary trees. On the left, from front to back, we see 2 horns, 4 first violins, the first oboe, and the first viola; on the right 2 trumpets (showing plainly why Mozart designated them 'trombe lunghe' in his scores), 4 second violins, the second oboe, and the second viola. In the centre at the back we see the maestro al cembalo, surrounded by a cello, a double bass and a singer of each sex. Another man seems to be directing the rehearsal, while fashionably attired ladies and gentlemen stroll, chat or listen, a dog barks and someone sweeps up.
For these performances we have applied Galeazzi's instructions to the personnel lists of Turin, Milan and Naples for the large-scale symphonies (those with trumpets and kettledrums), and followed the Chiari engraving for the smallscale ones (those without these festive instruments). The large-scale orchestra has the strings at 12-12-4-2-6, five bassoons (reinforcing the bass line), the necessary wind, and two harpsichords improvising a continuo. The great strength of the violins and double basses and the relative weakness of the violas and cellos creates a sound quite distinct from that of the London, Paris, Salzburg, or Vienna orchestras, also recreated in this series of recordings. The predominance of the double basses over the cellos creates an organ-like sonority that makes the acoustic of a theatre or hall resemble that of a cathedral. The timbre is more 'archaic,' that is, it tends toward the Baroque ideal and away from the Classical. The strong contingent of bassoons compensates for the small number of cellos and etches the details of the bass line with scintillating clarity.
For the small-scale orchestra, the strings are 6-5-2-2-1 (following further advice from Galeazzi about proper string balance), with one bassoon, the necessary wind and one harpsichord. The layout in the Chiari engraving emphasizes a special feature of the orchestration of Mozart's Italian symphonies: the first oboe often doubles the violin in unison or the first viola in octaves, while, in a similar fashion, the second oboe often doubles the second violin or the second viola.

Symphony in D major, K.73l/81
As we have seen, a manuscript copy of this work dated Rome, 25 April 1770 attributes it to Wolfgang, but in a Breitkopf thematic catalogue published in 1775 it is listed as a work of Leopold’s. The symphony - bright, superficial and conventional - has generally been accepted, however, as being by Wolfgang. The orchestra is small: pairs of oboes and horns, strings, and harpsichord continuo.
The first movement opens with a rising D-major arpeggio, an idea that is turned upside down for the opening of the finale. It continues as a compactly organized sonata form without repeats, and with a literal recapitulation. The tiny 'development' section of twelve bars could perhaps more aptly be called a transition.
The second movement, a G-major andante in 2/4, features a dialogue between the first and second violins, the conversation soon broadening to include the pair of oboes. In this serene binary movement with both halves repeated Wyzewa and Saint-Foix detected the influence of the Milanese composer Giovanni Battista Sammartini.
The 3/8 finale, marked allegro molto, is the sort of movement known as a 'chasse' or 'caccia' - that is, a jig filled with hunting-horn calls. This 'hunt' would seem to be one contemplated from the comfort of the drawing room, however, far from the mud and commotion of the actual event. The form is a binary arrangement as described for the first movement of K. 19a.

Symphony in D major, K.73m/97
This work survived in a single undated, nonautograph manuscript in the archive of Breitkopf & Härtel in Leipzig. Its provenance is therefore completely unknown. In recent editions of the Köchel catalogue it has been assigned to Rome, April 1770, on largely illogical grounds. It has nonetheless been included here among Mozart's Italian symphonies, for lack of a better hypothesis.
The first movement is an Italian overture in style and spirit, in sonata form with no repeated sections. The trumpets add to the festivity, as well as helping to outline the movement’s structure. A neatly-worked-out, brief development section travels through G major, E minor and B minor, before re-establishing the home key.
The andante, a binary movement in G major 2/4, with both halves repeated, exhibits an attractive mock-naïveté. The minuet that follows adheres to Mozart's preference (documented above) for brevity. In fact, the spirit of the movement is more of the ballroom than the symphony. The G-major trio omits the wind and, by its chamber-music character, provides an excellent foil to the pomp of the minuet proper.
The finale is a gem. It is a jig-like movement (presto, 3/8) in sonata form, with a brief but effective development section. Furthermore, the movement contains an uncanny adumbration of a passage in the first movement of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony, not only in the theme itself but in the way in which it is immediately repeated with a turn to the minor. Beethoven cannot have known this work, so we can only speculate about coincidence or an as-yet-undiscovered common model.

Symphony in D major, K.73n/95
The source for this work is identical to that of the previous one, and doubts about its provenance are equally severe. It has been given the same place and date as the previous symphony on similarly unsatisfactory grounds, and is included here for the same reason.
The first allegro, alla breve, opens with an idea more or less the same as that which launches the symphonies K. 73m/97 and 74. It is in sonata form without repeats. The movement is an essay in orchestral 'noises' put together to form a coherent whole. That is, there are no memorable, cantabile melodies, but rather a succession of idiomatic instrumental devices, including repeated notes, scales, fanfares, turns, arpeggios, sudden dynamic changes, etc. Descriptions and explanations of musical form tend to fall back on linguistic analogies. In this case, however, such an analogy would lead us into the absurd position of having to imagine meaningful prose composed of articles, conjunctions and prepositions! Responding to this paradox, Schultz refers to such movements as 'purely decorative.' Leopold Mozart once called a symphony of J. Stamitz in this vein 'nothing but noise.' The 18th-century aesthetician Lacépéde thought that, therefore, symphony movements needed programmes to make sense of otherwise 'meaningless' musical events. These reactions, and the failure of the linguistic analogy, point to a weakness of aesthetic theory in dealing with an art of abstract sounds unsupported by association with concretre verbal ideas. (A parallel may be drawn with the difficulties surrounding the acceptance of non-representational painting in the 20th century.)
The first movement comes to a halt on a D-major chord with an added seventh, leading directly into the G-major 3/4 andante. Whatever lyricism may have been lacking in the previous movement is more than atoned for in its songful successor. The trumpets and kettledrums drop out and the oboes are replaced by flutes, which lend a pensive, pastoral hue to this sweet-sounding interlude.
The oboes and trumpets return for the boisterous minuet, in which Mozart presents yet another example of concision for the instruction of his longer-winded Italian colleagues. The trio in D minor omits the trumpets, and with its quiet intimacy nicely sets off the retum of the minuet.
The allegro 2/4 finale returns us to the sonata fomi and happy noises of the opening movement. The two movements are even linked by the same opening gesture.

Symphony in D major, K.73q/ 84
This symphony survives in manuscripts in Vienna (attributed to Wolfgang), Berlin (attributed to Leopold), and Prague (attributed to Dittersdorf). A close stylistic analysis of the work by LaRue has shown that Wolfgang is the most likely of the three to have been the composer. As has already been mentioned, the Vienna manuscript bears two inscriptions: 'In Milani, il Carnovale 1770' and 'Del Sig[no]re Cavaliero Wolfgango Amadeo Mozart a Bologna, nel mese di Luglio 1770.' These apparently contradictory bits of information may perhaps be resolved in the following manner: in 1770 Carnival lasted from 6 January until 27 February, and the Mozarts were in Milan from 23 January to 15 March, and in Bologna from 20 July to 13 October. Hence, if the inscriptions are to be trusted, this symphony may well have been drafted in Milan in January or February and have received its final revision in Bologna in July.
The opening allegro in common time exhibits a fully-fledged sonata form without repeated sections. There are, well differentiated, an opening group of ideas, a second group and a closing group, a brief development section of eleven bars, and a full recapitulation.
The 3/8 andante in A major has a Gluck-like ambience. It is also in sonata form but without a development section. The finale, allegro 2/4, opens with a fanfare borrowed from the first movement. This idea is withheld during the rest of the exposition, development and recapitulation, to serve as coda. Most of the movement, the fanfare aside, is filled with a constant flow of triplets, which turn it into a kind of jig. One passage in particular reminds us of Figaro's prattling in Rossini's Barber of Seville.

Symphony in G major, K.74
The autograph of this symphony is among those formerly in Berlin and now at Kraków. It bears neither date nor title, although at the end of the last movement Mozart expressed his gratitude (or perhaps relief) at its completion by writing 'Finis Laus Deo.'
This work is written in Italian overture style, that is, the boisterous first movement is in sonata form without repeats, and flows into the finely-wrought second movement without a halt - in this case, without even a new tempo indication or double barline. At this juncture the quavers in the oboes continue unperturbed as the metre shifts from common time to 3/8 and the key from G major to C major.
The finale is marked simply 'Rondeau,' and the French spelling gives a hint of the character of its refrain, which is that of a French contredanse. Especially noteworthy in this movement is the 'exotic' episode in G minor, which is perhaps the earliest manifestation of Mozart’s interest in 'Turkish' music - an interest exhibited in portions of such pieces as the ballet music for Lucio Silla, K. 135, the violin concerto, K. 219, the piano sonata, K. 300i/331, The Abduction from the Seraglio, K. 384, and the aria, 'Ich möchte wohl der Kaiser sein,' K. 539. These pieces have nothing to do with true Turkish music, but represent rather a style found occasionally in the music of Michael and Joseph Haydn, Leopold and Wofgang Mozart, Dittersdorf, Gluck, and other middle-European composers of the period. The origins of this style are as follows: 'exotic' elements were drawn from the indigenous music of the region bordering the Ottoman Empire, where the Hungarian peasants and gypsies imitated or parodied the music of their Moslem neighbours. The 'exotic' elements often included a leaping melody, a static bass with reiterated notes, occasional chromatic touches in the melody, a minor key, profuse ornamentation in the form of grace notes, trills and turns, and a marchlike tempo in 2/4 time. In parts of Hungary the peasants referred to this style of music as 'Törökos,' which means precisely the same as Mozart's 'alla turca,' that is, 'in the Turkish manner.'

Symphony in D major, K.74a/87
This work originated as the overture for Mozart's opera, Mitridate, re di Ponto. The opera was begun in September 1770. Wolfgang composed the recitatives first, then turned to the arias, and probably wrote the overture last. The opera had its first general rehearsal on 17 December and its premiere on 26 December, to general approbation. Wolfgang presided over the first three performances at the harpsichord, as was then the custom and required by his contract. The overture circulated widely in the 18th century as a concert symphony.
The autograph of the opera is lost, and only sketches of a few numbers survive in Mozart's hand. In the extant sources for the opera, the orchestra employed in the overture calls for pairs of flutes, oboes and horns, and strings. Examination of the rest of the opera reveals, however, that the orchestra also includes pairs of trumpets and bassoons - instruments that would hardly have been silent during the festive overture. (Leopold Mozart, it will be recalled, reported the presence of trumpets and bassoons in the Milan orchestra.) Due to these circumstances, we have followed a set of 18th-century manuscript parts in Donaueschingen for the overture. These provide for bassoons throughout, doubling the bass line, and trumpets in the first and last movements. Originally there must have been a part for kettledrums, but as that has been lost, we have had to improvise one.
The libretto of Mitridate, re di Ponto was the work of Vittorio Amedeo Cigna-Santi, based on Racine’s Mithridate. A brief synopsis of its plot may serve to indicate the atmosphere that Mozart attempted to evoke in writing this symphony.
Mithridates VI Eupator (111-63 B.C.) had conquered Cappadocia and other provinces beyond the Bosphorus as far as the Crimea. In the third Mithridatian War, however, he was defeated by the Romans under Sulla and Pompey and fled to his kingdom of Pontus by the Bosphorus where, believing himself to have been betrayed by his sons and wife, he killed himself by falling on his sword, leaving open the way for a happy ending of the opera - at least for the other characters!

Symphony in D major, K.111, 111a/120
This symphony also began its life as an overture, in this case to the 'theatrical serenade' Ascanio in Alba, K. 111. Ascanio was written for the celebrations surrounding the wedding of the Austrian Archduke Ferdinand and the Princess Maria Ricciarda Beatrice of Modena. Mozart began to compose it at the end of August 1771, and the work was completed by 23 September. Its first performance in Milan on 17 October was a success, apparently eclipsing a new opera by Hasse that was also part of the festivities. That the great choreographer Noverre created the ballets to Ascanio undoubtedly added to its éclat.
In this instance Wolfgang went against his usual custom and composed the overture first. The reason for this was probably that he had decided to integrate the end of his overture into the beginning of the serenade. Thus, following the allegro movement, the andante served as a ballet, to be danced by 'the Graces.' The libretto explains the setting portrayed by Mozart’s andante:
'A spacious area, intended for a solemn pastoral setting, bordered by a circle of very tall and leafy oaks which, gracefully distributed all around, cast a very cool and holy shade. Between the trees are grassy mounds formed by Nature but adapted by human skill to proowned by the Heinemann Foundation. It is a clearly-written fair copy inscribed 'Sinfonia del Sig[no]re Cavaliere Amadeo Wolfgango Mozart à Milano 2 di Novemb. 1771' (the first word in Wolfgang’s hand, the remainder in Leopold’s). It may have had its first performance at an orchestral concert that Leopold and Wolfgang gave on 22 or 23 November at the residence of Albert Michael von Mayr, who was keeper of the privy purse to Archduke Ferdinand, son of Empress Maria Theresa and Governor of Lombardy.
That this was conceived as a concert piece and not an overture can be seen in the first, second and fourth movements, in which all sections but the coda of the finale are repeated. From the beautifully proportioned sonata form of the first movement, through the careful part-writing of the andante (for strings alone) to the energetic giga rondo-finale, a spirit of confidence and solid workmanship seems to emanate from this symphony, fruits perhaps garnered from the success of Ascanio the previous month.
The minuet shows sign of other origins, however. In this movement the violas double the bass line, instead of having an independent part to play, as is customary in Mozart's symphonic minuets. Because Mozart’s ball-room minuets and contredanses were customarily composed without viola parts, this unusual feature of the minuet of K. 112 may mean that it fulfilled another function before being pressed into service in this symphony. The trio (for strings alone) may be new, however, as there the violas do carry an independent voice.
© Neal Zaslaw