Chapter IV (1)

The Solemn Mass in D--A Royal Subscription--More Negotiations with
England--Opera Projects--Grillparzer’s “Melusine”--The Diabelli
Variations--Summer Visitors--An Englishman’s Account--Weber and
Julius Benedict--Ries and the Ninth Symphony--Franz Liszt and
Beethoven’s Kiss--The Year 1823.

When the year 1823 opens, the Mass in D is supposedly finished and negotiations for its publication have been carried on in a manner the contemplation of which must affect even the casual reader grievously. The work had been originally intended for the functions attending the installation of Archduke Rudolph as Archbishop of Olmütz--not merely as a personal tribute to the imperial, archepiscopal pupil, but for actual performance at the ceremony of inthronization--a fact which ought to be borne in mind during its study, for it throws light upon Beethoven’s attitude towards the Catholic Church (at least so far as that church’s rubrics are concerned) as well as towards religion in general and art as its handmaiden and mistress. Archduke Rudolph had been chosen Cardinal on April 24, 1819, and Archbishop on June 4 of the same year; he was installed as head of the see of Olmütz on March 20, 1820; but the fact of his selection for the dignities was known in Vienna amongst his friends as early as the middle of 1818. When the story of the year 1823 opens, therefore, Beethoven’s plan is nearly five years old and Archduke Rudolph has been archbishop nearly a year. We first hear of the Mass this year in a letter dated February 27, when Beethoven apologizes to his august pupil for not having waited upon him. He had delayed his visit, he said, because he wanted to send him a copy of the Mass; but this had been held back by corrections and other circumstances. Accompanying the letter were the copies of the overture to “The Consecration of the House” and the “Gratulatory Minuet.” Finally, on March 19, 1823, on the very eve of the first anniversary of the installation, Beethoven placed a manuscript copy of the Mass in the Archduke’s hands. In the catalogue of the Rudolphinian Collection, now preserved by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in Vienna, it is entered thus: “_Missa Solemnis_. Partitur. MS. This beautifully written MS. was delivered by the composer himself on March 19, 1823.”

The plan to write the Mass for the installation ceremonies seems to have been original with Beethoven; it was not suggested by the Archduke or any of his friends, so far as has ever been learned. He began work upon it at once, for Schindler says he saw the beginning of the score in the fall of 1818. Nottebohm’s study of all the sketches which have been discovered (save a number now preserved in the Beethoven House in Bonn which do not add materially to our knowledge) led him to conclusions which may be summed up as follows: The movements were taken up in the order in which the various portions of the text appear in the Roman missal, but work was prosecuted on several movements simultaneously. The _Kyrie_ was begun at the earliest in the middle of 1818, i. e., shortly after the fact of the Archduke’s appointment became known; the _Gloria_ was completely sketched by the end of 1819, the _Credo_ in 1820; the entire Mass was complete in sketch-form in the beginning of 1822. While sketching the Mass Beethoven composed the Pianoforte Sonatas, Op. 109, 110 and 111, the Variations, Op. 107, No. 8, and several other small pieces, including the canons “O, Tobias,” “Gehabt euch wohl,” “Tugend ist kein leerer Name,” and “Gedenkt heute an Baden.” But with the elaboration of the sketches the Mass was not really finished, for subsequently Beethoven undertook many changes. The _Allegro molto_ which enters in the _Credo_ at the words _et ascendit_ is shorter in the autograph than in the printed edition. At the entrance of the words _et iterum_ and _cujus regni_ the autograph is in each case two measures shorter than in the printed score. In the autograph, and also in the copy which Beethoven gave to the Archduke, the trombones do not enter till the words _judicare vivos et mortuos_. There are no trombones in the _Gloria_. The trombone passage which now appears just before the entrance of the chorus on _judicare_ was formerly set for the horns. After the words _et mortuos_ the trombones are silent till the end of the _Credo_ in the autograph; they enter again in the beginning of the _Sanctus_, but are silent at the next _Allegro_. They occur in the _Benedictus_, but are wanting in the _Agnus Dei_. From the nature of these supplementary alterations it is to be concluded that considerable time must have elapsed before they could all be made and the Mass be given the shape in which we know it. Holding to the date on which the copy was delivered to the Archduke (March 19, 1823), the earliest date at which the Mass can have received its definitive shape must be set down as the middle of 1823. Beethoven, therefore, devoted about five years to its composition. He made so many changes in the tympani part of the _Agnus Dei_ that he wore a hole in the very thick paper, his aim being, apparently, by means of a vague rhythm to suggest the distance of the disturbers of the peace. That he was sincere in his purpose to provide a mass for the installation ceremonies is to be found, outside of Schindler’s statement, in a letter to the Archduke written in 1819, in which he says:

The day on which a high mass of my composition is performed at the
ceremony for Y. I. H. will be to me the most beautiful in my life
and God will enlighten me so that my poor powers may contribute to
the glory of this solemn day.

[Sidenote: BEETHOVEN AND RELIGION]

Something was said, in the conclusion of the chapter of this biography devoted to a review of the incidents of the years 1807 to 1809, concerning the views Beethoven entertained on the subject of religion and dogmatic and sectarian Christianity. His attitude towards the Roman Catholic Church becomes an almost necessary subject of contemplation in a study of the Solemn Mass in D; but it is one into which the personal equation of the student must perforce largely enter. The obedient churchman of a Roman Catholic country will attach both less and more importance, than one brought up in a Protestant land, to the fact that he admonished his nephew when a lad to say his prayers and said them with him (as the boy testified in the guardianship proceedings), that he himself at least once led him to the door of the confessional,[68] that he consented to the summoning of a priest when _in extremis_ and that he seemed to derive comfort and edification from the sacred function. It is not necessary, however, to go very deeply into a critical study of the Mass in order to say that while the composition shows respect for traditions in some portions and while it is possible to become eloquent without going beyond the demonstration contained in the music itself, in describing the overwhelming puissance of his proclamation of the fatherhood of God and belief in Him as the Creator of all things visible and invisible, the most obvious fact which confronts the analytical student is that Beethoven approached the missal text chiefly with the imagination and the emotions of an artist, and that its poetical, not to say dramatic elements were those which he was most eager to delineate.[69] One proof of this is found in what may be called the technical history of the Mass, and is therefore pertinent here. It was scarcely necessary for Beethoven to do so, but he has nevertheless given us an explanation of his singular treatment of the prayer for peace. Among the sketches for the movement is found the remark: “_dona nobis pacem_ darstellend den _innern_ und äussern Frieden” (“delineating internal and external peace”), and in agreement with this he superscribes the first _Allegro vivace_ in the autograph with the same words. In the later copy this phrase is changed to “Prayer for internal and external peace,” thus showing an appreciation of the fact that the words alone contain the allusion to peace which in its external aspect is disturbed by the sounds of war suggested by the instruments. The petition for peace is emphasized by the threatening tones of military instruments accompanying the agonizing appeal for mercy sent up by the voices. The device is purely dramatic and it was not an entirely novel conceit of Beethoven’s. When the French invaded Styria in 1796, Haydn wrote a mass “In tempore belli” in which a soft drum-roll entered immediately after the words “Agnus Dei” and was gradually reinforced by trumpets and other wind-instruments “as if the enemy were heard approaching in the distance.”

Whence came the plan of postponing the publication of the mass for a period in order to sell manuscript copies of it by subscription to the sovereigns of Europe does not appear. Beethoven had it under consideration at the beginning of 1823, for the year was only a week old when he sent his brother Johann with a letter to Griesinger of the Saxon Legation asking him to give advice on the subject to the bearer of the letter, apologizing for not coming in person on the ground of indisposition. Whether or not Griesinger came to his assistance we do not know, but within a fortnight work on the project had been energetically begun. Schindler was now called upon to write, fetch and carry as steadily and industriously as if he were, in fact, what he described himself to be--a private secretary. Among his papers in Berlin are found many billets and loose memoranda bearing on the subject, without date, but grouped as to periods by Schindler himself and provided with occasional glosses touching their contents. Beethoven took so much of his time in requisition, indeed, that he offered to pay him 50 florins after the collection of one of the subscription fees, but Schindler records that he never received them nor would he have accepted them. He was, as he informed the world for many years afterward on his visiting card, “L’Ami de Beethoven,” and his very considerable and entirely unselfish labors were “works of friendship” for which he wanted no remuneration; but he was very naturally rejoiced when Beethoven presented him with several autograph scores, and we have seen how, after the death of Beethoven, Breuning gave him many papers which seemed valueless then but are looked upon as invaluable now. Moreover, he disposed of his Beethoven _memorabilia_ to the Royal Library of Berlin for an annuity of 400 thalers--all of which, however, does not detract from the disinterestedness of his labors for Beethoven, alive, suffering and so frequently helpless.

[Sidenote: ROYAL SUBSCRIPTIONS INVITED]

The invitations to the courts were issued in part before the end of January. A letter to Schindler, evidently written in that month, asks him to draw out a memorandum of courts from an almanac in which the foreign embassies stationed at Vienna were listed. The invitations were posted on the following dates: to the courts at Baden, Wurtemburg, Bavaria and Saxony on January 23; “to the other ambassadors” (as Beethoven notes) on January 26; to Weimar on February 4; to Mecklenburg and Hesse-Darmstadt on February 5; to Berlin, Copenhagen, Hesse-Cassel and Nassau on February 6; to Tuscany on February 17, and to Paris on March 1. The invitation to the court at Hesse-Cassel had been written on January 23, but it was not sent because, as Schindler says, “it had been found that nothing was to be got from the little courts.” The letter came back to Beethoven and its preservation puts in our hands the formula which, no doubt was followed in all the formal addresses. We therefore give it here:

The undersigned cherishes the wish to send his latest work, which
he regards as the most successful of his intellectual products, to
the Most Exalted Court of Cassel.

It is a grand solemn mass for 4 solo voices with choruses and
complete grand orchestra in score, which can also be used as a
grand oratorio.

He therefore begs the High Embassy of His Royal Highness, the
Elector of Hesse-Cassel, to be pleased to procure for him the
necessary permission of your Exalted Court.

Inasmuch, however, as the copying of the score will entail a
considerable expense the author does not think it excessive if he
fixes an honorarium at 50 ducats in gold. The work in question,
moreover, will not be published for the present.

Vienna, 23 January, 1823.

Ludwig van Beethoven.

Only the signature was in Beethoven’s handwriting. It is not known how many of these invitations were issued; Schindler’s account goes only to the subscriptions received and even here it is not entirely accurate. There were ten acceptances. The first came from the King of Prussia. Prince Hatzfeld acted in the matter for Berlin and Beethoven also invoked the aid of Zelter. Court Councillor Wernhard, Director of the Chancellary of the Embassy at Vienna, brought the report to Beethoven and asked him if he would not prefer a royal order to the 50 ducats. Without hesitation, Beethoven replied “50 ducats,” and after Wernhard had gone he indulged in sarcastic comments on the pursuit of decorations by various contemporaries--“which in his opinion were gained at the cost of the sanctity of art.” Beethoven received the money, but the score was not delivered, owing, no doubt, to delay in the copying, and in July Prince Hatzfeld feels compelled to remind the composer of his remissness. Prince Radziwill in Berlin also subscribed, but he did not receive his copy till more than a year later. On June 28, 1824, a representative of the Prince politely informed Beethoven that he had sent a cheque for 50 ducats to him with a request for a receipt and a copy of the score, but had received neither. On July 3, Schindler informed Beethoven that Hatzfeld had earnestly inquired whether he was now going to receive the Mass. He was being so pestered about the matter from Berlin that it was becoming burdensome. He asked that Beethoven write to the Prince without delay, telling him when he should receive the Mass, so that he might show it in his own justification in Berlin. Schindler says the fault lay with the copyists; in every copy many pages had to be rewritten.

Much to Beethoven’s vexation and impatience the Saxon court was very tardy in its reply, or rather in subscribing, for at first the invitation was declined; but Beethoven was not thus to be put off by a court with which his imperial pupil was closely connected. He called in the help of Archduke Rudolph, to whom on July 1, 1823, he wrote a letter. He complains in this letter of pain in the eyes from which he has been suffering for a week. He was forced to make sparing use of them and therefore had not been able to look through some variations composed by the Archduke, but had been obliged to leave the task to another. He continues:

[Sidenote: AN ARCHDUKE ASKED TO BE SOLICITOR]

In regard to the Mass which Y. I. H. wished to see made more
generally useful: the continuously poor state of my health for
several years, more especially the heavy debts which I have
incurred and the fact that I had to forgo the visit to England
which I was invited to make, compelled me to think of means for
bettering my condition. For this the Mass seemed suitable. I was
advised to offer it to several courts. Hard as it was for me to
do this I nevertheless did not think that I ought to subject
myself to reproach by not doing it. I therefore invited several
courts to subscribe for the Mass, fixed the fee at 50 ducats, as
it was thought that would not be too much and, if a number of
subscribers were found, also not unprofitable. Thus far, indeed,
the subscription does me honor, their Royal Majesties of France and
Prussia having accepted. I also a few days ago received a letter
from my friend Prince Gallitzin [_sic_] in St. Petersburg, in which
this truly amiable prince informs me that His Imperial Majesty
of Russia had accepted and I should soon hear the details from
the Imperial Russian embassy here. In spite of all this, however,
though others have also become subscribers I do not get as much as
I would as fee from a publisher, only I have the advantage that
the work remains _mine_. The costs of copying are large and will
be increased by the new pieces[70] which are to be added, which I
shall send to Y. I. H. as soon as I have finished them. Perhaps Y.
I. H. will not find it burdensome graciously to ask H. R. H. the
Grand Duke of Tuscany to take a copy of the Mass. The invitation
was sent some time ago to the Grand Duke of Tuscany through the
agent v. Odelgha, and O. solemnly assures me that the invitation
will surely be accepted, but I am not entirely confident, since
it was several months ago and no answer has been received. The
matter having been undertaken, it is only natural that as much as
possible should have been done to attain the desired result. It
was hard for me to understand this, still harder for me to tell Y.
I. H. of it or permit you to notice it, but “_Necessity knows no
law_.” But I thank Him above the stars[71] that I am beginning to
use my eyes again. I am now writing a new symphony for England,
for the Philharmonic Society, and hope to have it completely done
in a fortnight. I can not yet strain my eyes for a long period,
wherefore I beg Y. I. H. graciously to be patient in regard to Y.
I. H.’s variations which seem to me charming but need carefully to
be looked through by me. Continue Y. I. H. to practice the custom
of briefly jotting down your ideas at the pianoforte; for this a
little table alongside the pianoforte will be necessary. By this
means the fancy will not only be strengthened but one learns to
fix at once the most remote ideas. It is also necessary to write
without the pianoforte, and sometimes to develop a simple chorale
melody now with simple, and anon with varied figurations in
counterpoint and this will cause no headache to Y. I. H. but rather
a great pleasure at finding yourself absorbed in the art. Gradually
there comes the capacity to represent just that only which we wish
to feel, an essential need in the case of men of noble mould. My
eyes command me to stop, etc.

This letter was written in Vienna, but from Hetzendorf he sent a postscript in which he said:

If convenient, will Y. I. H. graciously recommend the Mass to
Prince Anton in Dresden, so that His Royal Majesty of Saxony may
be induced to subscribe to the Mass, which will surely happen if
Y. I. H. shows the slightest interest in the matter. As soon as
I have been informed that you have shown me this favor, I shall
at once address myself to the Director General of the Theatre and
Music there, who is in charge of such matters, and send him the
invitation to subscribe for the King of Saxony which, however, I
do not wish to do. My opera “Fidelio” was performed with great
success in Dresden at the festivities in honor of the visit of the
King of Bavaria, all their Majesties being present. I heard of
this from the above-mentioned Director General, who asked me for
the score through Weber and afterwards made me a handsome present
in return. Y. I. H. will pardon me for inconveniencing you by such
requests but Y. I. H. knows how little importunate I am as a rule;
but if there should be the least thing unpleasant to you in the
affair you will understand as a matter of course that I am none
the less convinced of your magnanimity and graciousness. It is not
greed, not the desire for speculation, which I have always avoided,
but need which compels me to do everything possible to extricate
myself from this position. In order not to be too harshly judged,
it is perhaps best to be frank. Because of my continual illness,
which prevented me from writing as much as usual, I am burdened
with a debt of 2300 florins C. M. which can be liquidated only by
extraordinary exertions. If these subscriptions help matters, for
which there are the best of hopes, I shall be able to get a firm
foothold again through my compositions. Meanwhile, may Y. I. H. be
pleased to receive my frankness not ungraciously. If ever I should
be charged with not being as active as formerly, I should keep
silent as I always have done. As regards the recommendations I am
nevertheless convinced that Y. I. H. will always be glad to do good
_whenever possible_ and will make no exception in my case.

Beethoven’s impatience with the Saxon Court was so great that some time before his hopes had been reanimated, probably by the application for his opera, he had said in a note to Schindler: “Nothing from Dresden. Wait till the end of the month then an advocate in Dresden.” These words led Schindler to the singular conclusion that Beethoven had thoughts of compelling the King of Saxony to reach a decision by judicial means. Obviously, all that Beethoven meant by “advocate” was a pleader, an intercessor. He could have contemplated legal measures only if he had sent a copy of the Mass to the King with the invitation, and this we know he did not do from a letter written by Archduke Rudolph, which says, that the King of Saxony had not received a score by July 31. Archduke Rudolph became the advocate through his brother-in-law Prince Anton, brother to the King, and so did the Director General v. Könneritz, to whom Beethoven wrote on July 17 and again on July 25. In the first letter he promises to send the invitation to the King and in the next he does so. This must have been a second invitation, for Beethoven tells v. Könneritz that the original one had been declined. A paragraph from each letter deserves reproduction.

I know that you will scarcely think of me as among those who
write simply for vulgar gain, but when do not circumstances
sometimes compel a man to act contrary to his habits of thought and
principles!! My Cardinal is a good-hearted prince, but he lacks
means.

Up to now, in spite of all external glory, I have scarcely received
for the work what I would have been paid by a publisher, the costs
of copying having been so great. My friends conceived the idea of
thus circulating the Mass, for I, thank God, am a _layman_ in all
speculations. Besides, there is no citizen of our country who has
not suffered loss, and so have I. Were it not for my sickness of
years’ standing, I should have received enough from foreign lands
to live a care-free life, caring only for art. Judge me kindly and
not unfavorably, I live for my art alone and to fulfil my duties as
a man, but alas! that this can not always be done without the help
of the _subterrestrial powers_.

[Sidenote: SUBSCRIPTIONS BY REGAL COURTS]

These last efforts were successful; King Friedrich August subscribed for the Mass, and on July 31 Archduke Rudolph wrote to his music-master: “My brother-in-law Prince Anton has already written to me that the King of Saxony is expecting your beautiful Mass.” On September 12, Prince Anton wrote to Beethoven that he had no doubt his royal brother would grant his wish, especially as he had spoken to him on the subject in the name of his brother-in-law, the Cardinal. The money must have arrived soon afterward and Beethoven set Schindler’s mind at ease by writing to him:

In order that evil report may not longer injure the poor Dresdeners
too much, I inform you that the money reached me to-day, with all
marks of respect.

According to Fürstenau the manuscript copy of the Mass is still in the private music collection of the King of Saxony in Dresden.

The Grand Duke of Hesse-Darmstadt was appealed to directly under date of February 5, the letter, probably following the formula and signed by Beethoven, being forwarded through the Hessian ambassador, Baron von Türckheim, a cultured art connoisseur and subsequently Intendant of the Grand Ducal Theatre in Darmstadt. Louis Schlösser was in Vienna at the time, and Baron von Türckheim, knowing that he wanted to make Beethoven’s acquaintance, gave him the opportunity by asking him to carry the information that the invitation had been accepted, to Beethoven, handing him the dispatch with the Grand Ducal seal affixed for that purpose. Schlösser went to Beethoven, “No. 60 Kothgasse, first storey, door to the left,” and has left us a description of the visit, which must have been made in April or early in May, 1823. Beethoven read the document with great joy and said to Schlösser:

Such words as I have read do good. Your Grand Duke speaks not only
like a princely Mæcenas but like a thorough musical connoisseur of
comprehensive knowledge. It is not alone the acceptance of my work
which rejoices me but the estimation which in general he places
upon my works.

[Sidenote: A VAIN APPEAL TO GOETHE]

No success was met with at the cultivated Court of Weimar, though here Beethoven invoked the assistance of no less a dignitary than Goethe. His letter to the poet is still preserved in the Grand Ducal archives and is worthy of being given in full:

Vienna, February 8th, 1823.

Your Excellency!

Still living as I have lived from my youthful years in your
immortal, never-aging works, and never forgetting the happy
hours spent in your company, it nevertheless happens that I must
recall myself to your recollection--I hope that you received the
dedication to Your Excellency of “Meeresstille und glückliche
Fahrt” composed by me. Because of their contrast they seemed to me
adapted for music in which the same quality appears; how gladly
would I know whether I have fittingly united my harmonies with
yours; advice too, which would be accepted as very truth, would be
extremely welcome to me, for I love the latter above all things
and it shall never be said of me _veritas odium parit_. It is very
possible that a number of your poems which must ever remain unique,
set to music by me, will soon be published, among them “Rastlose
Liebe.” How highly would I value some general observations from
you on the composition or setting to music of your poems! Now a
request to Y. E. I have composed a Grand Mass which, however, I
do not want to publish at present, but which is to be sent to the
principal courts. The honorarium for the same is 50 ducats only. I
have addressed myself in the matter to the Grand Ducal Weimarian
Embassy, which has accepted the appeal to His Serene Highness and
promised to deliver it. The Mass can also be used as an oratorio
and who does not know that the benevolent societies are suffering
from the lack of such things. My request consists in this, that
Y. E. call the attention of His Serene Highness, the Grand Duke,
to this matter so that His Highness may subscribe for the Mass.
The Grand Ducal Weimarian Embassy gave me to understand that it
would be very beneficial if the Grand Duke could be induced to
regard the matter favorably in advance. I have written much but
accumulated scarcely anything, and now I am no longer alone but
have for more than six years been father to a son of my deceased
brother, a promising youth in his sixteenth year, wholly devoted to
science and already at home in the rich shafts of Hellenism; but in
these countries such things cost a great deal and, in the case of
young students, not only the present but also the future must be
borne in mind, and as much as I formerly kept my thoughts directed
aloft I must now extend my glances _downwards_. My income is all
outgo--the condition of my health for years has not permitted
that I make artistic journeys nor seize upon the many things which
yield money!?--If my health should be completely restored I might
expect other and better things. Y. E. must not think that it is
because I am asking a favor that I have dedicated the “Meeresstille
und glückliche Fahrt” to you--this was already done in May, 1822,
and this method of making the Mass known was not thought of till a
few weeks ago. The respect, love and esteem which I have cherished
for the only and immortal Goethe since the days of my youth have
remained with me. Things like this are not easily put into words,
especially by a bungler like myself, who has always been bent only
on making tones his own, but a singular feeling impels me always to
tell you this, inasmuch as I live in your works. I know that you
will not refuse to help an artist who feels only too keenly how far
mere _monetary reward_ is from _her_ (art) now that he is compelled
by _need_ and constrained to work and labor _because of others for
others_. The good is always plain to us and therefore I know that
Y. E. will not deny my request.

A few words from you would fill me with happiness.

I remain, Your Excellency, with the sincerest and most unbounded
respect,

Beethoven.

According to Schindler, who surely was in a position to know, no answer to this letter was ever received; nor did the Grand Duke subscribe. That the invitation reached its destination may safely be assumed from Beethoven’s remark about the interest displayed in the plan at the embassy; but the document is not to be found in the archives. Goethe’s indifference, if he was indifferent in the premises, may be explained on a number of grounds. If he ever was thoroughly appreciative of Beethoven’s music, it was only later in life. He was in the prime of life with fixed tastes in music as well as the other arts before Beethoven came with his new evangel. Reichardt, Zelter and men of their stamp produced the music which was most to his liking. It is true that in July, 1812, he wrote a letter in which he said that he had never seen a more self-contained, energetic and sincere artist than Beethoven and that he could well understand why he appeared singular in the eyes of the world; but it is doubtful if he ever felt any real attachment to the man, and not altogether impossible, if the Teplitz stories are true, that he resented the bad manners of which Beethoven is said to have been guilty. But a long time had elapsed since the two great men came together in 1812.

Bavaria’s story is a short one. In a Conversation Book towards the close of May, Schindler writes: “A negative answer has come from Bavaria.” To the King of Naples, Beethoven sent a French copy of the letter of invitation practically identical with the formula, and also to the King of France.[72] In the latter case Cherubini was asked to be the advocate. The draft of Beethoven’s letter to him is still preserved among the Schindler papers in Berlin:

Highly respected Sir!

It is with great pleasure that I embrace the opportunity to
approach you in writing; in spirit I am with you often enough,
inasmuch as I value your works more than all others written for
the stage, though the beautiful world of art must deplore the fact
that for a considerable period no new theatrical work of yours
of large dimensions has appeared, at least not in our Germany;
high as your other works are esteemed by true connoisseurs, it is
yet a veritable loss to art not to possess a new product of your
great mind. True art remains imperishable and the genuine artist
feels sincere pleasure in real and great products of genius, and
so I, too, am enraptured whenever I hear a new work of yours and
feel as great an interest in it as in my own works.--In brief, I
honor and love you--If it were not for my continual ill health and
I could see you in Paris, with what extraordinary delight would
I discuss art matters with you?! I must add that to every artist
and art-lover I always speak of you with _Enthusiasm_, otherwise
you might (_illegible word_) believe, since I am about to ask a
favor of you, that this was merely an introduction to the subject.
I hope, however, that you will not attribute such lowmindedness,
so contemptible an action, to me. My request consists in this,
etc.[73] That in this, etc. I know that if you will advise His
Majesty to take the Mass, he will surely do so. My situation _ma
critique demande que je ne fixe seulement come ordinaire mes
pensées aux ciel aux contraire, il faut les fixer en bas pour les
necessites de la vie_. Whatever may be the fate of my request to
you, I shall always love and honor you _et vous resteres toujours
celui de mes contemporains, que je l’estime le plus si vous me
voulez faire une_ [sic] _estréme plaisir, c’etoit si m’ecrireess
quelque lignes, ce que me soulagera bien--l’art unie touta_ [sic]
_le monde_ and how much more true artists, _et peut etres vous me
dignes aussi, de me mettre_ also to be counted amongst this number,

_avec la plus haute
estime
votre ami
e serviteur
Beeth._

[Sidenote: A MEDAL FROM THE KING OF FRANCE]

The letter was despatched on March 15. Cherubini did not receive it, and as late as 1841 expressed his great regret at the miscarriage which, however, worked no harm to the enterprise. King Louis XVIII not only subscribed for the Mass but within less than a year sent Beethoven a gold medal weighing twenty-one Louis d’ors, showing on the obverse side the bust of the King and on the reverse, within a wreath, the inscription: _Donnée par le Roi à Monsieur Beethoven_. Duke d’Achâts, First Chamberlain of the King, accompanied the gift with the following letter:

_Je m’empresse de vous prévenir, Monsieur, que le Roi a accueillé
avec bonté l’hommage de la Partition de Votre Messe en Musique et
m’a chargé de vous faire parvenir une medaille d’or à son effigie.
Je me félicite d’avoir à vous transmettre le témoinage de la
satisfaction de Sa Majesté et je saisis cette occasion de vous
offrir l’assurance de ma considération distinguée._

_Le Premier Gentilhomme
de la Chambre du Roi_

Aux Tuileries ce 20 Février 1824. Le duc d’Achâts.

“This was a distinction,” says Schindler, “than which one more significant never fell to the lot of the artist during his life”; but the biographer certainly is in error when he intimates that the medal was given in payment of the subscription price. Beethoven informed Archduke Rudolph that the King had accepted the invitation in his letter of June 1, 1823; the medal was received early in 1824, over eight months later. Beethoven’s needs and the reply which he gave the messenger from Prussia when he offered a decoration instead of the 50 ducats, indicate plainly enough how he felt as to the remuneration. Moreover, in a billet which he sent to Schindler instructing him to call upon von Obreskow of the Russian Embassy to tell him how to pay the subscription of the Czar, Beethoven says: “let him know incidentally, when opportunity offers, that France simply sent the money to you.” Evidently King Louis XVIII paid the money in the regular way and sent the medal as a special mark of distinction.

No subscription was received from the King of Naples. The negotiations with the Grand Duke of Tuscany were more successful, though they dragged on into the next year. They were a subject of discussion in the Conversation Book in which Count Lichnowsky, Brother Johann and Nephew Karl took part. From remarks there recorded it appears that an appeal was also made to Ex-Empress Maria Louisa, Duchess of Parma. Here the agent was Odelga and there was a plan to interest Countess Neuberg. Count Lichnowsky seems to have suggested the name of Maria Louisa and offered to write to Count Neuberg, whom he knew, on the subject. It looks also as if the case of the Grand Duke of Tuscany had been exceptional, in that the Mass had been forwarded before the subscription had been received; this at least might be the interpretation of a remark noted by Karl: “I shall go to Odelga on Sunday. We must get to work, or they will keep the Mass and send nothing.”

Schindler says that Beethoven sent a carefully written letter to the King of Sweden to accompany the invitation; but nothing came of it. The King of Denmark subscribed, but as we hear nothing of the particulars, it is most likely that everything went smoothly in his case.

Prince Galitzin was asked to make a plea to the Russian Court and reported in a letter to Beethoven, dated June 2, that the invitation had been accepted and the official notification would follow in due course through the Russian Embassy. The money came soon afterwards. On July 9, Schindler writes in a jocular vein, using a metaphor which had already done service in Beethoven’s correspondence:

I take pleasure in reporting to you herewith, that by command of
the Emperor of all the Russias, 50 horsemen in armor are arrived
here as a Russian contingent to do battle under you for the
Fatherland. The leader of these choice troops is a Russian Court
Councillor. Herr Stein, pianoforte maker, has been commissioned
by him to quarter them on you. _Rien de nouveau chez nos voisins
jusqu’ici._

_Fidelissimus Papageno._[74]

The director of the business affairs of the Russian Embassy, von Obreskow, had made inquiry as to how the fee was to be paid. Beethoven wrote to Schindler to tell Obreskow to pay the bearer on delivery of a receipt; to say (if it became opportune) that the King of France had done so; and admonished him always to remember that such personages represented “Majesty itself”; also to “say nothing about the Mass not being finished, which is not true, for the new pieces are only additions.” Impatience at the non-delivery of the Mass at the expected time must have been expressed by the Russian Embassy, for in a note which Schindler dates “in the winter of 1824,” Beethoven says:

Mr. v. Schindler:

Here the _Paquett_ for the Russian Embassy, please look after it at
once, moreover say that I shall soon visit him in person, inasmuch
as it hurts me that lack of confidence has been felt in me and I
thank God I am in a position to prove that I do not deserve it in
any way nor will my honor permit it.[75]

[Sidenote: PRINCE GALITZIN’S SUBSCRIPTION]

Prince Galitzin, who had already expressed his delight in the new work and who had also been invited to subscribe, suggested that the Mass be published by popular subscription at four or five ducats, as there were not many amateurs who could afford to pay 50 ducats for a written copy. “All that I can do,” the Prince writes in conclusion, “is to beg you to put me down among your subscribers and to send me a copy as soon as possible so that I may produce it at a concert for the benefit of the widows of musicians which takes place annually near Christmas.” Plainly, this was a subscription in the existing category; there was no other, and Beethoven, in view of the invitation to the courts, could not at once entertain the subject of a popular subscription for a printed edition. Galitzin also accedes to a request which had obviously been made to him when the invitation was extended, that the 50 ducats already deposited in Vienna by him for a quartet be applied to the account of the Mass. He writes on September 23 (October 3): “I have just received your letter of the 17th and hasten to answer that I have instructed the house of Henikstein to pay you immediately the 50 ducats which I fancied had long ago been placed at your disposal.” The bankers Henikstein sent the Prince Beethoven’s receipt for the 50 ducats “which we paid to him on the order and account of Your Highness as fee for the Mass which we have forwarded through the High State Chancellary.” The score was in the hands of Prince Galitzin on November 29, but the performance which he had projected did not take place until April 6, 1824. It was the first performance of the Mass anywhere, and Galitzin wrote an enthusiastic account of it to Beethoven under date of April 8.[76]

A special invitation to subscribe to the Mass was not extended to the Austrian court for reasons which, no doubt, were understood between Beethoven and Archduke Rudolph and which may have been connected with efforts which were making at the time to secure a court appointment for the composer. At the request of Artaria, however, an invitation was sent to Prince Paul Esterhazy. Beethoven had little confidence in the successful outcome of the appeal, probably with a recollection in his mind of the Prince’s attitude toward him on the occasion of the production of the Mass in C in 1807, to which he seems to refer in a letter to Schindler dated June 1:[77]

/# You will kindly again make inquiry of (_illegible_) for a
report. I doubt if it will be favorable for I do not expect a good
opinion from him, at least not to judge by earlier times! I think
that such matters can only be successfully presented to him by
women.

Beethoven’s suspicious nature had other food. On the outside of this letter he wrote:

N. B. So far as I can remember there was nothing said in the
invitation to Prince Esterhazy about the Mass being distributed
only in manuscript. What mischief may not result from this. I
suspect that the purpose of Herr Artaria in suggesting that the
Mass be offered to the Prince gratis was to enable him to steal a
work of mine for the third time.

Beethoven’s lack of faith in the enterprise was justified; Esterhazy did not subscribe.

No invitation was sent to the English court, probably because Beethoven cherished a grudge in that quarter; but subscriptions were asked of two large singing societies--the Singakademie of Berlin and the Cäcilien-Verein of Frankfort. Zelter was director of the Singakademie, and to him Beethoven wrote on February 8 as follows, after the introductory compliments and reflections:

I wrote a Grand Mass, which might also be performed as an oratorio
(for the benefit of the poor, as is the good custom that has been
introduced) but did not want to publish it in print in the ordinary
way, but to give it to the principal courts only. The fee amounts
to 50 ducats. Except the copies subscribed for, none will be
issued, so that the Mass is practically only a manuscript.

He informs Zelter that an appeal has been sent to the King of Prussia and that he has asked the intercession in its behalf of Prince Radziwill. He then continues:

I ask of you that you do what you can in the matter. A work of
this kind might also be of service to the Singakademie, for there
is little wanting to make it practicable for voices alone; but the
more doubled and multiplied the latter in combination with the
instruments, the more effective it would be. It might also be in
place as an oratorio, such as is in demand for the Societies for
Poverty. More or less ill for several years and therefore not in
the most brilliant situation, I had recourse to this means. I have
written much but accumulated almost 0. Disposed to send my glances
aloft--but man is compelled for his own and for others’ sake to
direct them downwards; but this too is a part of man’s destiny.

[Sidenote: ZELTER AND THE SOLEMN MASS]

The letter will be seen, on comparison with that written on the same day to Goethe, to be either a draft for the latter in part or an echo of it. There is the same pun on “geschrieben” and “erschrieben,” the same lament about having to keep his eyes on the ground while desirous to keep them fixed on higher things, the same reference to the value of the Mass for concert purposes in behalf of charity. As this last point is one which would naturally occur to the writer in addressing a musician and not at all naturally in an appeal to a poet, it is safe to say that the Zelter letter was written first. It is an unpleasant duty to call attention to a very significant difference between this letter and the invitation issued to the courts as well as the letter to Goethe. In the latter he distinctly says that the Mass will not be published in the ordinary way “for the present,” thus reserving the privilege of printing it at a future time. To Zelter, and presumably to the Frankfort society, he plainly intimates that there is to be no publication in the ordinary way at all. It is not a violent presumption that Zelter may have observed this discrepancy, which was of vital moment to his society, and that this may have caused the termination of the negotiations, which began auspiciously enough in a letter written by Zelter on February 22 in reply to Beethoven’s. In this letter he said he was ready to purchase the Mass for the Singakademie at his own risk, provided Beethoven would adapt it to the use of the society--that is, arrange it for performance practically without instruments--a proceeding, he explained, which would make it practicable for all similar concert institutions. To this letter Beethoven replied on March 25:

I have carefully considered your suggestion for the Singakademie.
If it should ever appear in print I will send you a copy without
pay. It is true that it might almost be performed _a la capella_,
but to this end the whole would have to be arranged. Perhaps you
have the patience to do this. Besides, there is already a movement
in it which is entirely _a la capella_ and I am inclined to call
this style the only true church style. I thank you for your
readiness. From such an artist as you are, _with honor_, I would
never accept anything. I honor you and desire only an opportunity
to prove this to you in deed.

There the matter ended, so far as is known. The negotiations with the Frankfort society were more successful. On May 19, 1823, J. N. Schelble, director, wrote saying:

The hope of receiving a new composition from you, great master,
inspires all the members and reinvigorates their musical zeal. I
therefore request you as soon as it is convenient to you to forward
a copy of your Mass to me.

There were, therefore, as appears from this account and the list of names sent in November, 1825, to the publishers of the Mass, ten subscribers, namely: the Czar of Russia, the Kings of Prussia, Saxony, France and Denmark, the Grand Dukes of Tuscany and Hesse-Darmstadt, Princes Galitzin and Radziwill and the Cäcilia Society of Frankfort. Beethoven’s receipts, 500 ducats (£250 or about $1200), were very materially reduced, how much we can not say, by the costs of copying. In this work his principal helper was a professional copyist named Schlemmer, who could best decipher his manuscript. But Schlemmer was sickly and died before the year was over; his successor was named Rampel, and seems to have caused Beethoven a great deal of annoyance; he probably was made to bear a great deal of the blame for the tardiness of the work, for which, also, the composer’s frequent alterations were in part responsible. One of the numerous letters to Schindler from this period throws a little light on this subject:

Samothracian L----l.[78]

How about the trombone part. It is certain that the youngster still
has it, as he did not return it when he brought back the _Gloria_.
There was so much to do in looking over the wretched scribbling
that to carry back the trombone part was forgotten. If necessary,
I shall come to Vienna about the police matter. Here, for Rampel,
is first the theme of the _Var._ which is to be copied for me on
a separate sheet--then he is to copy the rest to _Var._ 13 or to
the end of _Var._ 12, and so an end of this. Get from Schlemmer
what remains of the _Kyrie_:--show him the postscript and herewith
_satis_.--for such _Hauptl----ls_ there is nothing more to be done.
Farewell--attend to everything--I am obliged to bind up my eyes
at night and must be very sparing in my use of them. Otherwise,
Smettana writes, I shall write but few more notes. To Wocher,
whom I shall visit myself as soon as I come to town, my prettiest
compliments and has he yet sent away the _Var._?

[Sidenote: NEGOTIATIONS WITH DIABELLI]

Beethoven’s thoughts in connection with the Mass were not all engrossed during 1823 with the finishing touches on the composition and the subscription; he was still thinking of the publication of the work. His thoughts went to London, as a letter to Ries shows. The Mass also came up in his dealings with Diabelli in Vienna. There were, probably, other negotiations, of which we are not advised. An agreement had been reached with Diabelli concerning the Variations, Op. 120 (on the Diabelli waltz theme), and the Mass had also been mentioned. Whatever the nature of the negotiations may have been, Diabelli now seems to have been insisting on conditions which Beethoven could not accept without breach of contract with his subscribers or revoking the subscriptions. In March Diabelli called Schindler into his shop and had a talk with him which is detailed in a Conversation Book. It is Schindler who is speaking:

Diabelli called me in to-day while I was passing and said to
me that he would take the Mass and publish it in two months by
subscription. He guarantees you the 1000 florins, as he says he has
already told you. You can have as many copies as you want--Diabelli
only asks of you that you let him know your decision within a
few days, then he will have work begun at once and promises that
everything shall be ready by the end of May. You, however, will not
have any further care in the matter. I think the proposition a very
good one, the more, because the work will be printed at once.

Beethoven appears to have doubts or scruples on the score of the invitations sent to the sovereigns.

It will make no difference to the most exalted courts if printed
copies are put out. Do you want the 1000 florins in cash at once
or later?--he assures me that they will be guaranteed to you; the
business now is that you come to an understanding.

It appears, now, that Diabelli wants to publish the three supplementary pieces also; but Beethoven still hesitates:

It would be best if you were to persuade Diabelli to print the
work at once, but wait a few months with the publication by
subscription. Then you will not be compromised in the matter, nor
he either.

Later (there has plainly been another consultation between Schindler and Diabelli):

Diabelli agrees to wait until the tardy answers have been received
before opening the subscription. But he is not willing to wait a
whole year.

And in April:

Are you agreed? The only question is whether you give Diab. the
privilege of announcing the subscription a month before he pays. It
is his wish not to put the Mass in hand until he has paid. About
Diabelli then--do you want to leave the matter to me or consider
the publication by yourself? Diabelli wants the Mass by July 1 in
order to have it ready by the St. Michael Fair.

Later, August 1 and September 1 are mentioned. Beethoven was firm in his determination to keep faith with his subscribers. He writes to Schindler: “There are only two courses as regards the Mass, namely, that the publisher delay the publication a year and a day; or, if not, we can not accept a subscription.” Later he writes: “Nothing is to be changed in the Diabelli contract except that _the time_ when he is to receive the Mass from me be left undetermined.” The contract in question which was thus to be amended concerned the Variations, but presumably the Mass also. Beethoven writes:

From my little book I see that you have doubts in the matter of the
Mass and Diab., wherefore, I beg you to come soon, for in that case
we will not give him the Var. either, as my brother knows somebody
who wants to take them both. We are therefore in a position to talk
to him.