The puzzle of Beethoven's Kochs!

Perhaps you are still bound by Ivanhoe's vows of eternal love for Rebecca and her benevolent banker-father and as such you refuse to touch the "Bible" issue (let alone "international finances" and their criminal, cacophonic and ridiculous enorchestration ) and rightly so: Any discussion on the old jewish "biblia" is bound to get lost in controversies, inconsistencies, distortions and lies in permanent need of "interpretation", this great task justifying the salaries of armies of goodfornothing bloodsucking "God communicating shepards" for centuries.

As the only online amateur genealogist of "Cocchi-Koch" I have laid out and presented in this forum in detail my "story", all known to me evidence and -drawn to my satisfaction- conclusions with regard to my own roots.

I have furthermore challenged you from early on in your previous thread on Mozart to dispute me and have then called , in this thread, all concerned to solve the "Koch-Beethoven" puzzle of title offering a 500 eur reward to all "Kochs" in particular to prove me wrong. Noone appeared, as expected, the issue is delicate!

You on the other hand, playing it both cowboy and indian all along, failed in both roles and, beyond your "Mozart was manufactured" breathtaking announcement, have offered nothing other in either threads than acting as the perfect punching bag for me and I therefore must thank you again.

Cheers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

I understand England is in a bigger financial mess than Greece. According to some data published the other day in London.

As for 'what Bible ?' I was not refering to any particular translation. It seems to me we don't need new translations but an understanding (revealing) of what we already have.

If you find any Koch/Cocchi information in connection with Bonn (which may link with G. Cocchi or others of that family, it would be interesting, for sure). A single family can have very many members, of course. Why, the ancestry of J.S. Bach alone involves no less than 30 different families of that name. And 4 distinct branches.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bach_family

Regards

---

You are referring to a post of yours of 2005 (http://www.gyrix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2234) quoting Giorgio Taboga who in turn quotes Fr.Leopold Kantner on apparent similarities between music styles of Mozart and "theoretician" Valloti who has not been honoured with a Wiki biography* (as a two minute google search shows) and was "invented" by Burney** in his trip to Italy 1771-1773's.

According to my own "spot another Saint Germain alias" rules, Valloti is definitely a candidate to pass thru the "all inclusive timeline" to see how he fits, the more so because of Burney's "testimony", the "theoretician"("Koch") label and his Mozart and Luchesi connections, I would thus ask you to bring the matter to signor Taboga's attention asking him to provide more- and more concrete-data on signor Valloti's whereabouts (dates, places) if he can and I would more than happy to accomodate all concerned.

Many italian musicians contributed to establishing various european "ethnic" musics during the second half of the 18th and my "theory" on Saint Germain provides the answer to all relative questions of musicological nature such as "who spoke their language and had the interest, the power and the means to invite, distribute, appoint and control them all?" .

....and by the way, of Valloti's "Della scienza teorica e pratica della moderna musica" , only volume I was published in 1779, the other three volumes only published in 1950.

....and Vallotti has another link to Rousseau : Chambéry, the french town known to have educated the first and to have hosted (and subsequently been adopted by) the latter prior to his arrival in Paris(http://www.sabaudia.org/v2/dossiers/.../document1.php, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamb%C3%A9ry). Unforunately Vallotti's Chambery period of residence is not recorded online.

...and there is Abbe Roussier as well, who invented a previous musician, "abbe Rousseau", to separate him from Jean Jacques whose only work (Devin de village) he downgrades when editing Laborde's book on music-La Borde, Jean-Benjamin de. Essai sur la musique ancienne et moderne. Tome premier. Paris: Eugene Onfroy, 1780.

IE "Vallotti" is "Rousseau" (covering up his traces editing Laborde) and we have two or three more aliases of "Saint Germain".

Regards.


*A "Vallotti" wikibiography does exist however (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Antonio_Vallotti). He is said to have given music lessons to Vogler for five months in Padua....
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Joseph_Vogler)....propably late 1774-early 1775 (as per my timeline) but more specific dates on Vogler would be helpfull to draw conclusions.
Vogler's own biography and characteristics (round head, heavy build, much like Gaussec-Gluck) may provide the answer of the eventual existence of a musician brother of Gioachino Cocchi.

**In his "The Present State of Music in France and Italy: Or, the Journal of a Tour", Charles Burney declares his inability to distinguish between Valloti and Tartini and compares their use of mathematics in music to Rousseau's own theory, ie Tartini was most propably "Valloti's"/Gioachino Cocchi's/"Rousseau's" teacher, "divine" music at the time offended by "science" (mathematics) and Tartini's own pact with the "evil one". Burney's links to Cocchi-Rousseau-Koch etc have already been highlighted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

Perhaps of interest, the famous music theorist, Francesco Antonio Valloti (1697-1780), who taught Andrea Luchesi in Venice, was in 1722 organist at St. Antonio in Padua. He became Maestro there in 1730 and held the position for another 50 years (till 1780). He was also associated with Giuseppe Tartini. (Tartini's unpublished treatise on violin playing being plundered and published by Leopold Mozart, first in 1756). Valloti and Tartini's were both careers that would have been associated with G. Cocchi.

(Valloti's musical importance cannot be over-stated. He spent a great deal of thought on the theory of harmony and counterpoint. His theoretical studies culminated in 1779 with publishing of a 167-page, four volume work, 'Della scienza teorica e pratica della moderna musica' ('On the scientific theory and practice of modern music'), just before the end of his life. The influence of Valloti's theories were found by Italian musical researchers A. Trombetta and L. Bianchini (2008) to exist in the musical score of 'Mozart's' opera, 'Le Nozze di Figaro' although, of course the real Mozart studied harmony not a day in his life. With the single exception of a few days token visit to Padua with Padre Martini).

Regards

---

Thank you Yanni.

If I can condense matters (from my perspective, that is), the musical links Leopold Mozart had (even before the birth of Wolfgang) included those he had formed with Padua and with Venice. Dating back to the time of Hasse. (In fact the German composer Hasse was the man who wrote to the Venetian occultist Abbe Ortes before father and son Mozart ever went to Italy). Padua had been hugely important in the teaching of Aristotelian philosophy and ideas of oligarchy to the nobility of England. For example, early mercantile fleets of England which led to final formation of the British East India Company. This spread of occultism into the mercantile/aristocracy of England (in helping to form its giant mercantile and banking empire in London) came through these same occultist Venetians. The University of Padua was the academic centre of Venetian expansion into England and was also of crucial importance in the arts from the earliest years of the Jesuit Order. The later 'secularisation' known as the 'enlightenment' was controlled by Jesuit alliance with occultist Venice (from the earliest days of its creation as an order) and it owed much to men such as Cardinal Contarini of Venice). Padua also had a major role in young Mozart's reception in Italy. And yes, Valloti and others such as Luchesi were all part of this movement. As was Padre Martini himself, Abbe Vogler, Luchesi and numerous others.

The harmonic system of Valloti was very modern at the time Mozart supposedly composed 'Le Nozze di Figaro' (1785-6) and yet we find clear evidence of it in the theatre score at the Austrian National Library (the score used at the Vienna premiere) of Valloti's own harmonic ideas within it.

You refer to Giorgio Taboga. (A major researcher in to the life and career of Andrea Luchesi, amongst other things). Well, actually, musical analysis of that Figaro score (which shows the unmistakable influence of Valloti's harmonic theory within it) was made by Luca Bianchini and Anna Trombetta, two experts in 18th century operatic music. These two authors of 'Figaro - Aria Della Contessa' (2008) were also first to show photographic evidence of the musical contents of that score in detail.

We know Mozart, the real Mozart, knew virtually nothing of Valloti's theory and never read it or studied it. But others around his official career obviously had.

Here is the full article in 'Grove' on Valloti. I agree that it is not very specific about the various parts of his career. I have other sources too.

Vallotti, Francesco Antonio

(b Vercelli, Piedmont, 11 June 1697; d Padua, 10 Jan 1780). Italian composer and theorist. He was enabled by Padre Beccaria, superior of the Franciscan monastery of S Eusebi (the cathedral of Vercelli), to study with G.A. Bissone, maestro di cappella at the cathedral. His scores dated 1710 and 1712 demonstrate a thorough schooling in composition. An interest in theology and philosophy led him to further studies; at the age of 18 he visited Chambéry to join the Franciscan order, and he then spent a year in Crest (Dauphiné) where he took vows on 16 December 1716. By special dispensation, on account of his youth, from the Bishop of Saluzzo, Vallotti was ordained priest on 7 July 1720, after a period of study in Cuneo under the philosopher Castellani the elder. In 1721 Castellani sponsored him in a public debate possibly in Milan where he went to study with the theologian D.F. Donati; Donati moved to Padua and Vallotti followed him, arriving on 6 November 1721.

It is generally believed that Vallotti continued musical studies in Padua with F.A. Calegari, maestro di cappella of the basilica of S Antonio. He was elected third organist of the basilica, succeeding G.L. Albori, on 28 December 1722 and took up the post the following February. There he could learn Calegari’s musical theory, upon which, he later admitted, his own was partly based. While his dedication to his musical duties may not initially have exceeded those of other university students who sometimes served as temporary organists or choristers, it doubtless increased after his failure in October 1723 to qualify for advanced theological studies. In the latter half of 1725 he replaced Alessio Quadrio at the fourth organ at functions not requiring the third, and late in 1727, when the Paduan composer G.A. Rinaldi took over from Calegari as maestro di cappella, Vallotti was granted an increase in salary (from 80 to 100 ducats annually) for assisting the ailing maestro. Several compositions from this time as well as his theoretical work – Vallotti later claimed that his theoretical system was worked out by 1728 – must have recommended him as Rinaldi’s successor. After Rinaldi’s death (8 December 1729), however, Vallotti’s candidacy was challenged, but recommendations from Antonio Lotti, Antonio Biffi and Antonio Pacelli in Venice prompted the basilica’s administrators to appoint him maestro (by four votes to three) on 21 February 1730. He held the position for 50 years, with an annual salary of 200 ducats plus 40 ducats for music paper and copyists.

Vallotti was now in charge of a choir of 16 singers and a celebrated orchestra of 16 string players, with Tartini as leader and Vandini as first cellist. There were also several wind players; although inexplicably absent from Tartini’s scores, an oboe, trumpet and at least two organs were usually available and Vallotti’s music calls for these along with bassoon and horn (the two last reserved for high feasts). Vallotti, rather than Tartini, was officially consulted when new instrumentalists were engaged, and he conducted the orchestra whenever it accompanied the choir. Curiously, in some of his liturgical works the instrumental sections lacked a melodic line, unless (as Tebaldini conjectured) Tartini or another violinist improvised a part against the figured bass. The quality and size of the orchestra gradually declined after a fire in the basilica in 1749. When Burney heard the group in 1770, he thought it inferior to its reputation and complained of the loud accompanying organ. By the beginning of the 19th century the musical forces had further deteriorated, and Vallotti’s successors Antonio Calegari and Melchiorre Balbi reduced many of his works for four voices and orchestra to two-part men’s choir with organ.

As well as a concerted choral style, Vallotti cultivated a strict contrapuntal manner based on his study of 16th-century masters. Between about 1730 and 1760 he transcribed numerous masses of Palestrina, the introits of Costanzo Porta (1566) and other Renaissance works (now in I-Pca). His own antiphons and introits with a tenor cantus firmus in long notes represent a masterful synthesis of Renaissance contrapuntal techniques and tonal harmonic requirements. His reputation as a contrapuntist prompted other Franciscans such as G.B. Martini in Bologna, Giuseppe Paolucci in Venice and A.M. Belli in Assisi to request scores to study and perform. Frederick the Great commissioned a mass and Te Deum for the dedication in 1773 of St Hedwig’s Cathedral, Berlin, and a few years later Carl Theodor, Elector Palatine, sent Vallotti a gold medal to commemorate performances of his music in Mannheim (as related in correspondence with Vallotti’s former pupil G.J. Vogler in 1776). Knowledge of Vallotti’s contrapuntal art was transmitted to the 19th century mainly by L.A. Sabbatini’s Trattato sopra le fughe (Venice, 1802), which quoted extensively from Vallotti’s compositions. Verdi’s admiration for Vallotti was probably fostered by that book or by Asioli’s Trattato d’armonia (Milan, 1813), which quoted Vallotti’s music briefly but called him ‘the greatest of Italian harmonists’. In 1896, when Verdi was composing his Te Deum, he reported to Boito his youthful studies of Vallotti’s music and wrote to Tebaldini at Padua asking for a copy of a Vallotti's Te Deum.

Vallotti’s importance as a theorist has not yet been gauged. Except for the first volume of his magnum opus Della scienza teorica e pratica, published shortly before his death, his theoretical writings have remained little known. In 1783 the second, third and fourth books of this treatise were entrusted to G.B. Martini and, although Martini wrote prefaces to each and enthusiastically recommended their publication, they were not printed until 1950 when they were issued in an unscholarly edition as Trattato della moderna musica. In addition to technical descriptions of intervals, chords and other elements of music, Vallotti included practical guidance on numerous musical problems, including an elegant system of unequal temperament for tuning keyboard instruments (see Well-tempered clavier). In the third book Vallotti explains that F.A. Calegari discovered the relationship between the root position and inversions of chords, and that both he and Vallotti applied this knowledge in their compositions from the mid-1720s even though they did not learn until about 1737 of Rameau’s treatment of inversions in his Traité de l’harmonie (1722). Vallotti’s ideas on this subject are discussed by L.A. Sabbatini in his Trattato di contrappunto (I-Pca). It should be mentioned that Vallotti did not agree with Calegari in all matters, nor with Tartini in certain theoretical details. Vallotti’s treatise is not a simplification of Tartini’s Trattato of 1754. While the published portion is less technical than Tartini’s, manuscripts with Vallotti’s algebraic calculations in the S Antonio archives (along with his acknowledgement of assistance from Abbot Suzzi and Alessandro Barca, professors at Padua University) indicate a mathematical interest in no way inferior to Tartini’s. Vallotti’s correspondence with Count Giordano Riccati di Castelfranco from 1734 until 1777 probes deeply into scientific matters relating to music.

In a letter of 22 November 1733 to J.J. Fux, Vallotti argued that Fux's Gradus ad Parnassum of 1725 should have recognized the 12 modes used by Palestrina, Porta and others instead of claiming that there were but six; he added that the 12 modes of the ancients were replaced by two scales, the major and minor (as he explained in the treatise that he was then writing). As well as this letter to Fux, Vallotti’s correspondence includes 74 letters to G.B. Martini (dated 1734–79, in I-Bc) and a further 63 folders of letters (Pca), many of which await examination. His detailed criticisms made in 1760 and 1779, when helping to select maestri for S Petronio, Bologna, and Milan Cathedral, are extant with the candidates’ pieces (in Bc, Bsf, Md). Vallotti’s private collection of letters, compositions, theoretical writings and other papers were deposited in the archive of the Arca del Santo, the governing body of S Antonio, in May 1791. A marble statue of Vallotti was to have been erected in the basilica according to a decree of 16 December 1782, but instead his bust was placed with a full-length statue of Tartini in the Prato della Valle in 1806. A tablet commemorating Vallotti was added in the same park in 1881. Two portraits in oil are in the basilica.

WORKS

For thematic catalogue, see Massaro (in Cattin, 1981)

many MSS in I-Ac and Pca are autograph scores; most works a 4 for SATB; most accompaniments for organ and strings

masses, mass movements
Kyrie–Gloria–Credo: 2vv, A-Wgm, Wn, I-Pca, Vnm; 3vv, VId; 4vv, A-Wgm, D-Bsb, Dlb

Kyrie: 3vv, I-Vnm; 4vv, D-Mbs, I-Pc, Pca; 5vv, Pca, Vnm; 8vv, Pca

Gloria: 2vv, Pca, Vnm; 4vv, A-Wn, D-Mbs, I-Ac, Bc, Pca; 5vv, Bc, Pca; 8vv, D-Mbs, I-Ac, Bc, Pca, Pl

Credo: 2vv, Pca, Vnm; 4vv, A-Wn, D-Bsb, Mbs, I-Bc, Pc, Pca, Pl, Vnm; 5vv, D-Mbs, I-Pca; 6vv, Vnm; 8vv, Ac

Gratias agimus, 1v, Pca; Qui tollis, 1–4vv, D-Mbs, I-Pca; Qui sedes, 1v, Pca; Quoniam, 1v, Pca; Cum sancto spiritu, 8vv, Bc; Crucifixus, 2vv, Vnm


requiem mass movements
Introit: 2vv, I-Pca; 4vv, Bc, Pc, Pca, Pl

Sequence: 2vv, Pca; 4vv, A-Wgm, Wn, D-Bsb, I-Bc, Bsf, Pc, Pca, Pl, Vnm; 5vv, A-Wn, D-Dlb, GB-Lbl, I-Pca, Tn

Other movts: 4vv, D-Mbs; 8vv, I-Bc, Pc, Pca


other sacred vocal
Esequie per i teologi defunti, 4vv, I-Pca

Vespers for the dead, 8vv, Pca, Vnm

Introits, 2–8vv, A-Wn, I-Pca

Antiphons: Alma Redemptoris mater, 1–8vv, I-Pca; Ave regina, 1–8vv, Pca, Vnm; Regina coeli, 1–8vv, Pca; Salve regina, 1–8vv, A-Wn, D-Bsb, Dlb, Mbs, I-Bc, Pca; 4 ants with pss for Compline, 8vv, Ac, Pca; Vesper ants, 1–8vv, D-Mbs, I-Pca

Psalms: Beati omnes, 2vv, Pca; Beatus vir, 4–8vv, A-Wgm, Wn, D-Bsb, Dlb, Mbs, I-Ac, Bc, Pca; Benedictus, 4vv, VId; Confitebor, 2–8vv, Pca; Credidi propter, 8vv, Pca; Cum invocarem, 2–4vv, Pca; De profundis, 4–8vv, A-Wgm, Wn, I-Bc, FAN, Pca, Vnm; Dixit Dominus, 4–8vv, Bc, Pca; Domine ad adiuvandum, 4–8vv, Pca; Ecce nunc, 2–3vv, Pca; Ecce quam bonum, 8vv, Pca; In convertendo Dominus, 8vv, D-Bsb, I-Pca; In exitu Israel, 8vv, D-Bsb, Mbs, I-Pca; In te Domine speravi, 2vv, Pca; Laetatus sum, 8vv, A-Wn, I-Pca; Lauda Jerusalem, 8vv, Pca; Laudate Dominum, 4–8vv, Pca; Laudate pueri, 2–8vv, Pca, Vnm; Memento Domine, 8vv, Pca; Miserere, 2–4vv, A-Wgm, GB-Ob, I-Fc, Mc, Pc, Pca, VId, Vnm; Nisi Dominus, 2–8vv, Pca; Quaemadmodum, 8vv, Pca; Quam dilecta, 8vv, Pca; Qui habitat, 8vv, Pca; Voce me ad Dominum, 8vv, Ac, Bc, Pc; Pss for Terce, 8vv, Pca; Compline pss with 4 antiphons, 8vv, Ac; Pss for Vespers for the dead, 8vv, Pca

Responses: for Holy Week, 4vv, A-Wn, D-Mbs, I-Pca; for Pontifical funeral, 8vv, Pca; for S Spina, 8vv, Pca; others, D-Bsb, Mbs; In monte olive, 4vv, LÜh; O lingua benedicta, 1v, I-Pca; Si quaeris miracula, 2–8vv, A-Wgm, D-Dlb, Mbs, I-Bc, Pca, Vnm

Hymns: Pange lingua, 1–4vv, Bc, Pca; Tantum ergo, 4–8vv, Ac, Pc; Te Deum, 2–8vv, D-Bsb, I-Ac, Pca; Te lucis, 1v, Pca; Ut queant laxis, 3vv, Vnm; Veni creator, 8vv, Pca, VId; others, 1–4vv, Pca; Trisagio ed inno pei Martedi di S Antonio, Vnm

Canticles: Mag, 4–8vv, A-Wgm, Wn, I-Pca, Vnm; Nunc, 2–4vv, Pca

Litanies: VId; della BVM, Pca; pel Sabato Santo, Pca; dei Santi, Pc, Pca

Versicles: De torrente, 1v, Pca; Et misericordia, 1v, Pca; Gloria Patri, 1v, Pca; In manus tuas, 1v, Pca; In noctibus, 1v, Pca; Jube Domine, 2–4vv, Pca; O vos omnes, 3–4vv, A-Wgm, Wn, F-Pn, I-Bc, BGc, Md, Pc, Pca, Vnm; Quid sum miser, 1v, Pc, Pca; Qui sicut, 1v, Pca; Sepulto Domino, 3–4vv, A-Wn, F-Pn, I-Bc, BGc, Md, Pca, Vnm; Tecum principium, 1v, Pca

Others: Confiteor Deo, 1v, Pca; En gratulemur, 8vv, Pca; Laetare Doctor inclyte, 1v, Bsf; Lauda Sion, sequence, 4vv, Pc, Pca; 9 lessons for Holy Week, 1v, Pca; O lingua benedicta, 1–8vv, Pca; Pietà vi supplico, 2vv, A-Wn; Popule meus, 4vv, A-Wgm, D-Bsb; Salve Sancte Pater, 8vv, I-Ac; Transiti di S Antonio, 3vv, A-Wn, D-Bsb, F-Pn, I-Pca, Vnm; Alleluia, Benedictus, Tract, etc., for Holy Saturday, 8vv, Pca; 3 motets, 1v, A-Wn, D-Bsb, I-Pca


secular
Figli, qual duol v’ingombra? (cant.), T, D-Mbs, I-Vnm

22 fugues, 4 insts, D-Mbs

8 fugues, insts, I-CORc


theoretical works
Della scienza teorica e pratica della moderna musica, bk1 (Padua, 1779); bks2–4, MS, I-Pca [preliminary drafts of bks1–4, Pca]; ed. G. Zanon and B. Rizzi as Trattato della moderna musica (Padua, 1950)

Una memoria di varie decisioni teorico-pratiche spettanti al giusto intendimento delle materie musicali (MS, 1725, Pca)

Serie di vari autori greci, latini, italiani e francesi che hanno scritto della musica o antica o moderna con varie erudizioni ed opinioni diversi (MS, 1732, Pca)

Trattato dei tuoni modali, si ecclesiastici corali, che musicali ed armoniali, i: Compendio storico de’ tuoni modali della musica greca, del canto ecclesiastico, del canto figurato e della moderna musica; ii: Trattato de’ tuoni modali, in cui si tratta dei dodici tuoni ecclesiastici e corali (MSS, 1733–5, Pca)

Se il tuono minore naturale abbia per base la corda e ottava di D la sol re ovvero quella di A la mi re (MS, Pca)

Dell’estensione e carattere dei più comuni stromenti (MS, Vnm)

Contrappunto principii (MS, Vnm)

11 bassi del prete Francescantonio Vallotti (MS, Vnm); others, D-MÜs

2 untitled MSS: calculations to establish the weight of bells according to their sounds, project to construct an organ, both I-Pca


BIBLIOGRAPHY

BurneyFI

EitnerQ

FétisB

GerberL

GerberNL

MGG1(S. Martinotti)

L.A. Sabbatini: Notizie sopra la vita e le opere del rev. P.F.A. Vallotti (Padua, 1780)

F. Fanzago: Orazione ne’ funerali del R.P. Francesco Antonio Vallotti recitata nella chiesa del Santo (Padua, c1780)

G. Riccati: ‘Riflessioni … sopra il Libro primo della scienza teorica e pratica della moderna musica del P. Francescantonio Vallotti’, Nuovo giornale de' letterati d’Italia, xxiii (1787), 45–115

F. Fanzago: Elogi di tre uomini illustri: Tartini, Vallotti, e Gozzi, con una orazione gratulatoria (Padua, 1792), 61–99

A. L.: Nell’anniversario centesimoprimo dalla morte del celebre maestro di musica P. Francesco Antonio Vallotti (Padua, 1881)

G. Tebaldini: L’archivio musicale della Cappella Antoniana di Padova (Padua, 1895), 7, 19–20, 44ff, 114ff

C. Negri: Brevi considerazioni sull’evoluzione storica ed estetica della musica: biografie di musicisti vercellesi (Vercelli, 1909), 55–103

A. Sartori: ‘I frati del Santo ricordati nella toponomastica cittadina di Padova’,Bollettino della provincia patavina di S. Antonio, xxx (1960), 320

O. Wessely: Johann Joseph Fux und Francesco Antonio Vallotti (Graz, 1967)

G. Cattin, ed.: Francescantonio Vallotti nel secondo centenario della morte (1780–1980) (Padua, 1981) [incl. articles by L. Frasson, F.A. Gallo, E. Grossato, L.M. Kantner and V.S. Zaccaria]

M. Lindley: ‘La “pratica ben regolata” de Francescantonio Vallotti’, RIM, xvi (1981), 45–95

P. Barbieri: ‘Martini e gli armonisti “fisico-matematici”: Tartini, Rameau, Riccati, Vallotti’, Padre Martini: Bologna 1984, 173–209

S. Hansell: ‘Padua Viewed From Bologna: Martini's Opinion of Calegari and Vallotti Conjectured’, Quaderni della Rivista Italiana di Musicologia, xii (1987), 237–59

P. Barbieri: ‘Calegari, Valotti, Riccati e le teorie armoniche di Rameau: priorita, concordanze, contrasti’, RIM, xxvi (1991), 241–302

P. Revoltella: ‘Musiche di Vallotti dell’epistolario di Giorfano Riccati’, Contributi per la storia della musica sacra a Padova, ed. G. Cattin and A. Lovato (Padua, 1993), 247–97

Your effort to condense matters would be incomplete without....

Roussier, Pierre-Joseph ["Par M. l'Abbé Roussier"]
Mémoire sur la musique des anciens
Chez Lacombe, Paris 1770 - Où l'on expose le Principe des Proportions authentiques, dites de Pythagore, & de divers Systêmes de Musique chez les Grecs, les Chinois & les Egyptiens. Avec un Parallè entre le Systême des Egyptiens & celui des Modernes. [6] xxiv, 252 pages, [blank leaf]. One folding table (relating planets to days of the week and hours of the day and notes on the scale), one plate of musical notation (engraved by Pierre-Laurent Charpentier), a brief musical quotation printed in the text, and an in-text engraving, repeated twice. According to musicologist François-Joseph Fétis (see Mary Arlin's translation of his Esquisse de l'histoire de l'harmonie, Pendragon Press, 1994, pp. 101–105), Abbé Roussier made significant observations about harmony and chords, proposing theoretical chords and progressions "that only Mozart's genius and a small number of his contemporaries and successors had known how to bring into play." Unfortunately, Roussier's insight was undone by his fascination with astrology and ancient civilizations, leading him in this book to explore connections between music, numerology, the planets, ancient Egyptian mysticism, and Greek art.

....and there are still many more links between "Rousseau", "Roussier", "Vallotti", and Burney (and Rameau, Voltaire, "La Borde" and "Hennin"*) and (I assume as not familiar with music theory) obvious similarities of the pythagorean musical methods and principles adopted by "them", "Koch" included and therefore "Gluck" as well.

The cover up is much wider than what you insist on believing (and I have still to check your "Johann Adolf Hasse" whose biography is generally so similar to my hero's).

And spare me your world theories: "They" were acting against "old" Rome, keen to establish a new religion to fit the rising "New World" and had secured propably insider collaboration from a future "new" Rome as well, until 1778 at least(Rousseau's "death" and subsequent attack on "Roussier" and his orientalism). Possibly an attempt to fool "bankers" into financing american aid.

And spare me also of Grove quotes:

50 years of Vallotti's life are "lost", his whole biography is "made up" just like all others concerning "him".

And "astrology" (Cassini de Thury-Belderbusch jr) is another strong pointer to.

Regards.

*La Borde is mentioned by Voltaire in his letter to France's resident in Geneva, P.M.Hennin, dated 28th Jan 1767. He (V) is in dire financial situation having to pay the salaries of many (200) people working in "his" (actually "a" Saint Germain owned Ferney, see http://societe-voltaire.org/cv-index.php) chateau, and is thankfull to "La Borde" for payments received. There were two "Hennins" (Pierre Michel and Jean Michel-de "Beaupre") propably interchanging roles during their stay in Geneva (1765-1778) and elsewhere, with Mme D'Epinay acting as their secretary. And there was a theatrical troupe and new productions as well at Ferney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferney-Voltaire.)

(Also see "Correspondance inédite de Voltaire avec P.M. Hennin" by "Voltaire". Relative info is not to be taken as a serious source however: It was edited in 1819 and published by Michel Hennin (Pierre Michel's son and my ggggrandfather) in 1825 (during his stay in Misssolonghi) and was certainly "tuned" with "outside help" (Merlin publishers, Paris) accordingly.)

Before Ferney Voltaire was living (till 1765) at Les Delices owned by a swissfrench family, Mallet, inlaws of P.M. Hennin.

...and Abbe Terray or Terrail, Contrôleur général des finances (1771-1774) was another of their aliases. See in this regard http://wapedia.mobi/de/Caspar_Anton_von_Belderbusch whose career 1771-74 in Bonn's culture and finances seems rather "vague"- with the notable exception of founding Bonn's University at the time.

"La Borde", "Abbe Terray", "Roussier" and "Caspar Anton Belderbsuch" are one and the same(an eventual brother is not excluded) with "Vallotti", "Hennin", "Koch", Gluck", "Saint Germain" etc. Terray is also "included"-implanted rather- in Voltaire-Hennin correspondence (somehow as a more conservative donnor than La Borde). La Borde's court position and titles in 1773 are those of my "Augustin Henry Cochin-de Beaupre-Cocchi" btw.

...and so was the prussian dance expert (hah-hah) and composer http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Cahusac ("Rameau's nephew", Marie Fel's beau and contributor to L'Encyclopedie).

Anyone cares to dance?

Yanni,

It seems your method is to 'muddy the water' whenever we come in sight of the bottom of the pond ! Since your last post is typically filled with 'names' whose association/identities are a mystery known only to yourself. Swirling around each other like muddy water draining down a sink. So we become ever more confused about the picture you are painting, and not less so. You believe your 'timeline' for countless individuals is proof although, in reality, you seem reluctant to admit that a musicologist, or a theorist, or a composer, is not the same as making sausages or painting walls with white paint. These are highly skilled, focused, and dedicated arts. To suggest, therefore, that a man can be six, or ten, or twenty different people, all at the same time, all of them writing music, acting as diplomats, teaching students, travelling across Europe, writing books, composing operas and a thousand other things - all shrouded by countless pseudonyms is, to me, such a flawed, subjective, and unproved thesis that common sense says it's not right.

You speak of '"They" were acting against "old" Rome, keen to establish a new religion...' etc.

But that is exactly correct. The Church of Rome was at war with Venice. And it was only diplomacy which allowed Venice to continue as an independent territory. That's history. It's history too that the formation of the occultist Jesuit Order was helped by the Venetians. It is history that the Illuminatists came from a Jesuit university. It is history that the monopoly of the Jesuit Order on printing, book publishing, censorship and other roles was taken over by this same Illuminatist movement. Amazing coincidences just continue. And it's plain, documented fact that Venice (and its occultists) were the major makers of the British Empire. Transfering assets and men to England to create the City of London, its banking system, and even developing Freemasonry within England from its Venetian ('Giovani') origins. All of these things are true. It is also true that the Royal Society (a body formed in England to pursue scientific enquiry) had amongst its founder members occultists. This also is true. It's true that the infiltration of the English government came by the Venetian/Jesuit occultists. It is true that the University of Padua was used by English elites of the British Empire. And that Padua was also the centre where the Venetian oligarchs studied their system of oligarchical empire. Soon transfered with all the rest to the British elite system of government. None of this is fiction. It's all fact. The names of those who are associated with the official career of Mozart are one and the same people. And that too is not a coincidence. Since Rome and its church were infested by occultists. Just as the government of England was.

Empires are not built on individuals but upon hierarchies and networks. That is what Empires are. They transcend the individual and they transcend national boundaries. As we see here. To suggest, therefore, that Cocchi or any other individual was ten or twenty people is so dogmatic and so flimsy an argument that not even the 'timeline' makes sense.

Instead of insisting you are right why not accept the modest fact that Cocchi was part of a network, of a movement ? A musician who was part of a network who included many individuals. As anyone can surely see. I cannot see why you would find this difficult. Other than the fact that your 'timeline' seems sacred to you.

I know differently. There were dozens and dozens of other careers and they were not all G. Cocchi.

Sorry to break this news to you but if you cannot accept it you will definitely remain the one and only person who believes that G. Cocchi was many people.

A man may have several aliases. True. But his works are not those of twenty people. And this fact will always remain. As will the glaring deficiencies of your 'timeline'.

Your research is good. But what is not good are the conclusions you draw from it. They (your conclusions) are ruining the good you have done in your research. And I say this honestly, sincerely.

Regards

So, you think you can still dance without specifics and hard facts, dear Watson?

Why don't you prove me wrong by presenting your evidence, dispute the identity of any of my aliases, highlight the "glaring defficiencies" in my timeline,win the "Kochs" award and make your day?

Or is your "sense" too "common" perhaps, leading you to unfounded conclusions?

Besides "music", Cocchi was incharge of "encyclopedists" and "freemasons" as well (and had many working and supplementing for him. He also took great care creating his aliases also), I never said otherwise.

"Saint Germain" owned Ferney, must I repeat it? (See post 27 of http://www.online-literature.com/for...t=35779&page=2 for source).

Enjoy you Grove dictionary!

Yanni,

I know you are wrong. Your 'timeline' has never been posted here. And, in your system, names can be added to it all the time.

Why not post here your timeline ? So we can all see it ?

Then I will happily show these multiple aliases cannot be correct. It's rather simple.

You now say 'Cocchi had many working and supplementing for him'. Isn't that exactly my point ? But you want a vast system of people who are Cocchi and another vast system who are 'working and supplementing for him'. In other words, you want it both ways at the same time. Don't you ?

A recipe for total confusion, no ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yanni

So, you think you can still dance without specifics and hard facts, dear Watson?

Why don't you prove me wrong by presenting your evidence, dispute the identity of any of my aliases, highlight the "glaring defficiencies" in my timeline,win the "Kochs" award and make your day?

Or is your "sense" too "common" perhaps, leading you to unfounded conclusions?

Besides "music", Cocchi was incharge of "encyclopedists" and "freemasons" as well (and had many working and supplementing for him. He also took great care creating his aliases also), I never said otherwise.

"Saint Germain" owned Ferney, must I repeat it? (See post 27 of http://www.online-literature.com/for...t=35779&page=2 for source).

Enjoy you Grove dictionary!

---

Prove what you know then.

My timeline is much to big (1434Kbytes, 147 A4 pages plus footnotes), complicated and in need of editing (four or five different languages, "within year" rearrangement and more additions are required) to be posted here but its usefullness has already been demonstrated repeatedly, in parallel and at the expense of your worthy efforts to dispute me.

I have been saying all along that he used many aliases and was in charge of many others, well trained and more than willing to replace him, and possibly a musician brother as well, you know it but you still must say something or other being in a such a disadvantage.

After "Poe decoded" I never again complained against "confusion" in general (selecting instead to name and attack the perpetrators) and have now defeated it, but you did: To justify your "difficulty" to identify Mozart's manufacturer.

So let go of your generalities and be more specific:

What does Grove write, or Wikipedia, or the British Encyclopedia about "Voltaire's" chateau in Ferney(owned by "a" Saint Germain), for instance?

Or about Vogler's 1771-1774 whereabouts(in particular), or his "peculiar" music or his works or his "influence" on your honoured R.Browning (and v.v.)?

Not that I'd give a shilling to learn, mind you: Idiotic attempts to cover things up fall outside my interests alltogether!

Here is a good book that will clear away your musicological confusion: "In praise of harmony: the teachings of Abbé Georg Joseph Vogler" by Floyd Kersey Grave,Margaret G. Grave, (On "remarkable" similarities-see Epilogue-between Rousseau's, Koch's, Vogler's and Valloti's "music of the spheres" principles. Roussier, La Borde and Gaussec are not mentioned however.)

Enjoy!

:driving:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

Yanni,

I know you are wrong. Your 'timeline' has never been posted here. And, in your system, names can be added to it all the time.

Why not post here your timeline ? So we can all see it ?

Then I will happily show these multiple aliases cannot be correct. It's rather simple.

You now say 'Cocchi had many working and supplementing for him'. Isn't that exactly my point ? But you want a vast system of people who are Cocchi and another vast system who are 'working and supplementing for him'. In other words, you want it both ways at the same time. Don't you ?

A recipe for total confusion, no ?

---

Yanni,

I've said it before. Your research is important, valuable, and relevant. All I am doubting are the conclusions you draw from it, the interpretation you give to it, etc.

Since your timeline is 147 pages long of A4 Pages ('plus footnotes, complicated and in need of editing, 4 or 5 different languages') etc. it is information available only to your goodself. And has not, by your admission, been condensed or simplified, nor shared with anyone to form a judgement on it. In such a case you are working with material which is, at best, in need of refinement, presentation and simplification. Without which it is unfair and unreasonable to suppose it will be believed by anyone. With the best will in the world.

But before you do this task (or before you consider doing it) the fact remains that these events were taking place within a highly structured, hierarchical society. One in which networks, fraternities, and elite patronage were factors. Further increasing the likelihood that we are not discussing the life and works of one man but of many. A network, in fact. That's all I'm saying.

I will check the Grove as you suggest (and other sources) although I know already the 'Voltaire' chateau in Ferney was used by Voltaire, Grimm and others. And that a St. Germain was associated with it. Again tending to prove what we are both saying - a network.

Anyway, I hope to post again soon.

Very best wishes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yanni

Prove what you know then.

My timeline is much to big (1434Kbytes, 147 A4 pages plus footnotes), complicated and in need of editing (four or five different languages, "within year" rearrangement and more additions are required) to be posted here but its usefullness has already been demonstrated repeatedly, in parallel and at the expense of your worthy efforts to dispute me.

I have been saying all along that he used many aliases and was in charge of many others, well trained and more than willing to replace him, and possibly a musician brother as well, you know it but you still must say something or other being in a such a disadvantage.

After "Poe decoded" I never again complained against "confusion" in general (selecting instead to name and attack the perpetrators) and have now defeated it, but you did: To justify your "difficulty" to identify Mozart's manufacturer.

So let go of your generalities and be more specific:

What does Grove write, or Wikipedia, or the British Encyclopedia about "Voltaire's" chateau in Ferney(owned by "a" Saint Germain), for instance?

Or about Vogler's 1771-1774 whereabouts(in particular), or his "peculiar" music or his works or his "influence" on your honoured R.Browning (and v.v.)?

Not that I'd give a shilling to learn, mind you: Idiotic attempts to cover things up fall outside my interests alltogether!

Here is a good book that will clear away your musicological confusion: "In praise of harmony: the teachings of Abbé Georg Joseph Vogler" by Floyd Kersey Grave,Margaret G. Grave, (On "remarkable" similarities-see Epilogue-between Rousseau's, Koch's, Vogler's and Valloti's "music of the spheres" principles. Roussier, La Borde and Gaussec are not mentioned however.)

Enjoy!

:driving:

---

Whenever you decide to be specific answering my questions, dear Robert, you'll be more than wellcome to return in this thread of mine and perhaps, why not, claim the Koch trophy to cure your bitterness.

Other readers of this thread will perhaps be interested to notice that my conclusions on Cocchi and his aliases provide the answer to specific parts of an essay on Haydn's Orfeo (copyright Lygia O'Riordan) highlighted by yourstruly:

Haydn with his unlucky Opera may perhaps have succeeded best in building an intense and flowing drama on the scale of the great Greek tragic plays. His use of the choir to comment on the drama throughout, as in the great Greek tragedies is masterly. His use of major keys to portray tragedy and drama shows an insight in to the colour of tonalities that is unsurpassed. And yet fate dictated that he would never hear the opera himself. During the first rehearsal of Orpheo and Euridice in 1791 at the Haymarket Theatre in London, when no more than 40 bars had been played, official emissaries of King George the Third abruptly interrupted the music and on the express orders of the King, banned the rehearsal to continue. To contravene this order would have meant jail.
The Theatre had been refused a licence for Opera by the King and therefore could not open after its reconstruction following a fire in 1789. Concerts and Ballet in the theatre would be permitted but no opera was allowed. The performance was banned and Orpheo and Euridice lay unperformed for over 150 years until 1951 when Maria Callas and Erich Kleiber gave the first performance in Florence and Joan Sutherland and Richard Bonynge the first Viennese performance at the Vienna Festival in 1967.

Of great interest is Haydn's use of the chorus, which resembles the structure of a great Sophocles tragedy. The Chorus narrates andcomments throughout the opera. We know that Haydn had been fascinated by English choruses, by their excellence and their size. This may also have influenced his decision to give the choir such an important role.
Another fascinating element in the opera is Haydn's choice of keys. In 1768 Jean-Jacques Rousseau had developed a table with the characteristics of different keys.
His thesis was that F and the flat major keys express gravity or majesty and the sharp major keys brilliance or joy. Abt Vogler and H.C. Koch argued that keys which used many open strings on the violin had a much brighter, sharper sound whereas keys using closed strings had a darker sound. Haydn's choice of E flat major for Orpheo's final aria is daring and imaginative. Rather than using a minor key, Haydn has combined this dark sound of E flat major with unforgettable orchestration, such as the bassoon which almost wails in accompaniment to Orpheo's grief.
Haydn's Orpheo and Euridice is a masterpiece, which deserves to be established firmly in the repertoire of opera companies today. In the words of Stendhal: "Haydn left London with eleven completed numbers of his Orpheo among his luggage- eleven numbers, which, I have been credibly assured represent his finest achievements in operatic music and so returned to Austria".

A historian wishing to place Haydn's Orfeo in a timetable will be dissapointed to note that Wikipedia barely mentions the work and ommits to give the exact date of Haydn's attempt to stage it in London, even ommiting the year.

The only misstep in the venture was an opera, Orfeo ed Euridice, also called L'Anima del Filosofo, which Haydn was contracted to compose, but whose performance was blocked by intrigues.[35]

Other Haydn Wiki data however, such as his life span, his musical characteristics....

Franz Joseph Haydn[1][2] (March 31, 1732 – May 31, 1809) was an Austrian composer. He was one of the most prolific and prominent composers of the classical period. He is often called the "Father of the Symphony" and "Father of the String Quartet" because of his important contributions to these genres. He was also instrumental in the development of the piano trio and in the evolution of sonata form.[3][4]

...as well as his 1792 portrait by Thomas Hardy (looking very much like a younger "Carl Ludwig Cocceji" -his 1802 medal as president of Bohemia), definitely place Joseph Haydn in the list of tentative "Cocchi aliases candidates".

More to follow soon.

Ommiting, for obvious reasons, birth details, here is the precious few data of Haydn's music life quoted from Catholic Encyclopedia:

He began his great musical career in the choir-school of St. Stephen's, Vienna. For nine years he was a chorister there, and yielded his place as solo-boy to his younger brother Michael when the inevitable signs of change appeared in his voice. During these years he manifested an extraordinary passion for music, availing himself of every opportunity to improve his knowledge of the art. He was enabled to pursue his musical studies. At this time he came under the influence of Emanuel Bach, Dittersdorf, and Porpora, who may be said to have been his principal masters, although the credit of his remarkable achievements must be given rather to his own incessant industry than to any particular instruction. The year 1756 found Haydn so well informed in the various branches of his art that he began to be ranked among the first music-masters of Vienna. In 1759 he accepted the appointment of vice-capellmeister to Count Morzin, a Bohemian nobleman, who maintained an orchestra at his country-house. His contract with this prince brought him into the daily necessity of composing "divertimenti" for the orchestra, thus affording a splendid opportunity for the study of instrumentation. It was at this time that Haydn made the mistake of contracting a loveless marriage with Maria Anna Keller. Had he been more prudent in the choice of a spouse, perhaps his after life might have been free from the suspicions which his relations with other women justify. By temperament he was deeply religious, and gave back to Almighty God, in his compositions for the services of the Church, the talent with which he was so richly endowed.

In 1761 he became vice-capellmeister at Eisenstadt, and in 1766 went as capellmeister with Prince Nicholaus to his new palace at Esterház. His life during these years was of singular steadiness of purpose. The duties of his position were most arduous, involving the necessity of providing daily orchestral recitals, two operatic performances and at least each week one concert. He received a salary of one hundred pounds annually. In 1785 he joined the Freemasons to please his friend Mozart, who was an ardent member; and it is not clear how long he remained in that society. Upon the occasion of his two visits to London (1791 and 1794) he was hailed as the greatest musician of the day, and received marked attention from royalty. The University of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of Doctor of Music. His career in London was brilliant, and his successes signal. Salomon's orchestra was the vehicle he chose to introduce his compositions to the English public, and the twelve symphonies performed under his direction created a profound impression. He left London in 1795, and in January, 1797, moved to Gumpendorf, Vienna, where he died.

In other words, choir boy Haydn, self tutored more or less in music, was already "among the first music-masters of Vienna" in 1756 but then lost suddenly his initiative and locked himself in two obscure palaces giving private concertos and operas for the elite for some twenty years, to then join Freemasons convinced by his junior friend Mozart-to escape from his lackluster and oppresive wife propably- and then enjoyed a brilliant career in London and lived happily everafter.

The unfortunate researcher who insists of knowing more, is then inclined to look for Haydn's first noble employer, Count Morzin, to then fall, head on (or in) to a yet greater pile of the particular result of "scholarly strain":

Different authorities give a different interpretation to the phrase "Count Morzin" (the sole words by which early Haydn biographies identified the man); the phrase is ambiguous because the title of count was hereditary, so that there was a whole line of Counts Morzin. The prestigious New Grove (article by James Webster) asserts that the "Count Morzin" who played an important role in Haydn's life was Karl Joseph Franz Morzin (1717-1783)[1], whereas a biography by the leading Haydn scholar H. C. Robbins Landon asserts that it was Ferdinand Maximilan Franz Morzin (1693-1763)[2]. The difference apparently involves the question of whether Haydn was hired by the reigning count (Ferdinand Maximilian) or his son (Karl Joseph); see External Link below. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Count_Morzin.

As Wikipedia's links to both "count Morzins" advise, their "Page does not exist"!

No wonder count Robert refuses to touch the sacrosanct "subject" having misplaced his shovel (it's frozen solid, Robert, bring a wagondrill along next time)!

The mere fact the Prince Regent bowed on receiving "Joseph Haydn", early 1791, thus causing an uproar ....

during a royal court ball at St. James`s Palace Haydn was greeted by the Prince of Wales with a noticeable bow. http://www.worldcreation.info/index....e&part=5&lng=2

....proves my theory on Cocchi's position in Music, Freemasonry, the need of his aliases and the "cover up" that still continues today, Rome included...

...provided , that is, one examines history in papallel, including the few known facts on Freemasonry.

Needless to say Haydn's few biodata, his London presence and his Orpheo in particular, fully confirm as well he was another Cocchi alias, just like Gluck (whose one and only Orpheo was finally staged in Covent Garden, Feb 1792 to then depart as Haydn together with Salomon, June, for "Waldstein's-Belderbusch's" Bonn and then Vienna , as the story goes, to continue with Beethoven's tuition ) and Philidor (who was playing chess at the time in London as well).

...and, no, he did'nt burn Haymarket in 1789 and, if Gallini had something to do with the incident, he was acting on local orders "from above".

That's the truth about "Haydn" or "The Shakespeare of Music" as London press named him on his 1791 New Year arrival.

It was a great party, Robert, sorry you missed it!

:hurray:

Yanni,

I don't think I missed the party at all ! In fact, I've arrived with a bottle of wine and some dance music. Having examined this subject in some detail. Only this year.

There is not one but THREE operas which are associated with Josef Haydn's visits to London. None of which were performed. And the details of which I think you should be aware of.

I will shortly post details of correspondence I made this year with the Royal College of Music in London on this very subject. Since they hold most of the score of one of them, 'Armida' - an opera Haydn brought to London but which, also, was not performed here. Its story is amazing and of obvious relevance to our conversation.

You may be sure Josef Haydn did not compose any of these three operas. And none were performed in London. Thus, this subject is more than that of 'Orfeo'. It is a story of wholesale fraud. (As is that of the invented career of W.A. Mozart).

In the meantime, some dance music, of a more extraordinary kind, compliments of a certain Leipzig Kapellmeister.

Sinfonia
BWV 1045

'Nothing is impossible in music - and, do you, do you believe that ?' J.S.B.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S601...eature=related

Cheers !

Robert

All in proper time, confessions included, otherwise it doesn't count, count!

Haydn certainly composed both Armide and Orpheo (as Durazzo, Gluck etc) but he possibly could not find enough time for theatricals while in London since he was not there most of 1791-92 as my, now famous, timeline confirms.

He did stage his Orpheo though, didn't he?

With Weichsel and his sister Billington participatiing according to "A Biographical Dictionary of Actors, Volume 15, Tibbett to M. West" by Philip H. Highfill,Kalman A. Burnim,Edward A. Langhans

and the following data as well:

28 February 1792 Covent Garden
Orpheus and Eurydice.
By Francis Gentleman (librettist) and Christoph Gluck (composer).
Opera.Printed for T. Cadell (1792).
[LS V.ii.1431. Adalbert Gyrowetz composed the overture; additional music composed by William Reeve. Other songs drawn from numerous composers. This opera, which was first performed at the Smock Alley Theatre, Dublin (3 January 1784), was shortened for afterpiece performance as of 13 March 1792.]

(The composer's name possibly escaped the censor's attention. Anyway Haydn was still in London-propably-bohemian Gyrowetz one of his students and Francis Gentleman had passed away in 1784.)

BTW my version is "Everything is possible with music" (post #6 of http://www.online-literature.com/for...d.php?p=588533, late 2008) and I just don't know (I do now) how or when it was planted in my memory.

The truth, the whole truth and nothing but, Robert!

No, Yanni, you are wrong.

You wrote, 'Haydn certainly composed both 'Armide' and 'Orpheo' (as Durazzo, Gluck etc').

Having examined this subject in some detail I completely disagree with you. But tell us why you believe Josef Haydn composed these two operas ? When, in fact, he never did. Your evidence will certainly be interesting. Do you have any ? Apart from this being your assumption, that is ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yanni

All in proper time, confessions included, otherwise it doesn't count, count!

Haydn certainly composed both Armide and Orpheo (as Durazzo, Gluck etc) but he possibly could not find enough time for theatricals while in London since he was not there most of 1791-92 as my, now famous, timeline confirms.

He did stage his Orpheo though, didn't he?

With Weichsel and his sister Billington participatiing according to "A Biographical Dictionary of Actors, Volume 15, Tibbett to M. West" by Philip H. Highfill,Kalman A. Burnim,Edward A. Langhans

and the following data as well:

28 February 1792 Covent Garden
Orpheus and Eurydice.
By Francis Gentleman (librettist) and Christoph Gluck (composer).
Opera.Printed for T. Cadell (1792).
[LS V.ii.1431. Adalbert Gyrowetz composed the overture; additional music composed by William Reeve. Other songs drawn from numerous composers. This opera, which was first performed at the Smock Alley Theatre, Dublin (3 January 1784), was shortened for afterpiece performance as of 13 March 1792.]

(The composer's name possibly escaped the censor's attention. Anyway Haydn was still in London-propably-bohemian Gyrowetz one of his students and Francis Gentleman had passed away in 1784.)

BTW my version is "Everything is possible with music" (post #6 of http://www.online-literature.com/for...d.php?p=588533, late 2008) and I just don't know (I do now) how or when it was planted in my memory.

The truth, the whole truth and nothing but, Robert!

---

No assumption at all, my dear count, just historical research (in the above mentioned "hard to crack scholarly pile", remember?).

Because Haydn was the same as Gluck and Durazzo, I already said that (and the fact that Francis Gentleman was dead in 1792 -but alive in 1784, ie was Gluck's associate-reconfirms it) didn't I?

Please support your disagreement with facts -even musicological studies/interpretations if that's all you have- this time!

Because music similarities between Koch, Gluck etc and Haydn/Beethoven/Mozart abound, some already quoted above!

Unless your disagreement focuses on the particular Orpheo pastichio perfomance only, "by several composers including Reeves", nevertheless still under "composer Gluck" as per title.