The Manufacture of Mozart

[yanni]

A "four eyed", yet still empty, answer.

Cheers!

Yanni,

I have given you my view and it's not based simply on what you have written, interesting though that is. In point of fact there are various books and publications of the early 19th century which say similar things. At least in respect of saying Mozart's career was one giant falsification. But neither you nor I would consider them, interesting as they are, as proof of anything. They are, at best, views which happen to have some merit. But the proof of it remains for you and others to provide. It is not my view that this theory is convincing.

If your view was to be judged by a fair and reasonable audience on the grounds you have so far argued would that jury find 'beyond reasonable doubt' that G. Nissen was the same person as W.A. Mozart ? I think not. In fact I am sure they would not. Which is all I am saying. I believe this issue deserves to be studied in more detail and have said so. The most recent time was earlier today. And I've posted an article (yesterday) connecting Gieseke with Denmark. On which you have so far said nothing.

I am open to being convinced on most things. This is no exception. But please do not assume you have proved anything merely by quoting lines from a publication intended for stage performance. In such a case one can 'prove' anything.

I have somewhere in my papers MANY better proofs (made around 2 years ago) in support of your own thesis on Nissen (and that of David Roell) although, even with them it would be necessary to secure samples of Nissen's handwriting and carefully examine the career of Nissen prior to 1807 before one can reasonably claim to have found convincing evidence. But these I will not produce or discuss here. Not because I am being unsociable but because my focus is on the musical career of Mozart before 1791 and not on the fascinating question of whether Nissen was one and the same person as Mozart.

It would be possible to share these notes with you in due course if you were interested in researching that subject in more detail. It's a fascinating theory. But my own work is controversial enough and is very time consuming and I doubt that what I have is conclusive. As already said.

Regards

[Musicology]

Yanni,

All I mean is we don't need to be obscure with our evidence. We just need to see where reality breaks the surface. And it does.

An example. In February 1786 (a few months before the premiere of Le Nozze di Figaro) there was a music concert held outside Vienna where two new, one-act operas were performed. For a large overseas contingent of dignitaries/visitors. One of these works was attributed to Mozart and the other to Antonio Salieri.

That of Mozart was 'Die Schauspieldirekor' (The Impresario) and the other was Salieri's 'Prima la musica e poi le parole', also called Prima la musica, poi le parole' The libretto to the second was written by Giovanni Battista Casti.

In the Salieri opera what we see (and its text was by Italian librettist Casti) is nothing less than a mockery of Mozart. In fact, it's one big exposure of Mozart. Right on the stage. This same Casti is here satirising the common theft of music by composers. Even introducing a figure on stage who is described as an '***'. A mockery of Mozart. In fact. Those within the music profession in Vienna could not have failed to understand what Casti and Salieri were actually saying in that production. Casti's satire even continued in his later writings. (An Italian music friend of mine pointed this out - Luca Bianchini).

Alongside this event on the same day was the premiere there of 'Mozart's' 'Impresario'. Whose action is set in Salzburg. But that music is of very poor quality. The only worthwhile stuff is the overture and two arias, neither by Mozart. Amazing to believe this composer is said to be the true composer of 'Le Nozze di Figaro' of only a few months later. But there it is. (Count Zinzendorf, music diarist of the time said Mozart's music here was poor stuff. And so it is).

So, by all means, if there is convincing evidence for the Nissen theory, great. The problem is Mozart is a very major figure and your argument needs to be very strong if you are really going to argue in this way. I still think there is more to discover on this Nissen theory.

Regards

[yanni]

What Mozart or Salieri did or did not do with "Gluck's" music archive matters no more, present day obscuritists are the issue from now on:

You wrote earlier that Roell came to the idea that Mozart was Nissen five yeares ago and you have been in contact with him eversince, your long colaboration resulting in producing two (hah-hah), instead of the one and only, Nissen/Mozart, having rushed to this literature site, almost simultaneously with Roell's publication, planning all along to implant doubt and contradiction through this highly suspect and hastily made "two Nissen" fabrication, both appearing however seven whole months after my Opera Phantom Thread was first introduced herein.

“The Life, Death and Life of Wolfgang Mozart”, David R. Roell (July 24, 2009,Minor edits, August 25, 2009)"

"The manufacture of Mozart", your thread, began in his forum September 3, 2009.

NOBODY, not even your Mr Roell, buys your stories or "good intentions".

"Keep walking"!

[Musicology]

No I didn't say I've been in contact with Mr Roell 'ever since'. You are inventing things I never said. Please read more carefully what I wrote. I had two or three email exchanges with Mr Roell (as said before). I suggested he needed more evidence and that he needed to get samples of Nissen's handwriting. These should be easy to obtain. But, as for the theory itself, if you believe it has merits you should be busy finding more proofs in its support. Which I would encourage. Since the theory itself is interesting.

I am glad we sorted that out ! There has been no long-term contact and your imagination seems to be getting the better of you. But why not write to Roell yourself ?

Your 'opera phantom thread' came 7 months earlier than Roell's ? Great. You should collaborate. Since he is presenting very different but complementary arguments, isn't he ? You surely agree about that. What's the problem, exactly ? You both deserve credit for the very different things you have done on that theory. There are many other lines of evidence which indicate the same thing. But they remain undeveloped. And they will remain undeveloped if you do not see that much more work needs to be done on them. Don't look for credit. Look for answers. That's my considered view.

What Mozart or Salieri did or did not do with "Gluck's" music archive matters no more, present day obscuritists are the issue from now on:

You wrote earlier that Roell came to the idea that Mozart was Nissen five yeares ago and you have been in contact with him eversince, your long colaboration resulting in producing two (hah-hah), instead of the one and only, Nissen/Mozart, having rushed to this literature site, almost simultaneously with Roell's publication, planning all along to implant doubt and contradiction through this highly suspect and hastily made "two Nissen" fabrication, both appearing however seven whole months after my Opera Phantom Thread was first introduced herein.

“The Life, Death and Life of Wolfgang Mozart”, David R. Roell (July 24, 2009,Minor edits, August 25, 2009)"

"The manufacture of Mozart", your thread, began in his forum September 3, 2009.

NOBODY, not even your Mr Roell, buys your stories or "good intentions".

"Keep walking"!

[yanni]

What Mozart or Salieri did or did not do with "Gluck's" music archive matters no more, present day obscuritists are the issue from now on:

You wrote earlier that Roell came to the idea that Mozart was Nissen five yeares ago and you have been exchanging email with him occasionaly eversince, your whatever colaboration resulting in producing two Nissens (hah-hah), instead of the one and only Nissen/Mozart, having rushed to this literature site, almost simultaneously with Roell's publication, planning all along to implant doubt and contradiction through this highly suspect and hastily made "two Nissen" fabrication, both appearing however seven whole months after my Opera Phantom Thread was first introduced herein.

“The Life, Death and Life of Wolfgang Mozart”, David R. Roell (July 24, 2009,Minor edits, August 25, 2009)"

"The manufacture of Mozart", your thread, began in his forum September 3, 2009.

NOBODY, not even your Mr Roell, buys your stories or "good intentions".

"U'Mosar haAdam min haBeheima ayin."

"Keep walking"!

[yanni]

“Je crois vous avoir écrit quel le petit Mosar est ici, et qu’il est moins miracle, quoiqu’il soit toujours le même miracle, mais il ne sera jamais qu’un miracle, et puis voilà tout.”
http://www.fondazionepergolesisponti.../lang,italian/

Adieu encore. Je vous embrasse, en dépit du scandale de Panurge et de tous les envieux de notre tendre correspondance .

From Naples to Mme d'Epinay, 7th July 1770!

"keep walking"

[Musicology]

Yanni,

The Nissen theory deserves more work. If you want to work more on it, fine.

As for the 'Manufacture of Mozart', my own research began back in the mid 1990's. And in the last 10 years I've been specially busy on it. During which time I have corresponded with dozens and dozens of people. Archivists, librarians, musicologists and many, many other writers and others. Twice or three times to Mr Roell, who had mentioned my own research on his website. That is all.

In point of fact I have been posting on this subject of Mozart to many, many websites long before this one. Years before, in fact.

What matters ? Reality is what matters. Not obscurantism or anything else.

I do not know what you mean about 'Gluck's musical archive'. Why don't you tell us ? Because, so far, you have really told us nothing on that subject. And you've also told us nothing of Mozart and Salieri's supposed role in 'Gluck's musical archive'. As usual. Aren't you being, well, 'obscurantist' in your posts ?

You have the habit of refering to things which nobody (least of all myself) have ever heard of. Why not tell us. So that we can avoid obscurantism completely.

Regards

What Mozart or Salieri did or did not do with "Gluck's" music archive matters no more, present day obscuritists are the issue from now on:

You wrote earlier that Roell came to the idea that Mozart was Nissen five yeares ago and you have been exchanging email with him occasionaly eversince, your whatever colaboration resulting in producing two Nissens (hah-hah), instead of the one and only Nissen/Mozart, having rushed to this literature site, almost simultaneously with Roell's publication, planning all along to implant doubt and contradiction through this highly suspect and hastily made "two Nissen" fabrication, both appearing however seven whole months after my Opera Phantom Thread was first introduced herein.

“The Life, Death and Life of Wolfgang Mozart”, David R. Roell (July 24, 2009,Minor edits, August 25, 2009)"

"The manufacture of Mozart", your thread, began in his forum September 3, 2009.

NOBODY, not even your Mr Roell, buys your stories or "good intentions".

"U'Mosar haAdam min haBeheima ayin."

"Keep walking"!

[Musicology]

This is much more interesting !

Yes, Mme d'Epinay, partner of Baron Grimm, and of Rousseau. Here in 1770 already closely associated with promoting the 'miracle' of Mozart. In this letter a private joke by repeating the word 'miracle' in connection with Mozart because that was the project they were involved in.

But what of Abbe Galiani of Naples ? What can you tell us of him ?

It's a fascinating letter, for sure.

“Je crois vous avoir écrit quel le petit Mosar est ici, et qu’il est moins miracle, quoiqu’il soit toujours le même miracle, mais il ne sera jamais qu’un miracle, et puis voilà tout.”
http://www.fondazionepergolesisponti.../lang,italian/

Adieu encore. Je vous embrasse, en dépit du scandale de Panurge et de tous les envieux de notre tendre correspondance .

From Naples to Mme d'Epinay, 7th July 1770!

"keep walking"

[Musicology]

Abbe Galiani, another part of the jigsaw puzzle of the 'Enlightenment'. Poet, librettist, economist. Closely associated with the Encyclopaedists of Paris. With Grimm, d'Epinay etc. etc. Most of his works were published in Naples. Connections with British East India Company in London and with the aristocracy of Britain via Paris and Venice. Interestingly -

Opera by -

Giovanni Paisiello (1740-1816) - (Jesuit educated composer and close associate of Mozart in Vienna etc).
'Socrate Immaginario' (1775) - Premiered Naples
Text partly by Abbe Galiani (1728-1787)

[yanni]

Have been telling you all along, you just don't want to (or are not properly equipped to) hear:

The Opera phantom and Mozart!
________________________________________
Mozart in Paris (Timeline 1777-1779)

(To examine and interpret bearing in mind that “Augustin Henri Cochin, Louis Claude Dupin de Franceuil , Marquis de Girardin, Melchior Grimm, Christoph Willibald Gluck, Rousseau, Claude Louis comte de Saint Germain, Myslivecek, Pierre Michel Hennin, Alexandre Strogonoff, Nicolas Bricaire de La Dixmerie, Chevalier La Luzerne, Marquis de Chastellux, abbe Galiani, abbe Raynal ”, "Baron de Bache" or "Bagge" etc etc are all aliases of Gioachino Cocchi ie "the phantom" and that “Conrad Alexandre Gérard de Rayneval” was, most propably, a blood relative of his-See other relevant threads in this site).
http://www.online-literature.com/for...d.php?p=669725
(Durazzo, Gleichen and de Magnaville are included in the etc's.)

Your "manufactured Mozart" can only be "unlocked" by this one and only "key" above.

I have given it to you from the beginning and have been furthermore demonstrating eversince how well it "functions"!

What you think or do with it is up to you, for me the "Manufactured Mosar" case has closed, my curiosity already long satisfied.

Your interpretation of Galiani and D'Epinay "promoting Mozart", is a half truth: "Galiani" writes that he does not believe in miracles and that the little "man" ("mosar" in hebrew) will never ever be "great", c'est tout.

By "pure coincidence", Comte de Saint Germain, the alchemist, as well as "Baron von Gleichen" were seen in Naples that very same summer of 1770:

Battle of Chesme (5 July – 7 July 1770) and the Battle of Kagul (21 July 1770).

SG, July 1770:

It would appear that he then travelled with the Graf von Lamberg, for in a paper published at Florence Le notizie del Mondo (July, 1770), under the heading "News of the World," we find the following paragraph:--p. 48 "TUNIS, July 1770."The Comte Maximilian de Lamberg, 1 Chamberlain of M.M.L.L. II. and RR. having paid a visit to the Island of Corsica to make various investigations, has been staying here since the end of June, in company with the Signor de St. Germain, celebrated in Europe for the vastness of his political and philosophical knowledge."

Gleichen…. am 13. Juli nach Neapel versetzt und damit unverkennbar ein paar Stufen tiefer in der diplomatischen Rangordnung gestellt worden. Gleichwol gefiel sich G. in Neapel in der Gesellschaft Galiani8 so gut, daß er eine Weile Vorhatte, sich dort anzukaufen;

Mme d’Épinay à Galiani, le 17 7bre 1770, dans Correspondance de Ferdinando Galiani et Louise d’Épinay, t. I, Iettre XXVII. D’Epinay introduces “locataire C-p-Savalette de Magnanville


As for "Gluck's" huge music archive: Find your misplaced imagination first, and then go back to my words on "Caccini-Cocchi-Gluck-Grimm-Rousseau- Hennin-Chastellux-Myskivecek-Durazzo" etc in this thread.

Adieu encore. Je vous embrasse, en dépit du scandale de Panurge et de tous les envieux de notre tendre correspondance .
(From Naples to Mme d'Epinay, 7th July 1770!)


Cheers.

,

This is much more interesting !

Yes, Mme d'Epinay, partner of Baron Grimm, and of Rousseau. Here in 1770 already closely associated with promoting the 'miracle' of Mozart. In this letter a private joke by repeating the word 'miracle' in connection with Mozart because that was the project they were involved in.

But what of Abbe Galiani of Naples ? What can you tell us of him ?

It's a fascinating letter, for sure.

[Musicology]

Yanni,

You will, from time to time, come across people who know their subject as well, if not better than yourself. This is my experience, at least.

I don't think it's helpful to say I'm not interested in your view when pages of posts here prove the opposite. These persons you have mentioned in connection with your 'Phantom of the Opera' idea are all well known to me. They are, to you aliases of one man, Cocchi. But you must credit the fact that others besides you have examined these issues in detail whose views are of value besides your own. So what you know is useful, but not as useful as your ability to have a respectful conversation without accusing others of being obscure. More important is the fact that all these people you refer to in your article played a role in Mozart's career. And so, aliases to one side, I have no difficulty on this issue. We see, without a shadow of a doubt, the 'Enlightenment' consists of a network of people whose background and whose purpose was to serve the elites of Europe. Who had links with the British Empire, France, Italy etc.

Would it not be obvious arrogance to assume you are always right ?

Let me give you a simple proof of the dubiousness of your Cocchi theory, just on this issue of Abbe Galiani. One of his supposed 'aliases'.

There is an author named Gaetano Amalfi who can perhaps teach you something. In Turin in 1888 he published a book entitled. 'Dubbi sul Galiani'. You may be interested to know the sub-title of Amalfi's book is rather relevant to us, ' On the authorship of various works attributed to Abbe Galiani'. Which you may not like to know about although it calls in to question much of what this Abbe Galiani supposedly wrote and published. In fact, I have many proofs of the same view from other sources. Amalfi says Abbe Galiani wrote few of the works attributed to him. That various other authors were involved. If you get a copy of his book and read it you will see your countless aliases for the same person (Cocchi) cannot possibly be correct. Here in the one case of Abbe Galiani the facts simply do not support the view you are teaching. Is it not better you learn a little humility in what you are teaching so stridently ? Since you profit and I profit only by sharing evidence ?

Anyway, I say so because you have the habit of insisting you are right and that nobody knows of this subject but you. And because I think truth is between us on this issue and is available to be appreciated by us both. With a certain humility.

Regards

[yanni]

....and Bob's your uncle!

The subject is for me closed.

[Musicology]

The subject is not closed but your willingness to talk of it is. Let us not confuse the two things.

Here is a copy of Amalfi's book in the British Library -

http://catalogue.bl.uk/F/P11A8NYI65A...089&format=999

Regards

[Musicology]

Yanni,

Since we've finished our conversation on the reality of the 'Englightement' network that surrounded Mozart (which I believe was not a network of one person but many) here are several other publication references showing clearly that Abbe Galiani was associated with Jacobin, Illuminatist, 'Englightenment' interests and associated with the mercantile Empire of Britain in various of 'his' publications dealing with economics and trade. This besides being linked with music via composers such as Giovanni Paisiello etc. Starting with reference to a book discussing his Illuminatist contacts.

Celesia, Pietro Paolo.: 'L'illuminismo a Genova' :lettere di P.P. Celesia a F. Galiani /[a cura di] Salvatore Rotta.. Firenze : La nuova Italia, [1973? -1975?].


//

PANAREO, Salvatore.: '' Giovanni Paisiello in Russia'. (Dalle sue lettere al Galiani.)..
pp. 44. Trani, 1910..

//

LUCCHESI-PALLI, Ferdinando, Count.: Principes du Droit public maritime, et histoire de plusieurs traités qui s'y rapportent ... Ouvrage traduit de l'Italien par J. A. de Galiani..Paris, 1842..


//

MORELLET, André. Title Réfutation de l’ouvrage [by F. Galiani] qui a pour titre Dialogues sur le commerce des bleds. [By A. Morellet.] Publisher/year Londres, 1770. Physical descr. pp. 8, 360. 8º. General note The imprint is false. Dialogues sur le commerce des bleds.][/U] Dialogues entre M. marquis de Roquemaure, et Ms. le chevalier Zanobi. The autograph manuscript of the Dialogues sur le commerce des bleds, diplomatically edited with introduction, notes and appendices by Philip Koch.

///

GALEOTA, Onofrio, pseudonym. [i.e. Ferdinando Galiani.] Title Spaventosissima descrizione dello spaventoso spavento che ci spaventò tutti coll’eruzione del Vesuvio la sera delli otto d’Agosto del corrente anno ma ... durò poco. Di D. O. G. Poeta, e Filosofo all’Impronto. Publisher/year Napoli,

//

Torrice :dall'Epoca del Cardinal Mendoza a quella dell'Abate Galiani (secc. XVII-XVIII) : Convegno : Papers..Comune di Torrice Editore, 1989..

//
GALIANI, Aurelio.: Vincenzo Galiani nella congiura giacobina del 1794. Conferenza, etc..pp. 51. Montoro, 192

///

DIODATI, Luigi.: 'Vita dell'abate Ferdinando Galiani, regio consigliere, &c. &c. &c.. Napoli, 1788..

Regards


///

[yanni]

Your "soup" (list of works by or on various Galianis) only proves your predetermination to reach "inescapable conclusions" .....and avoid historic facts not to your liking.

For Ferdinando Galiani's (and "his brother" Bernando's) attempts in establishing their "local" genealogy, see:

http://denatalesifola.altervista.org/index2.php#_ftn119

For the Kingdom of "Two Sicilies", their King Ferdinando IV, their primeminister Tanucci (Galianis' close "associate") and their foreign policy, see Wikipedia.

Mozart was never "surrounded" by anybody in his lifetime: Galiani and Grimm "both" rejected him as a suitable future opera composer, contrary to his father Leopold's hopes. How exactly he later came to "Gluck's'" archive is unknown, yet the logic behind it, to maintain Comte De Saint Germain's real life identity secret, points to the answer and so does my "Two works by Poe decoded".