The Manufacture of Mozart

The Manufacture of Mozart: an upcoming book by Robert Newman

English author shows Jesuit control of the arts dating back 400 years

By Greg Szymanski, JD
Dec. 19, 2010

One of the most extraordinary theatrical events ever put on by the Papacy was when Gregory XV, the first Jesuit student to become Pope, canonized Ignatius Loyola.

Nowhere in the Bible is canonization condoned or authorized. It is simply a Vatican adaption of a pagan ritual wherein men are elevated to godlike status. Of course, the men elevated to ‘sainthood’ are chosen by men who have elevated themselves to godlike status without any particular Biblical authority.

And so the real live theatre at the Vatican continues today ever since Gregory’s brief pontificate of three years was marked by the blockbuster theatrical performance when Loyola, a bloodthirsty killer in the Pope’s army, was elevated to a pagan god on March 12, 1622.

Today schools and colleges are named after him. The Jesuits call him their guiding light in a world of darkness. And presidents and popes sit under his portrait when they meet in the Vatican for a beer and a friendly chat on how to create new crusades and genocides.

If you take the whole thing too seriously,  it will drive you nuts.

But if you look at it for what it is, good theatre without an ounce of truth, perhaps you can live through the next theatrical onslaught of Vatican and Illuminati madness bound to kill millions.

So what is this Vatican and Jesuit obsession with creating “great theatre”  in the real world and on the silver screen?

In 1957,  John XXIII in his encyclical, Miranda Prorsus, told us about the lofty goals for Jesuit theatre, announcing:

“Men must be brought into closer communion with one another. They must become socially minded. These technical arts (cinema, sound broadcasting and television) can achieve this aim. The Catholic Church is keenly desirous that these means be converted to the spreading and advancement of everything that can be truly called good.Embracing, as she does, the whole human society within the orbit of her divinely appointed mission, she is directly concerned with fostering of civilization among all peoples.

Directly talking to producers and directors,  your Hellishness went on:

“There must be a paternal injunction not to allow films to be made which are at variance with the faith and Christian moral standards. Should this happen – which GOd forbade – then it is for the Bishops to rebuke them and, if necessary, to impose upon them appropriate sanctions.”

Then John XXIII told Pius XI’s national film reviewing officies to do the following:

“…be it entrusted to men who are experienced in cinema, sound broadcasting and television, under the guidance of a priest specially chosen by the Bishops…At the same time we urge that the faithful, and particulary those who are militant in the cause of Catholic Action (a Jesuit organization) be suitable instructed so that they may appreciate the need for giving to these offices their willing, united and effective support.:

According to researcher, the late Tupper Saucy, controlling theatre and Cinema for the last four centuries, the aim is to mass produce in America Jesuitic graduates schooled in Jesuit “Ratio Studiorum.

Saucy points out the aim of modern entertainment and public schooling in America , which as Martin Luther warned and Columbine attests, is to ignore Scripture and Bible teachings, turning our schools “into a widening gates of hell.”

He adds that Jesuit Universities are “no longer chartered institutions; it has become our entire social environment- the movies, the mall, the school, the home, the mind.

“Most of the content of modern media, whether television, radio, print, film, stage, or web, is state of the art Jesuit Ratio Studiorum.”

It’s hard for Americans to believe that the Jesuits and Vatican have had their control fingers on entertainment and education for at least four centuries, perhaps more.

But if you are doubtful, take the time to look at how they even controlled and manufactured the most famous composer of all time, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.

Be assured if they could control and manufacture Mozart, they can do the same to the likes of Bono, Madonna, Tom Hanks and Ron Howard.

To prove this point English author Robert Newman has dedicated 15 years of his life uncovering how the Vatican and Jesuits perpetrated the Mozart fraud.

Newman recently appeared on my radio show, The investigative Journal, and provided the following preview of his book entitled, “The Manufacture of Mozart”:

“The name of Mozart has long been synonymous with the term ‘musical genius’. Mozart is the archetypal composer of the well known film, ‘Amadeus’. (Whose trailer leads with the statement that, ‘Everything you’ve heard is true’). And yet, there is growing but little known evidence from detailed study of manuscripts and other lines of evidence that Mozart’s entire career was almost entirely manufactured. With the full assistance of the Jesuit Order and, later, from members of  fraternities after the Jesuit  ban in 1773, including individuals associated with the Freemasons and, still later, the Illuminati.

“This manufacture of Mozart’s status during his short lifetime and later, within western civilization generally by way of sympathetic biographies and music publishing is a classic case of systematic and deliberate misinformation in the area of culture which involved and still involves suppression of historical/musical fact.

“To create Mozart’s huge and dominating status in western culture required steady supply to him throughout virtually all his life of works he never wrote, this on an extraordinary, even wholesale scale. A process still continuing even after his untimely death in December 1791. Of music composed by men whose names are today little known, members of a fraternity, most of which were Jesuit educated or closely allied with them – with the ultimate objective of such a  project to create in the name of one man a ‘musical superman’. So that music as an industry could be more easily controlled, internationally, through an ‘approved’ person by creation of his myth.

“This at the price, of course, of virtually suppressing work by many, many composers ever since. Mozart’s image has been spoken of by other composers in such revered terms that it almost seems impossible to think of him in any other way. To the late 19th century composer Peter Tchaikowsky Mozart is ‘the musical Christ’. To philosopher Sorren Kierkegaard the music of Mozart was reason to consider establishing a new religion ! And to theologian Karl Barth Mozart was an angel.

“Hardly surprising he was soon described as belonging to an elite pantheon of Vienna composers such as Joseph Haydn and Ludwig van Beethoven. (Whose own stories have hardly been told). This ‘iconic view’ of music history seems to be inevitable. But it had the effect of slowly reducing the subject (almost without realising it) to virtual idolatry, a pantheon of accepted demi-gods of music who seem unchallengeable because of their unique works. Not unlike those statues which stand on  Easter Island off the coast of South America. We live in a world where cultural icons of this kind dominate our own landscape but where, in the case of music, the input of other talented musicians of Mozart’s time are simply unknown or have been hugely and deliberately suppressed.

“This ’genius’ image of Mozart, carefully controlled by early biographers and later sympathisers was further exaggerated and transformed into the huge industry we know today. So that the bubble, once created, expanded and expanded to huge dimensions with ever greater colour and fascination. To the point where music study seems impossible without acknowledging Mozart’s ‘musical genius’.

“That much of this music attributed to Mozart (though by no means all) is of great and lasting quality is undeniable. But that he, W.A.Mozart, was its true composer is a very different issue. What we find, in fact, is that the music history we find in books and reference sources, and which is widely taught, has been as corrupted and twisted as that of any other field of human activity. Even worse, for in the case of Mozart in particular, there is little, if any, cross-examination of what we are told.

“The Jesuit control of Mozart began even before he was born with the education of his father, Leopold, in his native Augsburg, Germany. Leopold was educated by the Jesuit Order there.  It was a Jesuit college which staged one of his son‘s earliest works in Salzburg and it was a Jesuit priest (Abbe Bullinger) who remained in the closest contact with Mozart even at the age of 22, when, during a visit he made to Paris with his mother in 1778 she died in the French capital after a period of illness.

“It was to this same Abbe Bullinger that Mozart announced her death by letter, this days before he broke the news in another to his father. And the list of Jesuits and occultists involved in the manufacture of his musical career is very long. Amongst those involved were Jesuit educated men such as composers – Giovanni Paisiello, Antonio Salieri, Andrea Luchesi, Paul Wranitsky, Anton Wranitsky, Josef Martin Kraus, Vicenzo Righini, J.B. Vanhal,
Josef Fiala, Josef Cartellieri, Josef Myslivececk, Abbe Maximilian Stadler, Abbe Georg Vogler, J.C. Bach, H.A. Gelinek, Theresia von Paradis and many others.

“And, after 1773, came the Illuminati, with members of which Mozart had many, many associations. These including music publishers such as
Hoffmeister (Vienna), Simrock (Bonn), Artaria, Breitkopf and Hartel.

“Together with a string of patrons such as Baron van Swieten, Prince Lichnowsky, Prince Furstenberg of Donaueschingen, Prince Lobkowitz of Bohemia and many, many others. Including various members of the Rosicrucian Order, the Freemasons, and string of others belonging to various Orders of the Holy Roman Empire etc.

“The posthumous creation of Mozart’s gigantic reputation took decades and that story has hardly been told.  But his reputation remains, to this day, the product of a fusion of the occult with that of extreme conservatism of the Holy Roman Empire during the late 18th century. The chief product of which is the corporate domination of musical/cultural history and little appreciation of the lives and talents of these other, real composers. (J.S. Bach, of course, did not officially exist to that Empire. He was to be ‘rediscovered’ only decades later).”
— R. Newman
Author of ‘The Manufacture of Mozart’
May 2009


7 thoughts on “The Manufacture of Mozart

  1. Thanks for this information, Greg.

    I have never liked Mozart’s music, in fact, I loath it. My aversion to it is so strong I can’t listen to it without feeling greatly annoyed. I cannot even brook being in the company of Mozart afficionados. Your article enables me to understand my feelings. Beethoven’s music, on the other hand, has the exact opposite effect on me. I could listen to it all day long and still crave more.

    Mozart was an Illuminist from birth. Although Beethoven, according to the little that has been written about his ties to Illuminism, is said to be an Illuminists too. However, because the Illuminists’ stock in trade is to tell a lie now and again, whenever it suits their diabolical goals, I suspect that they were lying about Beethoven.

    Beethoven and Mozart lived far apart and met only once. So Beethoven was spared the conditioning and mind control that Mozart received from his father Leopold and Leopold’s Illuminist friends – Franz Mesmer (from whom we get the term “mesmerize”) and Ben Franklin. All three of these educators of the young Mozart were Illuminists and therefore in all likelihood Satanists. There is virtually no doubt about Franklin being an Illuminist: here is one telltale anecdote – when the home of Franklin in Paris was shored up to be made a museum, at least six bodies of young children were found buried in the basement.

    Because there is a dearth of writing about Beethoven’s belief in Jesus Christ, we do not know whether in fact he believed in Him or not. But what is sure is that he yearned to find Him. Going far beyond the limit that words could ever go, he expresses his passionate sentiments in Missa Solemnis, one of his last works, and to him, his greatest. Although Beethoven’s music is occasionally unworldly, for example, the wondrous piano sonata “The Tempest,” none of his music has so much as a single bar of pretension that exalts mankind to the unobtainable realm of The Grand Creator. Mozart’s music, on the other hand, has the hubris not only to reach these heights but to depose The Grand Creator from His throne and banish Him from our world.


  2. “If we know true history, we will know who rules today.” Eric Jon Phelps
    One program note before I get to Eric.
    I’ve had Robert Newman from England on my show the last couple of days discussing 15 years of research, how the Jesuit Order manufactured Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Some people have emailed me and were astounded by this story, another said, well, Greg, why bother with this? And I said, well, there is much much more to this than what you think.
    [Loyola, of course, was far more than just a “bloodthirsty killer in the Pope’s army” but I think, Greg’s intention was to make the difference between a saint (a real friend) and an usurper (a false friend, a superior) as clear as possible at this point.]

    @ 4th min) If you take this whole thing to seriously, it, of course, will drive you crazy. But if you look at it for what its worth, just really understand that it’s good theatre on their part without an ounce of truth in it, perhaps you can live through the next theatrical onslaught, the real life theatrical onslaught of Vatican and Illuminati madness bound to kill millions. So what is this obsession with creating great theatre in the real world and on the silverscreen with the Jesuits? Well, go to my article on ArcticBeacon.Com, you’ll see the words of John XXIII in 1957 expanding the Jesuit theatre, which started out way back 400 years ago, and also exceed in the control of our educational system, our entertainment system, and every other aspect of our life. And when you read some one of these encyclicals, you’ll understand why people like Ron Howard, Tom Hanks, Madonna, Bono, a number of these people, are no more different than what my guest the other day said about Mozart, how Mozart really didn’t write all of those concertos, and how the Vatican was behind it. How the Jesuits were behind it to create an idol man, to create nothing more than idolatry in the music business. It’s a great story, go read it. Eric, how are you today?

    Eric) […] the Beatles, too. You’re absolutely right on, Greg, and I first discovered this in a tremendous work called Power and Secret of the Jesuits by Rene Fulop-Miller. It was written in the 30s, and he showed in there how the Jesuits were in control of the theatre, especially in Austria, and that they were bossom friends with Mozart, and that Mozart used to compose for them, and one of his compositions was The Magic Flute. That was composed for freemasonry, so Mozart himself was a Freemason, so you have the Jesuit Freemasonic connection in Mozart. […]

    @ 7th min – Greg) I’m looking forward to Robert Newman’s book. He not only discusses … he is a musical historian – he is looking into much much more behind the scenes and why they do this. I asked him point blank: Did Mozart write these concertos, and did he write these symphonies? And he said most of them were written by other men, and this is a great, great story that we need to look at because it really tells you exactly what they are doing today. And I believe it’s quite important because, you know, we are talking about an encyclical by John XXIII in 1957 who really tells us … he talks right to directors and movie people, and he says, you know, you need to work with us (I’m just paraphrasing). You need to do things suitable to the Catholic Action group that is controlling the media and the cinema. Many people don’t even know that there is national film reviewing offices, and many of them are controlled by people in the Knights of Malta, the Catholic Action group, and many other things, that really control who gets on the silverscreen. So when we see this movie coming out today – I might add – in theatres all over our country called Angels & Demons (just want to do a quick comment, cause it’s the day it’s coming out), you find again another propaganda story by the Vatican. Millions spent by Hollywood to promote a story, that’s gonna tell you basically that the Vatican is good and they are fighting the evil Illuminati who is try to defeat them ever since the 17th century, and basically they are citing themselves on the side of good while they place the Illuminati on the side of evil. So you have another propaganda piece by Dan Brown.

    @ 10th min – Eric) I got my thought, Greg, I got my thought back.
    I have an Italian friend who has told me through an email that the Jesuits composed much of the music for the Beatles, that Lennon and McCartney didn’t write all that music, that it was written for them.
    Greg) And that goes in line with what Newman is talking about …
    Eric) Sure, and the Beatles first performed in a Catholic church in Liverpool. It was their first performance. […] And we also have to remember that Ron Howard is a high-level Freemason, that cute little Opie on Andy and Mayberry grew up to be a high-level Freemason working for the Jesuits.
    Greg) Let’s get to some more serious stories. The one I wanted to talk about, you have put out a couple of emails regarding … kind of warnings to the Jewish population in our country. I don’t know if this extends also to the Jews in Israel, but you know the Vatican’s modus operandi. You have seen a lot more Jewish hatred now spread all over the media, you have seen it all over the place, and this is kind of what they have always been up to. And in the end, you say listen Jews, please read what’s going on because you’re going to be again put into concentration camps just like they did in World War II. And it might not just be Jews, it might be any of us.

    @ 13th min – Eric) The papacy has put together an infrastructure here in the U.S. to carry out a North American Jewish Holocaust as well as the Holocaust against true Bible believers and any “enemies of the state”. So what they have, they have created a Department of Homeland Security which I call the Department of Romeland Security, and the major creator was a man named John C. Gannon who is a very important Jesuit Coadjutor. He was a member of the Jesuit Volunteer Corps. He was in the CIA for 22 years. He was given a very high medal by President Bush, and he is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. So the Department of Homeland Security is to be the American Gestapo or SS and all these round-ups, for which reason I look for the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI someday to be merged. So, meanwhile with all of this apparatus they put in place, then the Patriot Act and the camps that they put in place, they now are deliberately fomenting anti-Jewish fiery in every level. In the alternative media, in the regular media – I have a lady friend who is a member of a big country club down in South Carolina, Myrtle Beach, and she asked one of the wealthy AT&T retirees of the corporation: “Well, what do you think about this scandal?” And he says: “Those dirty damn Jews! Hitler should had killed them all.” So what we are seeing now is in the elite areas of American business, we are seeing this rampant anti-Jewish fiery, because they are blaming it with the Madoff scandal and the Lehman Brothers failure, which we have proofed on this show that the Jesuits were behind it with the various companies they are working with. So that they are now blaming all Jews in general for the financial debacle that this country is going through, and it’s only gonna get worse. Meanwhile they put Barry Davis Obama as the president with his real alter ego, with his right hand, the Jesuit Joe Biden, and they are going to bring this about unless the Lord intervenes.

    Me) Every type of exercise of power which basically relies on spiritual paternalism (shepherd-sheeps) contains theatrical elements within itself, from the foremost beginnings of politics by the first medicine men and clan chiefs up to the present day’s global church Hollywood.
    The power of brotherhoods and priesthoods as caretakers for the social life defining, main(stream) mysteries is practically based on theatre! The whole life back then in the South American reductions along the Uruguay River was governed as a “Jesuits’ Musical Kingdom” …

    “And really which is what Jesus was doing.”

    read more …


  3. “On the April 10, 1770, he arrived in Rome together with his father and, as guest of many noble and ecclesiastic salons, the ‘infant prodigy’ showed his mastery. He also went to a liturgical celebration in the Sistine Chapel, where he could listen to the Miserere by Gregorio Allegri (1582-1652) for two nine-part choirs. Already knowing that he could not get the music score because it was strictly prohibited, he transcribed the piece by heart at the end of the liturgy, almost without any mistakes. Mozart so highly impressed the scholars of the Curia that Pope Clement XIV decided to honour the artistic talent of the boy from Salzburg by granting him a private audience – together with father Giovanni Battista Martini, another famous musician who Mozart had already met in Bologna – thus conferring him the high honour of the Golden Army or the ‘Golden Spur’.”


  4. Thanks for the comments of Tosco Schimmer (above). I’m glad you are interested in the facts of Mozart’s career. You write –

    “On the April 10, 1770, he arrived in Rome together with his father and, as guest of many noble and ecclesiastic salons, the ‘infant prodigy’ showed his mastery. He also went to a liturgical celebration in the Sistine Chapel, where he could listen to the Miserere by Gregorio Allegri (1582-1652) for two nine-part choirs. Already knowing that he could not get the music score because it was strictly prohibited, he transcribed the piece by heart at the end of the liturgy, almost without any mistakes. Mozart so highly impressed the scholars of the Curia that Pope Clement XIV decided to honour the artistic talent of the boy from Salzburg by granting him a private audience – together with father Giovanni Battista Martini, another famous musician who Mozart had already met in Bologna – thus conferring him the high honour of the Golden Army or the ‘Golden Spur’.”

    Well, that’s the ‘official’ story, of course !

    1. In fact the boy Mozart did NOT ‘transcribe the Allegri piece by heart at the end of the liturgy, almost without mistakes’ in Rome in 1770. I’ve read the travel diaries of the Mozart family at this period. They (father and son) attended the Sistine Chapel in Rome at this time to hear this Allegri work not once but two times.

    2. The church music in question (the one which Mozart is said to have copied down from memory) by Allegri was already well known to the Mozart family before they even left Austria !

    3. In fact a copy of this same Allegri work was held at the Vienna Cathedral before the Mozart family left for Italy. So it’s wrong to say he (Mozart) heard it there in Rome for the first time. This whole affair was ‘stage managed’.

    4. After Mozart’s second hearing of this work (a copy of which he already had made before he arrived in Rome !) he attempted to make a version in his own handwriting. The Mozart family diaries make it clear that he, Mozart, was sitting in the audience with a musical manuscript in his hand on both times that he was listening to its performance ! How can that be interpreted as ‘transcribed by heart’ ???

    5. If Mozart really achieved this feat from memory why has this version of the Allegri work never been seen by Mozart researchers and never been any part of Mozart’s musical catalogue in over 200 years of Mozart study ?

    6. In the early 20th century a German writer who actually saw this Mozart version of the Allegri work described it as being ‘filled with musical errors’. So many, in fact, this document disappeared a few years after and has never once been published or examined by anyone, even by the centre of Mozart study, the Mozarteum in Salzburg ?

    7. Two years after Mozart’s visit to Rome his fraternity associates in England (1772) published a version of this Allegri piece and described it as ‘Mozart’s arrangement made in Rome’. But this fake version has nothing to do with Mozart. It is very different.

    8. The limitations of Mozart’s musical abilities are proved by surviving entrance examination documents to the Bologna music institute which he, the boy Mozart, wrote at this very time in Bologna. They are still there today in the archives. They are dated 1770. For (as Tosco Schimmer tells us) the head of this Bologna music institute was the same Giovanni Battista Martini whom he mentions as being with Mozart in Rome. But this surviving entrance exam paper which Mozart completed for Bologna Institute is even more filled with musical errors ! A detailed study of this exam paper was recently made in Italy by two famous Italian musicologists, Professor Luca Bianchini and Professor Anna Trombettta, both of which are experts in 18th century music and in 18th century opera and church music. They have concluded that W.A. Mozart, during this Rome period of his life, knew virtually nothing of musical harmony or orchestration and had never even studied these subjects at any time in his life. The entrance exam in Bologna was disastrous and Mozart was granted membership at the Bologna institute only because his ‘friend’, Padre Martini, allowed it. Even the details of the voting for his membership survive. It was not unanimous.

    If you would like direct contact with these Italian professors of music to confirm the truth of these things please let me know and I can give you their contact details.

    This story of Mozart’s musical genius in Rome is a fiction. Mozart’s career was artificially manufactured. So says the actual evidence.

    It is true that he, Mozart, was surrounded by noble and ecclesiastical patrons in Italy at this time. But that is true of his entire childhood. The musical career of W.A. Mozart was a ‘P.R.’ stunt of the 18th century. The boy studied music for no period of his life. Nor did he ever attend school. These are the plain facts.


    Robert Newman


    Best wishes

    Robert Newman
    London, England


  5. Further to the posts above. Here is further evidence that at the time of Mozart’s arrival in Italy he still had studied nothing of music. It comes from a little known letter written to Italy by Mozart’s own father, Leopold. He writes to the head of the music college at Bologna, Italy, about the planned visit of Wolfgang and says –

    “My son has been now been 5 years in the service of our Prince here at Salzburg, at a merely nominal salary, hoping that by degrees his efforts and any talents he MAY possess, combined with the utmost industry and most unremitting study, would be rewarded; but in this hope we find ourselves deceived. I forbear all allusion to our Prince’s mode of thinking and acting; but he was not ashamed to declare that MY SON KNEW NOTHING, AND THAT HE OUGHT TO GO TO THE MUSICAL TRAINING SCHOOL IN NAPLES, ITALY, TO LEARN MUSIC. And why did he, his employer, say all this? In order to intimate that a young man should not be so absurd as to believe he deserved a rather higher salary after such a decisive verdict had issued from the lips of a prince. This has induced me to sanction my son giving up his present situation. He therefore left Salzburg on the 23d of September”

    (Leopold Mozart in Salzburg to Padre Martini, Bologna, Italy).

    Clear evidence that Mozart, by the time of his arrival in Italy for the first of his tours had studied NOTHING of music. As was said by his own employer. This further confirmed by surviving music test papers still today at the music academy of Bologna, Italy, which are filled with musical mistakes by the boy Mozart as said above.

    So we have not one but two documentary proofs of Mozart having never studied music at the time he appeared in Rome. From his own father and from his employer. And also confirmed by the music college of Bologna in Italy.


    Robert Newman

    Clear evidence that, at this time, with Mozart already


  6. Pingback: Investigative Journal » The Manufacture of Mozart | INQUISITION NEWS

  7. Hello, I’ve been tracking this and these issues for a while now, looking very much forward to read the book, since the relationships, letters and accounts read like a proper (masonic or familial) Facebook – but what I’m interested in the most at the moment – is Salieri’s involvement …

    Salieri was one of the rare people to have access to Court Library (which he took full advantage of), was likely around 1789 and later Mozart’s composition teacher (through Hüttenbrenner, who had no reason to lie since he adored Mozart, Rochlitz openly places Mozart amongst Salieri’s students), they both performed and composed for Van Swieten since at least 1782, there’s the Colloredo-Salieri-Michael Haydn link through Haydn’s ordered Bearbeitungen of two masonic (wind) themes by Salieri (M. Haydn was also Jesuit educated, Leopold and Marianne were selling Michael’s music behind his back, plus Michael had a ripe career in detecting plagiarism in music, very interesting events here) Van Swieten also proposed a Copyright law for literature (overruled by Joseph II and one has to ask what a similar law in music would mean to Mozart since his own student Hummel was then the one who finally brought it about, especially since Hummel was also Haydn’s replacement and had an insight into workings of Esterháza, therefore possibly not entirely because of ”incorrect illegal copies” anger issues.) Salieri was Hummel’s wedding witness.

    On the other hand, Salieri was a bit choosy when performing Mozart’s/”Mozart’s” music (that *Mozart* page he left almost empty as per Chapel’s registry of performances and acquisitions) and as far as I can tell through a couple of programs – he also frequently chose music of composers not many have heard of (for which ever the reason, I was never able to track them down as they seemed to have written about two works in their lives, whether they were professional musicians or not I can’t yet tell – so what was going on there, who were these people?) In fact, he states so in his own letters, it was sort of a mission for him: he praises and respects the musical Diversity through the ages and advocates understanding of various musical endeavours, especially music of ”unjustly forgotten masters”, as he puts it. For Salieri, which is interesting notion in a theatre, music and words have to be sincere (which is what he liked about Gluck’s treatment of vocal music). The only two hero worshipping factors are for him extremely personal, namely Gaßmann (out of gratitude on all fronts) and Gluck (out of friendship + a reputation bonus). … Gluck was a Freemason – was Gaßmann too? One online source in German language states that Salieri was a Freemason – but offers no proof except a hint that he hung around a couple.

    One obvious hiccup between the two, if Mozart is to be believed *le sigh*: Mozart’s by Viennese Italian opera troupe (which was then under the Direction of Paisiello?) not-invited usurpation and his cabale of Anfossi’s opera through three long insert arias luckily never came to be as Salieri prevented a direct conflict between German and Italian artists by going in a roundabout manner to Adamberger … Orsini-Rosenberg supported Mozart, so if he ever said anything about it to Salieri, he would not have repeated the same to his favourite, to Mozart. The troupe never performed the second aria and so only one was heard, as firstly intended by Aloysia. She must have been respected by Italian opera troupe to have been allowed to bring Mozart in as a guest composer. Mozart however, had to *publicly apologise* for his *direct disrespect* of Pasquale Anfossi and complaint, as Mozart reports, of ”wanting to rewrite Anfossi’s opera” … Mozart was invited to write AN aria by and for the guest-singer, his wife’s sister Aloysia … Him wanting an arm and a leg could have ended in even bigger a scandal had he pursued this path and insisted on all three insert arias. Meaning: that whichever diplomacy Salieri pulled off, saved the day. The only question is – why he didn’t go to Mozart directly …

    Salieri knew that ”Mozart’s” Requiem was, compositionally speaking, a ”work left incomplete” and not quite right and that breaking the rules of harmony (in Benedictus) meant ”sporcheria” (Schweinerei) written by ”inexperienced hand” (letter to a well known composer Stuntz, 1820 – here it would be interesting to compare it with Rochlitz’ supposed quote of Salieri saying that Mozart’s Requiem ”exceeds all norms”.) He also instructed Süßmayr in the winter of 1791/92 when the latter was finishing up ”Mozart’s” Requiem.) Salieri likely directed and performed Michael Haydn’s first Requiem for Marie Therese (she loved and sang it, it was a very famous piece) or at least read its score – so he would have known about the thematic similarities between these two works as well as Messiah by Handel. Other Requiems were performed (likely under Salieri) in Chapel as well, such as Hofmann’s (who was Salieri’s wedding witness and Domkapellmeister of St. Stephan’s) and Gaßmann’s. When he saw something well written in Mozart’s music – he said so – and when he didn’t (like the two equal interpretations of the burning scene which was for Mozart a peaceful beauty from the perspective of the one who lit the match ~ while for Salieri it was a living, roaring horror of the people who got burned and killed) – he said so as well (to his closest students.) If anything – this sounds honest; consistently a person capable of praise as well as criticism, even if by droplets:

    as of yet, I suspect that Salieri was publicly mostly silent about *Topic: Mozart* simply because he may have known or had a feeling of what was behind it – and rather than *telling lies* and scoring points like so many others with or without thinking and intent have done ~ he kept quiet. That *howling with the wolves* part (which pops up about twice and through mouths of others) was simply because he had to do so, he was not blind to what was going on, maybe even out of duty (above all Salieri seems to have been a man of duty) and do so a little out of self-preservation instinct as well, but that his private conviction was in researching all sorts of musical scores (which he was rather possessive of) and performing at least some of them (and possibly passing them on to his students?) Though with years things tended to zoom-in on ”J. Haydn” and Co. which, if anything, became a general trend.

    Then judging from Salieri’s letters of recommendation, he gave students equally curt and to-the-point support and never played favourites, not even in case of Mozart’s son – thus allowing each student to succeed more on their own rightful abilities and merit and to persuade the examiners with their demonstrated knowledge rather than his own recommendation. Again, perfectly fair.

    Though not all of his works have been recorded yet, I was also wondering if there be evidence of Salieri ever doing the same, taking credit for other people’s works and such. Judging by what I heard he usually plagiarised himself (reworked his older ideas or took ”standard” themes which others have also used before him, which seems not to have happened that often at all.) I found one example of him using a theme by Edelmann (a tribute to known Paris composer and a buddy of Gluck,) in Tarare (Atar’s closing arietta.) Salieri seems to have been überproud of his achievements, a regular workaholic with main defining traits in music, teaching and generally genuinely helping people. … And writing quirky canons for wine glasses and nasal voices.

    So – apart from all this – what was his direct contribution in manufacturing Mozart?

    When something seems too good to be true … Salieri complied to what was expected of him and conducted *some* of Mozart’s (and ”Haydn’s”) music – but never to the exclusion of other musicians (despite not agreeing with at that time modern masters on the ”misuse” of harmony and being rather vocal about it – he never cut anyone’s credit through their works and has respected them regardless. Like that childhood anecdote Salieri wrote down for Mosel, when he found some priest’s organ playing too theatrical 😀 ~ but father told him that that very priest still deserves his respect, no matter the disagreements between their respective opinions on music.)

    … Fellow researchers, evidence as evidence and words as words, I’m, surprisingly, not particularly trying to pass any judgements or play favourites, ha, but please give me some ‘dirt’ on Salieri – because otherwise – despite having certain ambitions in life, doing his work – and keeping some opinions for himself or those closest to him – he seems to be a reasonably ethical, very reasonable and open-minded, quite likeable Ehrenmann, a gentilehomme … 😀

    Greetings to the team!


    P.S.: My sources are about 25 books, articles and other material on Salieri and a lot more on other composers, history, etc. Just punch the keywords and something will pop out on the internet, I’ve left enough clues.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s