Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-vrt8f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T05:57:01.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Die Zauberflöte: some textual and interpretative problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 1965

Peter Branscombe
Get access

Extract

This paper is basically a study of some of the numerous textual divergencies which exist between the first printed edition of the libretto of Die Zauberflöte, and Mozart's autograph score. I begin, however, with some remarks about a peculiar forgery which purports to be a letter from Schikaneder to Mozart, bearing a date which has led scholars to believe that the composition of Die Zauberflöte was already far advanced by September 1790, over a year before the opera was first performed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association , Volume 92 , 1965 , pp. 45 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © 1966 The Royal Musical Association and the Authors

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Dent, E. J., Mozart's Operas, 2nd edn., London, 1947.Google Scholar

2 Grove's Dictionary, 5th edn., London, 1954, art. ‘Mozart’.Google Scholar

3 E. von Komorzynski, Emanuel Schıkaneder. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des deutschen Theaters, Berlin, 1901; 2nd (revised) edn., Vienna, 1951.Google Scholar

4 Jahn, O., W. A. Mozart, Leipzig, 1856–59.Google Scholar

5 Rommel, O., Die Alt-Wiener Volkskomödie, Vienna, 1952.Google Scholar

6 Rommel, op. cit, p. 983.Google Scholar

7 Schikaneder's recognition of his debt to Wieland is shown by his leaving him ‘Als Verfasser des Tschinnistan Dreyhundert Gulden’ (Will of 17 December 1803). Komorzynski, op. cit., 1951, p. 333.Google Scholar

8 Vienna, 1864, p. 41.Google Scholar

9 Op. cit., 1951 edn., p. 192.Google Scholar

10 Shelf mark I.N. 8355.Google Scholar

11 Köchel, 6th edn., Wiesbaden, 1964, p. 678.Google Scholar

12 Jahn, op. cit., 1st edn., Leipzig, 1859, iv. 564.Google Scholar

13 Jahn's Mozart, 5th edn., ed. H. Abert, Leipzig, 1919–21, ii. 708.Google Scholar

14 Op. cit., p. 513.Google Scholar

15 Der Fagottist, oder: Die Zauberzyther, Singspiel by Joachim Perinet, music by Wenzel Müller, likewise based on the Dschinnistan stories.Google Scholar

16 ‘Neuerbautes’, pp. 66 ff.Google Scholar

17 Published in Die Zauberflöte. Unbekannte Handschrıften und seltene Drucke aus der Frühzeit von Mozarts Oper, ed. F. Brukner, Vienna [1934], pp. 145–803.Google Scholar

18 Mozart und Schikaneder. Ein theatralisches Gespräch, ibid., pp. 85–94.Google Scholar

19 Castelli, I. F., Memoiren meines Lebens, ed. J. Bindtner (Denkwürdigkeiten aus Alt-Österreich, vol. 9), Munich, no date, i. 236.Google Scholar

20 loc. cit.Google Scholar

21 Verzeichnüss aller meiner Werke …, facsimile edn., ed. O. E. Deutsch, Vienna – Leipzig – Zürich – London, 1938.Google Scholar

22 S = 1st edition of libretto, M = Mozart's autograph score. See Appendix, pp. 58–63. The numbering used in this paper is that of M.Google Scholar

23 E.g. 8 and especially 30 November 1780.Google Scholar

24 Mozart. Die Zauberflöte. Vollständiges Opernbuch, ed. Georg Richard Kruse, Leipzig, no date; W. A. Mozart. Die Zauberflöte. Oper ın zwei Aufzügen, ed. Wilhelm Zentner, Stuttgart, no date. Both editions bear the number 2620.Google Scholar

25 The Reclam editors similarly mislead when they imply that the direction before Monostatos's aria (14a) that the music is to be performed as if at a great distance first appeared in the Berlin 1795 edn.Google Scholar

26 The majority of the various printing errors, omissions and divergencies from the score which are found in S continue to occur in the later editions of the libretto which I have seen.Google Scholar

27 Beschreibung und Geschichte der Hauptstadt in dem holländischen Ostindien, Batavia nebst geographischen, politischen und physıkalischen Nachrichten von der Insel Java, tr. from the Dutch by J. J. Ebert, Leipzig, 4 vols., 1785–1786.Google Scholar

28 Reproduced in Glyndebourne Festival Opera programme book, 1966, p. 57. Mozart und seine Welt in zeitgenössıschen Bildern, ed. O. E. Deutsch (Neue Mozart-Ausgabe X/32), Cassel – Basle – Paris – London – New York, 1961, contains other early pictures of Tamino: plates 539, 540, 541, 543 and 545.Google Scholar

29 Cf. early pictures of this scene, for instance the Brno Allgemeines Europäisches Journal engraving of 1795 (Deutsch, Mozart und seine Welt in zeitgenössischen Bildern, plate 540) – though the title-page of J. J. Hummel's vocal score (1792/93) shows the serpent in one piece (Mozart und seine Welt …, plate 550). The earliest mention of the chopping-up of the snake seems to be in the vocal score published by the Musikalisches Magazin, Vienna, 1791–92 (Sie stossen die Schlange auf 3. Stück entzwei); it recurs int. al. in the full score editions of Rietz (Leipzig, 1870) and Soldan (Leipzig, 1925).Google Scholar

30 Mozart. Die Dokumente seines Lebens, ed. O. E. Deutsch (Neue Mozart-Ausgabe X/34), Cassel, etc., 1961, pp. 405 and 398.Google Scholar

31 It would be of interest to know the origin of the readily understandable stage direction ‘tanzend’ commonly found in modern scores and libretti when Monostatos and the slaves exeunt.Google Scholar

32 Leipzig, 1957.Google Scholar

33 The readings in S and M may of course be independent solutions to a problem previously discussed verbally.Google Scholar

During the course of the Paper the following recorded illustrations were played:Google Scholar

  1. a

    a Act I finale from Pamina/Papageno duet ‘Schnelle Fusse, rascher Mut’, to the duet ‘Kdnnte jeder brave Mann’ (Eulenberg miniature score pp. 162-173).

  2. b

    b The Quintet, no. 13 (Eulenberg and most modern editions no. 12).