Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen (1761-1817)

DIPLOMARBEIT

Titel der Diplomarbeit „Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen (1761–1817) From the Life of a Forgotten Composer“

Verfasst von Johann Peter Kellner

angestrebter akademischer Grad Magister der Philosophie (Mag.phil.)

Wien, 2014

Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 317 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Diplomstudium Theater-, Film- und Medienwissenschaft Betreuerin: Ass.-Prof. Dr. Isolde Schmid-Reiter 2

FRIEDRICH LUDWIG ÆMILIUS KUNZEN (1761–1817) FROM THE LIFE OF A FORGOTTEN COMPOSER

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………… 9

2. THE GENESIS OF A COMPOSER

2.1. A MUSICAL PEDIGREE …………………………………….… 12 2.2. A STUDENT IN KIEL …………………………………….....…. 17 2.3. EXCURSUS: THE SULTAN OF DENMARK ……………..…. 21 2.4. HOLGER DANSKE …………………………………….…….… 33

3. WANDERJAHRE

3.1. HOLGER DANSKE’S AFTERLIFE ………………….…….…. 61 3.2. FINDING MOZART ……………………………..…….……..… 66 3.3. EXCURSUS: DEMOISELLE OBERON …………….…….…. 75 3.4. MYSTERIOUS PRAGUE ………………………………….…... 86

4. RETURN TO COPENHAGEN ……………………………….…. 103

5. SUMMARY …………………………………………….…………. 122

ABSTRACT …………………………………………….………...…. 125 REFERENCES ………………………………………..……….…… 126 DEPICTIONS ……………………………………………………..… 136 CURRICULUM VITAE ……….…………….………………….….. 138

1. INTRODUCTION

One desirable result of this research would be to bring the life and work of the German-Danish composer Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen (1761–1817)1 to the attention of a wider audience. Even in Denmark, where his first major work has been deemed one of the twelve most influential classical compositions in the annals of Danish music, Kunzen is practically unknown. Although included in this ‘Culture Canon’, which was established by the Ministry of Culture in 2006–2007 as a collection and presentation of the greatest, most important works of Denmark's cultural heritage2, only very few know his work or indeed know his name. Beyond the Danish borders, and even in the world of musicology, Kunzen is virtually unknown – although his work certainly deserves a much higher degree of awareness. There is one single scholar to thank for Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen not being entirely forgotten by musicology: Professor Heinrich W. Schwab’s3 tireless research into Kunzen’s life and work has led to a number of publications about the composer, and thereby to a certain degree of acknowledgement of his achievements. His publications are both starting point and source material for this research. While Professor Schwab also analyses Kunzen’s work from the perspective of a musicologist, this approach is a biographical-historical one: the

1 Portrait page 5: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen (1761-1817). Etching by Johann Heinrich Lips, 1809, after a miniature by by Mathias Møller Heinrichsen. 15,6 x 10,5 cm. Enscribed: “M. Henrichsen del.H.Lips sculps. Zu finden in Zürich bey H.G. Nägeli & Comp.” Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen. 2 The homepage “Kulturkanon”, originally set up by the Danish Ministry of Culture in 2006/7, was deleted in 2012 due to running costs of almost 100.000 Euros per annum in payment of fees associated with copyrighted works. It can therefore no longer be used as a source. Another homepage with the same name is a private initiative established primarily for commercial purposes. 3 Prof. Dr. Emeritus Heinrich W. Schwab is since 1998 professor of musicology at the Institute for Musicology at the University of Copenhagen and member of the Norske Videnskaps akademiet in Oslo, the Kungl. Musikaliska akademier in Stockholm, the Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab in Copenhagen and the Academia Europaea in London.

9 focus is on Kunzen’s work from the angle of theatrical production, with its political, social and artistic components, and only to a minor extent on aspects of musical composition, as this is not the field of expertise of the author of this diploma thesis.

It is, however, not the aim to write a straightforward biography of this ‘almost forgotten’ composer. The intention is to take a few crucial actualities in Kunzen’s biography and analyse these features in correlation to the specific external circumstances that proved to be highly influential in defining his path in life:

First, the political and cultural context of his day in the kingdom of Denmark, which formed the backdrop to his first major orchestral work, music for the opera Holger Danske (1789). The opera led to one of the most acrimonious disputes ever witnessed in the history of Danish theatre; his work of art was commandeered for a struggle between national factions and had to serve as a platform for political tensions. But Holger Danske also served as a case in point from which to discuss the general function and role of the theatre, to question the necessity and value of opera as an art form, and to mirror the Danish struggle for a national identity forged between the radically new thinking of the Age of Enlightenment and the traditions of the absolute monarchy. All these circumstances had a direct impact on the opera’s première in 1789.

Secondly, a chapter on what could be viewed as his ‘Wanderjahre’ and for the thesis as a kind of intermezzo: the challenges Kunzen faced as musician and composer in Europe during the second half of the eighteenth century. Besides his artistic development, this period involves concerns regarding financial and legal practices of the time and several circumstances in Kunzen’s life can be seen as exemplary for the entire profession. The custom of using – or misusing – performing rights of theatrical works, the exchange of themes and

10 ideas across the continent, and the practice of promoting and favouring certain artists and their work are all issues which will be discussed in this chapter.

Thirdly, the work shall examine Kunzen’s return to Copenhagen in the role of Kapellmeister at the Royal Danish Theatre and his enthusiasm for the work of Wolfgang Amadé Mozart (1756–1791). Not only did Mozart’s music have great influence on Kunzen’s own compositions, but the staging of Mozart’s operas in Frankfurt, Prague and particularly in Copenhagen involved artistic triumphs, disasters and bizarre challenges. The Danish premières of Così fan tutte, Don Giovanni and Die Entführung aus dem Serail (‘The Abduction from the Seraglio’) all took place thanks to his energetic efforts and under his musical direction – the latter, in 1813, most probably attended by Constanze Nissen (1762–1842), formerly Mozart.

These three sections will investigate their topics in chronological order and connect them with biographical details, some of which have not previously been available. It is also the aim to correct some misunderstandings about Kunzen found in several standard reference books, and will thereby hopefully contribute to a more differentiated view of this ‘almost forgotten’ composer and long-time Kapellmeister at the Royal Danish Theatre in Copenhagen.

2. THE GENESIS OF A COMPOSER

2.1. A MUSICAL PEDIGREE

The German-Danish composer Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen was born in Lübeck on September 24, 1761, into a family of musicians who had been held in high regard in this town for the previous two generations. The musical tradition had started with his grandfather, Johann Paul Kunzen (1696–1757). Born in the small town of Leisnig in Saxony, he first attended schools in Torgau and Freiberg, and in 1716 he enrolled at the University of Leipzig where one of his teachers was Johann Kuhnau (1660–1722). Following concert tours and an employment as Kapellmeister in Zerbst, he moved to Wittenberg, where his son Adolf Carl Kunzen (1720–1781) was born. In 1723 he became employed at the Hamburg Opera for the “Direction der Musik für die Opern”4 (‘the management for the music of the operas’) and he composed several operas, choirs, symphonies and other musical works for the Hamburg Opera. In 1728 he embarked on a concert tour through the Netherlands and England5, together with his son Adolf Carl who was a gifted pianist and was regarded as a child prodigy.6

4 Johann Mattheson: Grundlage einer Ehren-Pforte, woran der Tüchtigsten Capellmeister, Componisten, Musikgelehrten, Tonkünstler etc., Leben, Werke, Verdienste etc. erscheinen sollen. Hamburg: 1740. 428 p., pp. 158–165 (on ‘Kuntzen’). p. 162. 5 In August 1728 Adolf Carl played the violin for the Danish King Fredrik IV and his wife Anna Sophie in the town of Aurich. His father also later sought contact with the Danish court by composing a cantata for the coronation of King Christian VI: “Aller-unterth. Freudenzuruff an K. M. Christian den Sechsten auf Dero Krönungs-tag in einer Cantata abgestattet und in Music gesetzet | Joh. Paul Kunzen. – Hamb., [1731]”, in: Jørgen Friis: Danmarkes og Norges Glæde over Kong Christian den Siette, da Hs. Maj. til sit Højst-Kongl. Regimente blev salvet og indviet paa Friderichsborgs Slott d. 6. Junij 1731. Copenhagen: s.typ., 1731, s.p. A minor work that is not mentioned in any musical or biographical catalogue. 6 “Among the musical phenomena of 1729, was the performance on the harpsichord of little Kuntzen, ‘a youth of seven years old, just arrived from Germany’”. In: Allatson Burgh: Anecdotes of Music, historical and biographical; in

While in England, the Kunzens became acquainted with, among other renowned musicians, Georg Friedrich Händel (1685–1759). In September 1732 Johann Paul was offered the position of organist at the St. Mary’s Church in Lübeck, a job he took up in 1733, and in which he successfully maintained the tradition of Abendmusiken (‘evening music’) introduced by his famous predecessors Franz Tunder (1614–1667) and Dietrich Buxtehude (d.1707). He held the position of an organist at St. Mary’s until his death. Adolf Carl received his early musical education from his father and later studied under Jacob Wilhelm Lustig (1706–1796). In 1749 he was appointed concertmaster at the court of Duke Christian Ludwig II of Mecklenburg(-Schwerin) (1683–1756), where he also started working on his own compositions. In 1752 he was promoted to Kapellmeister, but after a number of disagreements he left and moved to London. When his father’s died in 1757, Adolf Carl inherited the job of organist at St. Mary’s Church. When, at the age of 52, Adolf Carl was afflicted by a stroke which paralysed his right hand, he was provided with an assistant, Johann Wilhelm Cornelius v. Königslöw (1745–1833), who also took over the job of organist when Adolf Carl died in 1781.7

Hence, one would assume that Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius had the best possible starting position for a successful career in the world of music. However, despite this family tradition, astonishingly Adolf Carl did not try to further Friedrich’s musical studies – on the contrary, he had other plans for his son’s future. Young Friedrich, however, still followed his calling and, according to the Danish Biographical Lexicon,

a series of letters from a Gentleman to his daughter. Vol. III, London: Printed for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown, Paternoster Row. 1814. p. 397. 7 Heinrich W. Schwab notes that Johann Paul only used the form ‘Kuntzen’, Adolph Carl both ‘Kuntzen’ and ‘Kunzen’, while Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius only used ‘Kunzen’. Heinrich W. Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig AemiliusKunzen (1761– 1817): Stationen seines Lebens und Wirkens. Ausstellung aus Anlaß des Jubiläums der Berufung zum Musikdirektor der Königlichen dänischen Hofkapelle im Jahre 1795. Heide/Holstein: Westholsteinische Verlagsanstalt Boyens & Co., 1995, p. 12.

13 he was playing fantasias on the piano before he actually had learned how to read music and he wrote his first small compositions while still a child.8 A close friend throughout his life, the German-Danish writer Levin Christian Sander (1756–1819) describes Friedrich’s youth:

“Meget tidlig vaagnede hans Lyst og Talent til Musik. Hans podagriske Fader, der for længesiden havde opgivet al Underviisning, meddeelte ham blot de første Elementer og Færdigheder paa Klaveret. Spille kunde han, førend han kjendte Noder o.s.v.; og sit Spil begyndte han med egne Frembringelser og Phantasier. […] I det syvende Aar begyndte han allerede, at nedskrive sine Compositioner: og Faderen gav ham ingen anden Hjelp, end laconisk Roes og Daddel. Grundene dertil maatte han selv udgranske. […] Saaledes kan Kunzen i sin Ungdom betragtes som en Avtodidact, hvorfor han siden ofte klagede over Mangel paa tidlig, grundig Underviisning.

Men hans Fader havde stedse ønsket, at han ikke skulde gjøre sin timelige Velfærd afhængig af Tonekunsten; og selv af denne Grund ikke anvendt Flid paa hans musikalske Dannelse.”9

(‘His desire and talent for music was awakened at a very early age. His father, afflicted by the gout, had long since given up all tuition, merely informed him of the basic elements and skills on the piano. But he could play before he could read music and so forth; and he started playing tunes of his own making and fantasias. […] In his seventh year he already started to write down his compositions, his father giving him no other help than laconic praise and reproach. The reasons for this he was left to work out for himself. […] Kunzen can thus be regarded as an autodidact in his youth, hence he later often lamented his lack of early, thorough tuition.

8 C.V. Ravn: Kunzen, Frederik Ludvig Æmilius. In: Carl Frederik Bricka (ed.): Dansk biografisk lexikon. Tillige omfattende Norge for tidsrummet 1537–1814. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandels Forlag (F. Hegel & Søn), 1887–1905, 19 vols, vol. 9 (1895), pp. 601–606. p. 601. 9 Levin Christian Sander: Nekrolog 1817. In: Dagspostens Søndagsblad. Udgivet af Jens Kragh Høst, 1817, No. 2, p. V.

But his father had always wished that his existence should not depend on the art of music, and for that very reason he took no pains over his son’s musical education.’)

It therefore seems strange that his father presented Friedrich as a child prodigy in 1768 in London, as The New Grove claims.10 This alleged biographical detail also stands in stark contrast to all other sources that could be found about Friedrich’s youth. It can be assumed that the journey to London as reported in The New Grove is the result of a mix-up between the different Kunzens. In contrast, The New Grove does not mention the documented 1728-29 London appearances by Adolph Carl, where he had actually been admired as child prodigy.11 In Grundlage einer Ehren-Pforte Johann Mattheson details information reported to him personally by Johann Paul Kuntzen: that on August 11, 1728, Johann Paul and Adolph Carl had set off on a journey to England via The Netherlands, passing through Aurich, where the Danish King Frederik IV (1671–1730) was staying; the king had admired the young Adolf Carl’s piano skills. On October 4 they had arrived in London, where they were welcomed by Johann Christoph Pepusch (1667–1752), who arranged the score and composed some of the music to the libretto of John Gay’s The Beggar’s Opera. While in London, Adolph Carl even gave a piano concert for Robert Walpole (1676–1745).12 It is astonishing that these details have been omitted from several biographical encyclopedias. The source for the misunderstanding between the Kun(t)zens might well be Robert Eitner’s Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon, which reads

“Schon 1768 reiste der Vater mit ihm und seiner ebenfalls sehr begabten Schwester, der späteren Opernsängerin und Gattin des

10 Stanley Sadie (ed.): The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Second Edition. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited, 2001, 29 vols, vol. 14, pp. 31– 32. p. 31. 11 Stanley Sadie (ed.): The New Grove. Vol. 14, pp. 30–31. p. 30. 12 Mattheson: Grundlage einer Ehren-Pforte. pp. 162–163.

Mecklenburgischen Hofmusikus Braun in Ludwigslust, nach London und ließsen sich mit Erfolg als Klavierspieler in einem Konzerte für 2 Flügel von A. K. Kuntzen hören.”13

(‘As early as 1768 his father travelled with him and his likewise highly talented sister – later opera singer and wife of the Mecklenburg court musician Braun in Ludwigslust – to London, where they successfully presented themselves as pianists in a concert for two pianos by A.K. Kuntzen.’)

When writing this detail, the editor of the biographical encyclopedia did not take into consideration that Friedrich’s younger sister, Louise Ulrike Friederike (1765–1839), was only three years old at the time and this was a rather young age to be giving piano concerts – even for the most outstanding of musical prodigies. Friedrich continued to develop his musical skills in a more or less autodidactic way and he became a highly respected pianist. He gave several concerts in Lübeck and at the ducal court of Mecklenburg- Schwerin in Ludwigslust. He composed a number of concertos for grand piano and six sonatas for piano (the oldest preserved composition by F.L.Æ. Kunzen is a choral cantata from 1780), but his musical career seems to have ended before it had really began.

13 Robert Eitner: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten christlicher Zeitrechnung bis Mitte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts. 2. verbesserte Auflage in 11 Bänden. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1959, 11 vols, vol. 5, p. 478.

2.2. A STUDENT IN KIEL

His father wanted him to study law,14 a wish Friedrich obeyed after his father’s death in 1781. That same year he moved to Kiel and embarked upon jurisprudence studies at the city’s university. At that time, Kiel was part of Denmark, or more correctly the Duke of Holstein was the Danish King Christian VII (1749–r.1766–1808) and the university experienced a significant upturn under his regency. One of the professors there was Carl Friedrich Cramer (1752–1807), who was also the publisher of the reputable Magazin für Musik (‘Magazine for Music’).15 This acquaintanceship would prove to have great influence on Kunzen’s professional development. It was an auspicious encounter both for Cramer, who wanted to publish music but lacked knowledge in the art of composition, as well as for Kunzen, who found in Cramer a resolute promoter. Cramer encouraged Kunzen to pursue his musical ambitions and, for example, asked him to produce a piano score for Antonio Salieri’s (1750–1825) Armida, which he was intending to publish, and which was a welcome challenge for Kunzen. The young composer-in-waiting was not reticent about adding a few changes to the score. In a letter to Cramer, Salieri emphasised the good work Signore Kunzen had done.16 Cramer also undertook a musical journey along with his younger friend; in 1783 they travelled to Mecklenburg, amongst other places to the Duke’s court, for which both Friedrich’s father and grandfather had provided some of their music.

14 A fact Friedrich later regretted and about which he commented publicly. As mentioned by Sander, Friedrich compensated for his lack of musical education by pursuing autodidactic studies and he became, like his father, an excellent pianist, which proved to be a great advantage for his career. 15 Carl Friedrich Cramer (ed.): Magazin der Musik. Hamburg, 1783–1786. 16 See Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, pp. 34–35.

It was also through Cramer that Kunzen became acquainted with the Kapellmeister at the court theatre in Rheinsberg, Johann Abraham Peter Schulz (1747–1800), who was also to be of utmost significance throughout Kunzen’s career. In Ernst Ludwig Gerber’s (1746–1819) Neues historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler, Schulz describes his first meetings with Kunzen:

“Er studirte um 1784 in Kiel, und lebte viel mit dem Prof. Cramer, wo ich ihn persönlich kennen lernte und oft Gelegenheit hatte, sein fertiges Klavierspielen, schnelles Notenlesen, brillantes und geschmackvolles Fantasiren, seine gründlichen Einsichten in die Komposition, die er sich durch eigenen Fleiß erworben hatte, seine Ausarbeitungen mancherley Art, mit einem Worte, sein großes Genie zu bewundern.”17

(‘Around 1784 he studied in Kiel and spent a lot of time with Prof. Cramer, where I also became personally acquainted with him and often had the opportunity to admire his skilful piano playing, quick sight- reading of music, brilliant and tasteful fantasias, his deep insight in composition, which he had acquired through own assiduity, his elaborations of several kind, in other words, his great genius.’)

Encouraged by both Cramer and Schulz, Kunzen finally followed the call of his musical talent, and on Cramer’s advice he moved to Copenhagen in the late summer18 or October/November19 of 1784. The

17 Ernst Ludwig Gerber: Neues historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler, welches Nachrichten von dem Leben und den Werken musikalischer Schriftsteller, berühmter Komponisten, Sänger, Meister auf Instrumenten, kunstvoller Dilettanten, Musikverleger, auch Orgel- und Instrumentenmacher, älterer und neuerer Zeit, aus allen Nationen enthält. Leipzig, 1812–1814. Dritter Theil, K–R. 1813.col. 149–150. A first, but very short, biographical note about Kunzen is already to be found in Gerber’s first edition of his encyclopedia: Ernst Ludwig Gerber: Historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler…Leipzig, 1790–1792. Erster Theil, A–M, 1790. pp. 770–771. 18 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig AemiliusKunzen, p. 19. 19 Kunzen received a letter of recommendation dated October 2, 1784, from Knud Lyne Rahbek (1760–1830) to the famous actor at the Royal Danish Theatre in Copenhagen, Michael Rosing. One would assume that he moved to Copenhagen after Rahbek had given him the letter.

Danish Biographical Lexicon notes that Kunzen relocated “around Easter 1785”,20 which seems strange given that in October 1784 Kunzen had already received letters of recommendation from Knud Lyne Rahbek (1760–1830), who would later become a well-reputed writer and critic, and the poet Ole Johan Samsøe (1759–1796), to the famous actor at the Royal Danish Theatre in Copenhagen, Michael Rosing (1756–1818). In his memoirs, Rahbek writes that he and Samsøe shared a flat with Kunzen when they lived in Kiel, and regarded him as a friend.21 One would assume that Kunzen moved to Copenhagen shortly after he had received the letters. Also according to Sander and others, he arrived in Copenhagen in the autumn of 1784. Furthermore, Kunzen seems to have given a concert for the Danish king on 20 November 1784.22 The Riemann Musik Lexikon is also wrong about the year Kunzen moved to Copenhagen, dating it as 1783.23

Cramer knew Copenhagen very well and had many personal connections there. He had grown up in this city because his father had been preacher for the royal court in Copenhagen. Cramer’s many good contacts soon helped Kunzen to become part of the musical life of the capital, which for the most part took place in musical societies; the Royal Theatre had gone into decline over the previous decade and was in a mediocre artistic state. Count Ernst Heinrich von Schimmelmann’s (1747–1831) home and especially the family Brun’s

20 C.V. Ravn: Kunzen, Frederik Ludvig Æmilius. In: Dansk Biografisk Lexikon, p. 602. 21 Knud Lyne Rahbek: Erindringer af mit liv. Anden deel. Kjöbenhavn: Jens Hostrup Schultz, 1825. p. 56 and p. 101. 22 Torben Krogh: Zur Geschichte des dänischen Singspiels im 18. Jahrhundert. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaards Forlag, 1924, p. 210. Astonishingly, he is contradictory in his own book about Kunzen’s arrival in Copenhagen, dating it around Easter 1784. 23 Wilibald Gurlitt: Riemann Musik Lexikon. Zwölfte völlig neubearbeitete Auflage in drei Bänden. Mainz: B. Schott’s Söhne, 1959. Band 1, Personenteil A–K, p. 982.

19 soirées were the places to be,24 and Kunzen was very welcome to entertain at these private parties by playing the piano and presenting short compositions. Later he performed in the role of piano virtuoso at Det Harmoniske Selskab (‘The Harmonic Society’), the Drejerske Selskab (‘Drejer’s Society’) and made appearances at Kongens Club (‘The King’s Club’). The major society events were the concerts for the Aristocracy held at the Palais Schimmelmann, several of which Kunzen conducted. However, he had to spend the first few years in Copenhagen without permanent employment, mainly earning his keep by giving music lessons. But behind the superficially idyllic and harmonious life in the capital of the Kingdom of Denmark there lurked a very particular constellation of politics and intrigues, which had followed an era characterised by madness and Enlightenment under the rule of King Christian VII (1749–r.1766–1808). The events and their aftermath proved to have substantial influence on Kunzen’s path in life. Therefore, the following chapter will give a more detailed summary of the historical developments in Denmark during the second half of the eighteenth century. In this context, the role of the theatre is particularly interesting, being the trigger for one of the deepest and most spectacular disputes ever seen in the cultural life of the State of Denmark.

24 An overview of the musical life in Copenhagen, and the socio-political context, can be found in Anne Ørbæk Jensen: “Klubs, Gesellschaften und Salons: Das Kopenhagener Konzertleben 1760–1820”, in: Wahlverwandtschaften: zwei Jahrhunderte musikalischer Wechselwirkungen zwischen Dänemark und Deutschland, ed. Anne Ørbæk Jensen, Claus Røllum-Larsen, and Inger Sørensen. Copenhagen: Det Kongelige Bibliotek, 2004 (= Serie Göttinger Bibliotheksschriften, 28), chapter 1, pp. 9–16.

2.3. EXCURSUS: THE SULTAN OF DENMARK

Albeit an absolute monarchy, the country had actually long been ruled by powerful ministers, not least because of King Frederik V’s (1723– r.1746–1766) alcoholism, promiscuity and unrestrained behaviour. Crown Prince Christian therefore grew up in a claustrophobic universe peopled by these ministers, and saw himself kept in check by the manoeuvrings and power struggles of the ‘periwigs’, as he later used to call them. His stepmother, Juliane Marie of Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel (1729– 1796), was mainly concerned for her own son, Christian’s half-brother, Hereditary Prince Frederik (1753–1805). Christian had a particularly authoritarian chamberlain, Privy Councillor Count Ditlev Reventlow (1712–1783), who did not hold back in his frequent use of the cane, and a Swiss teacher named Elie Salomon François Reverdil (1732– 1808), of whom he was actually very fond. At an early age, young Christian showed a profound interest not only in theatre – he actually became fanatical about theatre after seeing a performance at the Royal Danish Theatre at the age of five25 – but also in literature, and indeed pornography as well. It is not known whether Christian saw a performance of Voltaire’s Zaïre between 1757 and 1764, when the production was in the repertoire every season at the Royal Theatre, but the play would later have great significance for him. On 14 January 1766, following his father’s death, Christian became king, and on 8 November he married Caroline Matilda (1751–1775), the sister of King George III (1738–r.1760–1820) of Great Britain and Ireland. They were soon blessed with the birth of Crown Prince Frederik (1768–1839). Their marriage, however, in no way prevented him from continuing his out-and-out promiscuity and his wassails.

25 Robert Neiiendam: “Kong Christian den Syvende som Skuespiller: Et Bidrag til Hoftheatrets Historie i dets tidligste Tid”, in: Historisk Tidsskrift 8/2 (1909– 1910), p. 308.

That same autumn he gave orders to build a theatre in the armoury above the stables at the Royal Palace of Christiansborg.26 On 29 December 1766, the young king ordered a performance of Zaïre for the very same evening – not the easiest task for the actors who had not performed the play for almost three years – and he watched it with great interest at the Royal Theatre. Christian’s particular interest in Zaïre was driven by his own ambition to perform the character of the enlightened Sultan Orosmane, and he spent the whole winter studying this role with his teacher, Reverdil. At first he performed only privately for a select few, but on 16 March, 1767, he made his debut in front of a larger audience.27 For this occasion, he chose to use a portable stage, which had been set up in the dining hall of Christiansborg castle. After the meeting of the State Council, thirty of the guests were invited to see the performance. Reverdil played Nerestan, clad in golden armour; Chatillion was dressed as a white knight and performed by Enevold Brandt (1738– 1772), later manager of the Court Theatre; and the ladies Madame de Gabel and Madame A.S. Bülow, as Zaïre and Fatime, were dressed in Turkish costume.28 Christian’s wife, Queen Caroline Matilda, was originally asked to play Fatime, but her head lady-in-waiting, Louise von Plessen, objected, arguing that unless she were to perform the title

26 The theatre was built in neo-classical style in pearl-grey and gold, with a balcony resting on twenty-two columns, boxes in the stalls, and an auditorium floor that could be raised to stage level for masquerade balls. The theatre was inaugurated on 29 January, 1767 – Christian’s eighteenth birthday – by a French theatre company. These acteurs, numbering not less than twenty-four, had arrived in Copenhagen just over a month earlier. A costly affair and certainly not one to please the ministers. The Hofteatret, as it is called – the Court Theatre – still exists, although considerably changed, and today houses the Theatre Museum. 27 B.[olle] W.[ilum] Luxdorph: Luxdorphs dagbøger; Indeholdende bidrag til det 18. aarhundredes stats-, kultur- og personalhistorie, ed. Eiler Nystrøm, vol. 2. Copenhagen: Gad, 1925–1930, p. 300. 28 Neiiendam: “Kong Christian den Syvende som Skuespiller”, pp. 318–321. In his article Neiiendam gives a very florid description of the interior and décor of the theatre. From invoices, accounts, memoranda, journals and other records in the Danish State Archives (Rigsarkivet), he meticulously reconstructed very valuable information. His technical descriptions are therefore most trustworthy. His characterisation of Christian VII as a man and his depiction of the king’s political views are, however, highly questionable.

22 role she should not participate at all.29 Sitting on a footstool behind the scenery was Henri de la Tour, the leading actor of the French troupe, prompting Christian who performed, like everyone else, in French. He played Orosmane again on 29 March, on 8 May and finally on 26 January, 1768; the latter performance was in public, at the Court Theatre. Christian as actor seems to have won over the audience, reaping much acclaim for his presentation.30 The performance on 8 May was again after a meeting of the State Council, but this time all the ministers and the most distinguished citizens of Copenhagen had been invited to attend the show. The whole scenario raises the question of whether it is possible to read something symbolic or orchestrated into this particular staging: A decision to put on a performance of Zaïre for this audience can only be seen in the light of Voltaire’s ideas. Moreover, it can only be seen against the backdrop of the prevailing political situation. The theatre will therefore always be the platform for the drama’s major interest, as Voltaire put it.31 In the present context, at least three elements need to be singled out: Firstly, there is no doubt that Christian had a great interest in the ideas of the Enlightenment. He declared himself an admirer of Voltaire and in 1766 he donated – as did a handful of other European regents – a substantial sum of money to Voltaire’s campaign in support of Jean Calas and Pierre-Paul Sirven, men who had been unjustly condemned for killing their own children. Voltaire wrote to thank Christian; the letter, dated 4 February 1767, full of praise for the king, was published in a Danish newspaper on 17 March – the day after Christian’s first

29 Ulrik Langen: Den afmægtige: En biografi om Christian 7. Copenhagen: Jyllands- Postens Forlag, 2009, p. 179. 30 Ibid, p. 180. 31 Voltaire’s words are: “Mœurs turques”, “mœurs chrétiennes” and “grands intérêts”.

23 appearance as Sultan Orosmane.32 However, this might simply be a coincidence. The king’s interest in the ideas of the Enlightenment is also reflected in his meetings with d’Alembert, Diderot and other figures in the movement in Paris in 1768. Some argue that it was Christian’s teacher, Reverdil, who had been a ‘Voltairian’ and had turned the King into a freethinker –Reverdil, however, denied this in his memoirs. The second element is that, now Christian had become the sovereign, he could feel that he actually would be in a position to have some impact on the political and ideological future of his kingdom. The third, and by no means least, element is that he was mad – or, to put it another way, that he showed symptoms which would today probably be diagnosed as Hebephrenic Schizophrenia, also called ‘Youth Madness’. The most common trigger for this illness is known to be stress and anxiety. In recent years there has been much discussion in Denmark about the actual nature of Christian VII’s ailment and the degree to which his mental health problems influenced his actions. The many diverging statements made by his contemporaries make it indeed very difficult to come to a clear conclusion. Foreign or independent observers often see Christian and his abilities differently to the views held by many Danish eyewitnesses. For example, the meticulous comparison of letters, statements and reports made by William F. Reddaway in the English Historical Review, 1916, draws a positive picture of him throughout. Here the British diplomatic representatives at Copenhagen, Titley, Cosby and Gunning, report “the masterly ease and dignity with which he expressed his sentiments”. According to Titley, Christian “discovers the greatest Humanity and Goodness of Disposition and is also distinguished by a most lively Understanding, which has been carefully

32 Kiøbenhavns kongelige allene privilegerede Adresse-Contoirs Efterretninger, 9te Aargang, N.41 (1767), Tirsdagen den 17. Martii, col. 1–2.

24 cultivated in a Noble, Rational Way”. Titley adds solidity of understanding, diffidence, temperance, diligence, and independence to his list of the king’s qualities, while the cooler Gunning was “impressed by the ability and discernment of the young king”.33 And the envoy Titley later goes even further, reporting

“that this Prince, who discovers good Sense, right Judgment and greatness of Mind to a surprising degree for One so Young, seems resolved to be thoroughly Master of his Affairs, and to decide upon them finally Himself; tho’ to chuse [sic] the best Counsellors and follow the best Counsel, He says, shall be His constant Endeavour.”34

It is interesting that those who argued (and still argue) that Christian VII was unstable and easy to influence due to his illness, in the main seem to use this argument in support of those who stood in opposition to him – and who succeeded in conveying this picture of the king. Historiography can be a question of perspective and a matter of power. The outcome of this ‘image’ has been, until recently, a version of Christian as ‘the mad king’ who spent most of his time indulging in debauchery, and the startling political developments in Denmark around 1770 have been seen as the heinous ploy of his personal physician – what’s more: a German. When in 1768 the Danish King was on his eight-month-long tour to Paris and London, via Hannover, he appointed a travelling – and later personal – physician, Johann Friedrich Struensee (1737–1772), who very quickly became not only Christian’s most trusted adviser, but also the leading politician in the Kingdom of Denmark between 1770 and 1772. Struensee was practically ruling the country and held more or less absolute power during a period of ten months, in which he issued more than one thousand cabinet orders, or more than three a day,

33 William F. Reddaway: “King Christian VII”, in: The English Historical Review 31 (1916), p. 62. 34 Ibid, p. 63.

25 thereby implementing Europe’s most radical reforms in the spirit of the Enlightenment. This restructuring included university reforms, religious equality, the abolition of capital punishment for theft, a ban on the use of torture in judicial processes and, most exceptional for the time, on 4 September 1770, he introduced unlimited freedom of the press in Denmark and the abolition of all censorship. Due to the uniqueness of this latter document, signed by Christian VII and addressed to the Danish chancellery, it is brought here in its full and original wording:

Wir ſind des völligen Dafürhaltens, daß es der unpartheÿiſchen Unterſuchung der | Wahrheit eben ſo nachtheilig, als der Entdeckung verjährter Irrthümer und Vorurtheile | hinderlich iſt, wenn redlich geſinnete, um das allgemeine Wohl und wahre Beſte ihrer | Mitbürger beeÿferte Patrioten, durch Anſehen, Befehle und vorgefaßte Meinungen ab | geſchreckt und behindert werden, nach Einſicht, Gewiſſen und Überzeugung freÿ zu ſchre[i]|ben, Mißbräuche anzugreifen und Vorurtheile aufzudecken. Und da Wir in dieſem | Betracht, nach reifer Überlegung beſchloßen haben, in Unſern Reichen und Landen über|haupt eine uneingeſchränkte Freÿheit der Preße ſolchergeſtalt zu geſtatten, daß von nun | an Niemand ſchuldig und verbunden ſeÿn ſoll, ſeine Bücher und Schriften, die er dem | Druck übergeben will, der bishero verordnet geweſenen Censur und Approbation | zu unterwerfen, und ſolche des Endes beÿ denjenigen, denen dieſes Geſchäfte bis anhero | aufgetragen geweſen iſt, zur Durchſicht einzuliefern; ſo haben Wir Unſerer Däni|ſchen Kanzelleÿ dieſen Unſern Willen, in Abſicht auf Unſere Königreiche hiedurch in | Gnaden eröfnen [sic] und bekannt machen wollen. Gegeben Friedrichsberg, d. 4ten |Septbr, 1770. |

Christian

1770 4/9

B. 40.

An UnſereDäniſcheKanzelleÿ ASchumacher/35

(We are fully convinced that it is as harmful to the impartial search for truth as it is to the discovery of obsolete errors and prejudices, if upright patriots, zealous for the common good and what is genuinely best for their fellow citizens, because they are frightened by reputation, orders, and preconceived opinions, are hindered from being free to write according to their insight, conscience, and conviction, attacking abuses and uncovering prejudices. And thus in this regard, after ripe consideration, we have decided to permit in our kingdoms and lands in general an unlimited freedom of the press of such a form, that from now on no one shall be required and obliged to submit books and writings that he wants to bring to the press to the previously required censorship and approval, and thus to submit them to the control of those who have undertaken the business until now of inspecting them; so have we graciously revealed and made known this our will concerning our kingdoms to our Danish Chancellery.

Given at Friedrichsberg, the 4 September 1770. Christian.)36

35 Transcript from a photo of the original document. Source: Rigsarkivet, Danske Kancelli, E2. Samlingafkabinetsordrer, 1768–1778. The author of this diploma thesis would cordially like to thank the Don Juan Archiv Wien for their help with this transcript. 36 John Christian Laursen: “David Hume and the Danish Debate about Freedom of the Press in the 1770s”, in: Journal of the History of Ideas 59/1 (1998), p. 168.

Cabinet order from 4 September 1770, signed by King Christian VII. Rigsarkivet (Danish State Archive), Danske Kancelli, E2. Samling af kabinetsordrer, 1768–1778.

The Annual Register, or a View of the History, Politics and Literature for the Year 1770, published in London in 1771, comments on this:

“Several quick and unexpected revolutions, have taken place this year in the Danish ministry. The King continues the same patriotic conduct towards his people, which has hitherto distinguished his reign; as a new proof of which, as well as of his disposition to the encouragement of arts, sciences, and learning, he has this year freed the press from all restraints, and by a rescript dated at the castle Hirscholm, exempts all Books published in his dominions from any kind of censure.”37

The declaration about the freedom of press prompted another letter from Voltaire to Christian, dated 15 January 1771, containing an epistle of 179 lines of verse, full of praise for the king. Christian’s declaration must have been a dream come true for Voltaire. Struensee’s position was such that he would probably have been able to exploit Christian’s sporadic passivity due to illness to implement his own political ideas and shape them in the way he chose. But another conclusion might well be that Christian was well aware of his own lack of power to instigate radical political changes – that in Struensee he had found an associate who not only shared his ideals, but who also had all the personal attributes to accomplish them. And maybe in Struensee he saw a parallel to all the attributes of Sultan Orosmane of Jerusalem in Voltaire’s play Zaïre – many of which King Christian VII of Denmark did not possess himself.

Early in the morning of 17 January 1772 – the day after the season’s first masquerade ball had been held at the Court Theatre – Count Struensee, theatre manager and chamberlain Enevold Brandt, and Queen Caroline Matilda were arrested in their respective bedrooms and

37 The Annual Register or a View of the History, Politics and Literature for the Year 1770, 2nd ed. London: Printed for J. Dodley, in Pall-Mall, 1774, p. 44. Source: London, British Library.

29 taken to prison. In a coup d’état, with Christian’s stepmother Juliane Marie and half-brother Frederik at the centre, Struensee was overthrown, accused of lèse-majesté and usurpation of the royal authority. Indeed, he had conducted an intimate affair with the queen, probably even had a child with her – seemingly with the acceptance of the king. First imprisoned at Kronborg Castle, the queen was later expelled to Celle in Germany, where she died a few years later. Struensee and Brandt were executed at a huge public spectacle on 28 April 1772, following an old Danish law: first their right hands were cut off and then they were beheaded; their bodies were quartered, disembowled, and finally their limbs publicly displayed, skewered on poles and bound to wheels. Hereditary Prince Frederik was deployed as regent instead of his half-brother Christian, but Juliane Marie was de facto ruler. King Christian VII no longer had any influence on the events in his country; he was kept in isolation at a castle outside Copenhagen and suffered increasingly from his illness. Less than a year after Struensee’s execution many of his reforms were abrogated, with the freedom of the press restricted and censorship reintroduced. The arts, in particular the theatre, were neglected and gradually went into decline. Moreover, many supporters of Enlightenment ideas were removed from office. The mastermind behind the coup d’état was Ove Høegh-Guldberg (1731–1808). Born into a very humble family in Jutland, patrons helped him get an education, and after employment as professor eloqventiæ at the respected Sorø Akademi he became the private teacher of Christian’s half-brother Frederik. His extremely conservative and national-patriotic stance, coupled with an almost fundamentalist theology, had been in forthright opposition to Struensee, after whose fall Høegh-Guldberg became the most powerful man in the country – rolling back many of the Enlightenment achievements. Furthermore, he persistently tried to repress all German influence in the kingdom and was the motivating force behind the so-called “indfødsretsloven”

(in German ‘Indigenatsrecht’ or English ‘Law of Indigenous Rights’) in 1776, whereby only people born in the King’s dominions could assume public office. Officially this measure had been taken to unite the peoples of Denmark, Norway and Holstein, who were all under the Danish crown at the time. In other words, there was actually a difference between the inhabitants of Holstein and the ‘real’ Germans. It was a very popular edict, albeit one which, rather than uniting the Danes and the Germans, fuelled the patriotic Danish approach and anti-German mood in the country. The edict left its mark for the next century – possibly even until today. The consequences of all this, Kunzen would soon have to experience. Incidentally, at the time, Høegh-Guldberg was also a member of the commission for “bedre Indretning af de kongelige Skuespil” (‘improved organisation of the Royal Theatre’). The consequences are reflected in the repertoire, and they were certainly not an improvement,38 after theatre-enthusiast Christian VII had been disempowered. While Christian still had cultural influence, Copenhagen had been able to offer grand Italian opera, a French theatre troupe at the Court Theatre, as well as Danish, German and French plays and Singspiele. Guldberg’s theatre commission dismissed the Italians and French in 1773, and in 1775 Giuseppe Sarti (1729–1802), Kapellmeister at the Royal Theatre, also had to leave the country. The year Kunzen relocated to Copenhagen there was yet another coup: the almost unlimited power of Høegh-Guldberg had led to great discontent among many members of the State Council; when sixteen- year-old Crown Prince Frederik attended his first Council meeting on 14 April 1784, he had secured himself the signature of his father on an

38 A complete list of all performances can be found in Arthur Aumont and Edgar Collin: Det Danske Nationalteater 1748–1889. En statistisk fremstilling af Det Kongelige Teaters historie fra skuepladsens aabning paa kongens nytorv 18. december 1748 til udgangen af sæsonen 1888–89. Copenhagen: J. Jørgensen & Co., 1896.

31 according edict and immediately dismissed the entire Council. All edicts now had to be signed by both the king and Crown Prince Frederik. Høegh-Guldberg was sent to Jutland and Frederik became Prince Regent. He was soon to readopt many of the reforms that had been made in the spirit of the Enlightenment, and over the next decade he introduced many new, groundbreaking reforms. The aforementioned Count Ernst Heinrich von Schimmelmann, who had been dismissed by Høegh-Guldberg and took part in Frederik’s coup, was rehabilitated and became minister of finance. Likewise, Andreas Peter, Count von Bernstorff (1735–1797), who had fallen out with the Guldberg regime – not at least because of the ‘indfødsretsloven’ – returned to his former post as minister of foreign affairs. Interestingly, Schimmelmann was born in Dresden; his father, Heinrich Carl von Schimmelmann (1724–1782), a very successful businessman of Prussian origin, had established connections to the Danish Court as late as 1760, and within a few years he had become one of the most powerful people in Denmark due to his financial skills and his enormous wealth. Bernstorff was born in Hanover to Hanoverian gentry and had come to Denmark at the suggestion of his uncle Johann Hartwig Ernst Count von Bernstorff (1712–1772), who had held the post of minister of foreign affairs from 1751 to 1770. Bringing ‘Germans’ back into some of the most influential posts in the country was not to the liking of Danish patriots. A substantial segment of the establishment still took an aloof approach to them, suspicion still simmered under the surface and the ‘right of the native-born’ was not abolished, nor was it to be abolished. Only King Christian, or rather the Prince Regent and the royal family were not necessarily bound by these guidelines – and thus the world of art was to some degree exempted from the regulation. Ultimately, the regent of the day was the final approving authority for all appointments at the Royal Danish Theatre.

2.4. HOLGER DANSKE

Being a virtuoso on the piano, and being quick to improvise the right music at the right time, Kunzen had considerable success in the various musical societies and clubs and therewith in the overall musical life of Copenhagen; however, he had to earn his living by copying music.39 Once in a while a musician would be rewarded with a little gift for providing entertainment – an actual fee for his service or diversion was not common. However, in the autumn of 1785 he was asked to compose the music for a mourning cantata, to a text Knud Lyne Rahbek had written in memory of Count Otto Thott (1703–1785), and this commission was soon followed by compositions for New Year’s Eve 1786 and the wedding of Crown Princess Louise Augusta (1771– 1843) with Frederick Christian II, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein- Sonderburg-Augustenburg (1765–1814). J.A.P. Schulz had composed chorales to Racine’s Athalie, which were to be presented before the assembled high society of Copenhagen on 1 January 1787 in the Palais of Count Schimmelmann, and it was Kunzen who both arranged and conducted it. The performance was an overwhelming success, and later repeated a few times, but it was Schulz who reaped the glory. Kunzen had indirectly been made responsible for some of the ‘Danes’ not being invited to this event hosted by the ‘Germans’ Schimmelmann and Bernstorff. And Kunzen also seems to have dropped a clanger in the preamble to his song cycle Viser og lyriske Sange (1787) (‘Ballads and Lyrical Songs’).40 He wanted to express his gratitude to the country by setting

39 V.C. Ravn: Koncerter og musikalske Selskaber i Ældre Tid. Festskrift i Anledning af Musikforeningens Halvhundredaarsdag. København, 1886. p. 94. 40 Viser og Lyriske Sangesatte i Musik af Frederik Ludevig Æmilius Kunzen. Kiöbenhavn. Trykt hos August Friderich Stein.[1786]. 80 p. He even wrote his

original Danish poems to music. Rahbek contributed several texts and helped to bring together poems by a few other Danish writers. However, Kunzen’s well-meant effort backfired. It was not for a German to write that he is one of the first to try to capture the true nature of the poems in music and to spread the canto amongst the people – nor that it was his aim to achieve something similar to what J.A.P. Schulz had done with his Lieder im Volkston (1782) (‘Songs in a folk tone’).41 In a letter to his fatherly friend, Heinrich Wilhelm von Gerstenberg (1737–1823), dated 16 June 1787, Kunzen writes:

“Meine dän. Lieder dedicierte ich der Cronprincessin, und ließ sie ihr sauber eingebunden, übergeben; man hat mir aber kein gut Wort dafür gesagt; im Gegenteil haben einige so genannte Kenner bey Hofe sich weidlich über das Ende meiner Vorrede aufgehalten, und zeigen dadurch daß sie mich nicht einmal verstanden haben.”42

(‘My Danish songs I dedicated to the crown-princess, nicely covered, I had it consigned to her; I had not one good word for it. Quite the opposite, some of the so-called experts at the court had quite held forth about it, and thereby showed that they did not even understand me.’)

The year 1787 soon brought another twist for him. Not because he became a Freemason that year – in the ‘Lodge of the Three Wise Men from the Orient’ – but because Johann Gottlieb Naumann (1741– 1801), who had arrived in Copenhagen the year before to re-organise the Royal Danish Orchestra,43 suggested making a new position of ‘first accompanist’ – a job for which Kunzen was a more than eligible candidate.

name in the Danish style – showing just how much he was willing to take on board for the country. 41 Lieder im Volkston, bey dem Klavier zu singen, von J. A. P. Schulz. Berlin: George Jakob Decker, 1782. 47 p. 42 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. p. 64. 43 It is seldom mentioned that Det kongelige kapel (the Royal Danish Orchestra), which was founded in 1448 and still exists today, is most likely the oldest orchestra in the world.

But Lord Chamberlain and manager of the Royal Theatre, Christian Frederik Numsen (1741–1811), was not at all in favour of Kunzen. Kunzen even reports his dealings with Numsen to have been hostile.44 In a letter he wrote to the king, Numsen even admitted that he disliked Kunzen45 and he found all possible arguments to prevent him getting the job. He wanted to appoint Hardenack Otto Conrad Zinck (1746– 1832), a flautist at the court in Ludwigslust – one of his arguments being that Zinck was His Majesty’s own subject. (Zinck was from Husum, Holstein, while Kunzen was born in Lübeck). The king had little choice: it had to be Zinck. Despite this unquestionably major setback, Kunzen stayed in Copenhagen, although he had no prospect of a fixed salary or position in this city. He would probably have left had not another development caused him to hesitate. Naumann decided not to stay in Copenhagen, and so Numsen had to find another suitable candidate to take over the job as Hofkapellmeister at the Royal Theatre. This he found in the person of Johann Abraham Peter Schulz, who was at the time Kapellmeister in Rheinsberg at the court of Friedrich II’s brother, Prince Friedrich Heinrich Ludwig von Preußen (1726–1802). Not being an appending ‘German’ either, Schulz was though well connected in Copenhagen and very well aware of what was necessary:

“Es war seit jeher […] mein Bestreben, Männer, die durch ihre Geistesprodukte die Zierde und Lichter der Nation sind, kennenzulernen und ihren Umgang zu suchen. Bis jetzt waren es Deutsche, weil ich in Deutschland ein Deutscher war; nun werden es Dänen seyn, weil ich in Dännemark, ein Däne zu werden, mich eifrigst angelegen seynlaßen werde.”46

44 Krogh: Zur Geschichte des dänischen Singspiels im 18. Jahrhundert. p. 226. 45 Børge Friis: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. Sein Leben und Werk. I. Teil: Bis zur Oper Holger Danske (1789). Diss. Copenhagen 1943. 194 p. p. 75. 46 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. p. 56.

(‘It has always been my aspiration to get to know and to consort with men who are, due to their originality of thought, the pride and radiance of their nation. Until now it was Germans, because I was a German in Germany; now it will be Danes, because I shall diligently strive to become a Dane in Denmark.’)

With his mentor as the new Hofkapellmeister at the Royal Danish Theatre in Copenhagen, Kunzen had slightly better prospects; just as he was about to head for Germany, Schulz managed to give him the opportunity to demonstrate his abilities as a composer.

Kunzen had earlier shown interest in dramatic works. While in Kiel he had already started to compose music for Shakespeare’s Anthony and Cleopatra and Klopstock’s Hermann und die Fürsten (‘Hermann and the Princes’), and in Copenhagen for Levin Christian Sander’s German translation of Johannes Ewald’s (1743–1781) Fiskerne (‘The Fishermen’), a Singspiel about which Sanders reports in his obituary of Kunzen:

“I Aaret 1784–1785 digtede vor Kunzen en malerisk og rig Musik til Sanders Fortydskning af Evalds Fiskerne, et Værk, der siden blev bestemt til Opførelse i Berlin, da Frederik den Andens Død forhindrede dette, som saa meget Andet. […] Den aldrig bekjendtgjorte Partitur findes blandt hans efterladte papirer: og da Oversættelsen i de fleste Sangdigte har beholdt Originalens rhytmiske Former, kunde Meget af Musiken endog bruges paa vor Skueplads. Kunzen selv har aldrig tilladt det, fordi han ikke vilde ansees for en Mand, der kunde støde en ældre Kunstner til Side.”47

(‘In the year 1784–1785 Kunzen composed painterly and rich music to Sander’s German translation of Ewald’s The Fishermen, a work that was later to have been performed in Berlin, but the death of Frederick the Second prevented this, as so much else. […] The unpublished score

47 Sander: Nekrolog 1817. p. VI.

is amongst his literary remains: and given that the translation of many of the songs has retained the rhythmic forms of the original, most of the music could be used in our theatre. Kunzen himself would never allow that, because he did not want to be seen as a man who would push an older artist aside.’)

Ewald’s work had already been performed with success in 1780, with music by Johann Ernst Hartmann (1726–1793). Kunzen’s reluctance was, therefore, in a way understandable, but Sander’s description also shows his inability to promote himself – on the contrary, he often seems to have hidden his light under a bushel, as Cramer also remarked on several occasions.

Schulz focussed on the popular Singspiel with its lightness of touch and easy approach. The ‘grand’ opera he left to others – to Kunzen, and to another young and promising talent, the author Jens Immanuel Baggesen (1764–1826). Coming from a poor family in the town of Korsør, Baggesen showed talent at school and later studied at the University of Copenhagen. He made the acquaintance of the aforementioned Prince Frederick Christian II, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg, whose financial assistance enabled him to devote himself to writing. An early success with Komiske Fortællinger (‘Comic Tales’) made him popular and well known, and his contributions to Minerva, a new journal set up by Rahbek and Christen Henriksen Pram (1756–1821), opened up for the best circles in town. It was in the homes of the Schimmelmanns, Bernstorffs or the Bruns that Baggesen became acquainted with Kunzen. For some, though, it seemed that this most talented of young Danish poets was mingling perhaps a little too much with the German aristocracy. It was probably at the legendary soirées held by Friederike Sophie Christiane Brun (1765–1835) in Brun’s palaces (in winter in their

mansion on Bredgade, central Copenhagen, in summer at Sophienholm, just outside the city) that these two talented men discussed what would later be acknowledged as the first Danish ‘national opera’. The young enthusiast Baggesen started out modestly with plans for an opera trilogy, as he later described:

“Min hele Trias af Planer til musikalske Dramer var allerede tidlig medeelt Kuntzen, Trylleharpen nemlig, Holger Danske, og Erik Eiegod for at udføre den allerede dengang af mig kiendte Sulzerske Idee om, hvordan en Oper bør være – paa tre forskiellige Maader – da salig Kapelmester Schulz kom hertil Kiøbenhavn, og Bekiendtskabet med ham og hans Compositioner giorde mig til lidenskabeligt Ønske, ogsaa engang at faae en Oper sat i Musik af ham.”48

(‘My whole trilogy of plans for musical dramas was told to Kuntzen early on, that is The Magic Harp, Holger Danske and Erik Eiegod, in order to carry out the Sulzerian idea, with which I was already familiar, about how opera should be – in three different ways – when blessed Kapellmeister Schulz came here to Copenhagen, and acquaintance with him and his compositions made me passionately wish one day also to have an opera composed by him.’)

He goes on to report that Kunzen was most interested in Holger Danske (‘Holger the Dane’, also called ‘Ogier the Dane’) – probably not least because there were dances in the story, elves, a supernatural element and other ingredients providing plenty of scope for a composer. They worked together on the opera, at the same time albeit in different places not far from one other. This was highly significant as it gave Kunzen the opportunity to have direct influence on the form and content of the libretto.

48 J.I. Baggesen: Trylleharpens Historie med Procedure i Sagen Justitsr. og Prof. Jens Imm. Baggesen contra Stud. Ped. Hiorth og Dom i Kgl. Lands- Over-, samt Hof- og Stadsret i Kiøbenhavn 25. Mai 1818. Kbh.: 1818. 290 p. p. 251.

Baggesen’s libretto for Holger Danske49 was based on Christoph Martin Wieland’s (1733–1813) heroic verse romance Oberon (1780). In his libretto Baggesen replaced Huon de Bordeaux with the legendary Danish hero Holger Danske (Ogier de Danemarche, or Ogier the Dane). This was in many ways an important, and actually well-thought-out, change to Wieland’s original – although that was not an opinion shared by everyone. Ogier the Dane appears for the first time in the Old French chanson de geste, in the cycle of poems Geste de Doon de Mayence. According to legend, he was the son of Geoffrey (the historical Gudfred), king of Denmark. In the thirteenth-century song Les enfances Ogier Ogier is portrayed as an honest knight in Charlemagne’s service, who at the end of the song leads the Franconian troops to victory against the Saracens. In the song La chevaleried’Ogier de Danemarche (‘The chivalry of Ogier of Denmark’), also from the early thirteenth century, Ogier had a son who was slain by Charlot, the son of Charlemagne. Seeking revenge, he sought out and slew Charlot, and was only just prevented from killing Charlemagne himself. He withstood Charlemagne for seven years, but finally made peace in order to fight alongside him against the Saracens, in which battle he felled the giant Brehus. There seems to be some historical background to the tale, as around the year 800, while Charlemagne’s empire was at its peak, the Danish king Godfred successfully waged war for many years against Frankish expansion into Frisia and Schleswig. After a long stalemate, peace was finally declared between the two rulers. In another song, Ogier is the son of the Danish king Gudfred and is handed over to Charlemagne as a hostage for peace. When Gudfred breaches the peace, Ogier is to be killed, but the ladies at Charlemagne’s court plead passionately for his life. Because of La

49 Jens Baggesen: Holger Danske. Opera i tre Acter, sat i Musik af Hr. F. L. Æm. Kunzen, ved Jens Baggesen. Trykt hos Johan Frederik Schulz, Universitets- Bogtrykker. Kiøbenhavn, 1789. 86 p.

39 chanson de Roland (‘The song of Roland’), Ogier is also a well-known hero in the traditional puppet theatre of Sicily. In Nordic literature, Holger Danske makes his first appearance in the thirteenth century in the Karlemagnús Saga (‘The Saga of Charlemagne’) under the name Oddgeir danski. Baggesen based his Holger character for the most part on Kong Olger Danskis Krønicke (‘King Holger the Dane’s Chronicle’), which Christjern Pedersen had published in 1534 in Malmø, and which was popular reading up until the nineteenth century. Of Huon de Bordeaux and Holger, Baggesen stated that

“at de efter Fabelen begge have været Riddere i Karls Tieneste, begge dræbt hans uværdige Søn, begge haft at bestille med Tyrker, og især – begge været dydige, uforskrækkede Helte.”50

(‘in the tale they have both been knights in Charlemagne’s service, both killed his unworthy son, both had dealings with the Turks, and, above all, both have been virtuous, dauntless heroes.’)

In his libretto, Baggesen disregarded Wieland’s demands on the hero to behead Langulaffer and to pull out some of the sultan’s teeth. In the preface to the libretto he writes,

“Man vil uden Tvivl tilgive mig, at jeg har sparet Sultanen sine Tænder, og Langulaffer sit Hoved, da det er saa en egen Sag, at miste sligt paa Skuepladsen.”51

(‘I will doubtless be pardoned for having spared the sultan his teeth and Langulaffer his head, as it is quite a matter to lose these things on a stage.’)

50 Baggesen: Holger Danske. Preface. 51 Ibid.

This ‘Turkish’ element in the story was certainly to the liking of Kunzen as it gave him the opportunity to insert some of the, at the time, very popular ‘alla turca’ music. ‘Turks’ and ‘Moors’ were not unknown on the Danish stage. At the Royal Theatre, for example, Charles-Simon Favart’s (1710–1792) and Giuseppe Sarti’s (1729–1802) Soliman den Anden (‘Soliman the Second’) had been continually in the repertoire since 1770, and André E. M. Grétry’s (1741–1813) opera buffa De to Gjerrige (orig. Les deux avares, ‘The Two Misers’) since 1774. (De to Gjerrige was performed at both the Court Theatre and the Royal Theatre.) Voltaire’s Zaïre had already premiered in 1757 – and, as reported above, it had even been performed by the king himself – and also a number of other plays and ballets with Turkish themes, such as Vincenzo Galeotti’s (1733–1816) Den ædelmodige Tyrk (‘The Magnanimous Turk’, 1779), had regularly been staged.52 The political, religious and social implications, as well as the perception of ‘Turks’ and ‘Moors’ on the Danish stage, is a very interesting subject, as earlier described in the passage about Voltaire’s Zaïre. For Kunzen, however, there were other far more relevant political and artistic implications to the theatrical representation of Turks and Moors. One of Schulz’ duties as Kapellmeister was to produce an opera every year for the birthday of King Christian VII, on 30 January. Having no Danish text he could use for this purpose, in his first season he put Naumann’s Cora on stage, a work which had earlier been shown in Stockholm and had now been translated into Danish by Thomas Thaarup (1749–1821). Schulz faced the same problem the following year, as the libretto Thaarup had promised to write, was not delivered. Therefore, he chose to put on Aline, Dronning af Golconda (‘Aline, Queen of Golconda’), an opera he had composed a few years earlier for Rheinsberg, in Thaarup’s Danish translation.53 Apart from these two

52 See Aumont and Collin: Det Danske Nationalteater 1748–1889. 53 Børge Friis: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. p. 106.

productions, only two other ‘grosse Opern’ had been staged since Hartmann’s Fiskerne in 1780, Salieri’s Armida in 1781 and Naumann’s Orpheus og Eurydike in 1786. This also reflects the general mood and preferences of the art lovers and literati in Denmark: spoken drama or Singspiele, preferably in Danish or at least translated from French originals. Another new and expensive opera project was therefore not a particularly welcome venture to many of them; very early in the process, opponents of the forthcoming opera began to sharpen their knives, before they even really knew what it was going to be about:54

“The story takes place at the time of the Emperor Charlemagne, and is set in the Lebanon and the cities of Baghdad and Tunis. Oberon, the king of the Fairies, has quarrelled with Titania, Queen of the Sylphs. Their reconciliation and reunion depend on an almost insoluble dilemma: first they must find a human couple who love each other so much that they will still remain true to one another in situations of the most extreme peril and temptation. Oberon and Titania have sealed this pact with an oath. Their painful separation has now been centuries long, yet even they must obey the laws of fate. However, the human couple that will be their salvation is about to materialise: Holger, a young prince of Denmark, a knight in the service of the Emperor Charlemagne, and Rezia, the daughter of the Sultan Buurman in Baghdad. And the providence that rules the wonderland of fairytale is to bring these so distant human beings together. Holger the Dane has killed – in self-defence – a son of Charlemagne, and to atone for the deed he must undertake a senseless and dangerous quest: to cut a lock from the Sultan of Baghdad’s beard and to kiss his daughter, Rezia, in full view of everyone.

54 The synopsis is based on the version printed in the booklet accompanying the first and only recording of Holger Danske: Danish National Radio Symphony Orchestra and Choir, conductor Thomas Dausgaard, Dacapo Records, Cat. No. 8.224036-37, 1995. However, there have been made a few changes and additions where it was found appropriate, and corrections where necessary.

ACT I

Night scene in a rocky wasteland. Full of longing, Oberon calls to Titania, but his lament is answered only by the echo of his own voice. The second scene takes place in thunder and lightning in a palm and cedar wood in the Lebanon, where Holger the Dane and his squire Kerasmin have got lost on their way to Baghdad. To allay his fear of ghosts, and above all of Oberon, Kerasmin sings a ballad. Aroused by the beautiful music, Oberon appears. He touches Holger with his lily staff. A choir of invisible fairies is heard, commenting on the events. The King of the Fairies promises assistance to Holger and gives him his horn, the magic power of which can make all his opponents start dancing ecstatically. If blown vigorously in dangerous situations, the horn will make Oberon himself appear. Before he hands over the horn, the magic is tried out on Kerasmin – as punishment for his hard words about Oberon – who has to dance until he collapses (Scene 3). As a kind of compensation, Kerasmin receives an ‘un-empty-able’ drinking beaker from Oberon, who then disappears. With renewed strength, Holger and Kerasmin journey on to Babylon (Scene 4). Scene 5 takes us to the bedroom of Princess Rezia: morning is breaking; today Rezia must marry the abhorred Langulaffer, the Prince of the Lebanon, but she awakes from a dream in which Holger has appeared before her as her true bridegroom. She anticipates the day with fear and foreboding.

ACT II

Palace of Buurman. In a large and splendid hall people sing and dance and pay homage to the sultan (Scene 1). The mufti starts the marriage ceremony (Scene 2). The sudden appearance of Holger, accompanied by Kerasmin, interrupts the festivities (Scene 3). In Rezia Holger recognizes the figure who has also appeared to him in a dream. Langulaffer too is someone he has met before – Holger once saved him from a fierce lion. But Langulaffer rewarded Holger shamefully for this brave deed by offering him a poisoned drink. Holger and Rezia declare their love, and as Holger blissfully embraces Rezia, the angry sultan draws his sword and falls upon him. Just in time, loyal Kerasmin

43 blows the magic horn and forces the whole indignant company – guards and dervishes, harem eunuchs and viziers – to engage in an involuntary, ecstatic dance. One after the other, they gradually sink exhausted to the floor (Scenes 3 – 5). Holger takes the opportunity to snatch a lock from the sultan’s beard (Scene 6). Langulaffer, who has just returned, attacks him from behind with a dagger. Kerasmin is on the alert and again sounds Oberon’s horn. The King of the Fairies appears and chases away the whole court. The suffering and ordeals imposed on the young couple are, however, far from over (Scene 7). In the interlude, Holger and Rezia – aware that they are meant for one another – board a ship that is to take them to Europe. A storm blows them to the coast of Tunis, where they are shipwrecked and, although saved from death, sold by pirates as slaves to the court of Sultan Bobul.

ACT III

Act III takes us back to the nocturnal setting of the introduction. In thunder and lightning, the lonely Titania now laments her separation from Oberon (Scene 1). Three sylphs tell her of the fate of Holger and Rezia. Titania wishes the couple courage and strength (Scene 2). The next scene is in the garden of the Sultana Almansaris. She is waiting in her pavilion for Holger, who has to work at her court as the gardener Hassan. With all her womanly wiles and enchanting “zither” playing, she tries to seduce Holger. But he loves only his Rezia and coldly rejects Almansaris (Scenes 3 – 5). Beside herself with anger, Almansaris calls the guards to take Holger to be burned at the stake; but this only makes her love pangs worse (Scene 6). Meanwhile Rezia, now the slave girl Palmine in the sultan’s harem, pleads with the ruler, sitting on his baldachin-throne, to pardon Holger. The sultan desires Rezia. But she too remains constant to her Holger. She would rather suffer death in the flames with her beloved than yield to Bobul (Scene 7). Holger languishes in a dark dungeon and calls longingly for his Rezia (Scene 8). Almansaris makes a last attempt to win Holger. She throws herself at his feet, promises him the sultan’s death – and his

44 throne. But Holger again resists seduction (Scenes 9 and 10). The scene changes to a large square in Tunis. Holger and Rezia have been chained to the stake, together; they are about to die. People hurry to the scene from all directions (Scene 11). As slaves kindle the fire, there is a fearsome bang: the fire and stake have disappeared, Holger and Rezia are free, Oberon and Titania appear, as does Kerasmin. Holger has the horn again. He once more forces all his opponents to dance themselves into helplessness; Oberon and Titania then chase them away. The Fairy King and Queen have reunited Holger and Rezia; in return, the human couple, by the example of their self-sacrificing love, have redeemed Oberon and Titania. Holger and Rezia are now crowned with myrtle wreaths. Fairies and sylphs join in a song of joy as the opera draws to its close.”

Jens Baggesen: Holger Danske. Opera i tre Acter, sat i Musik af Hr. F. L. Æm. Kunzen, ved Jens Baggesen. Kiøbenhavn, 1789. Trykt hos Johan Frederik Schulz, Universitets-Bogtrykker. 8°. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek, 86 p. Frontispiece.

When reading the libretto, one is struck by its quality of developing the events through plot and images, rather than by dialogue and narration. It is therefore perfectly suitable for a rich and colourful musical composition and a very good example of an ideal textbook concept for a music drama. Furthermore, the story of Holger Danske is accompanied by a very distinct musical element, Oberon’s Magic Horn, which is exemplarily used for the dramaturgy of the opera.

The orchestra Kunzen had put together was the following: strings, 2 flutes, 1 flauto piccolo, 2 oboes, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, 2 trumpets, timpani, triangle, timbrel and cymbal – a classical configuration for, among other forms, the so called Janissary music – or at least the occidental version of it.55

55 The New Grove describes Janissary music as “The Turkish percussion ensemble (also called mether […]) introduced into European military music and later adopted by orchestras. The term generally implies the Turkish crescent, single kettledrum, bass drum (played on one side with a drumstick and the other with a switch of twigs or a split rod), cymbals and triangle. In Turkish military music all these instruments were used, together with the shawm and fife in various sizes, more especially in the famous corps of janissaries – hence the name.” Stanley Sadie (ed.): The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited, 1980, 20 vols, vol. 9, pp.496–497. However, it has to be pointed out that in basically all the popular ‘Turkish music’ found in the musical works of the eighteenth century we have to speak of turqueries or alla turca music and not of Janissary music. In addition to instruments included by the European composers (such as the triangle and the piccolo), rhythms have been adapted and harmonies added. This applies to the music of Gluck, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and many others, as well as to Kunzen’s Holger Danske. For an in-depth analysis of the development of Janissary music in Europe, see: William F. Parmentier II: The Mether: Cultural Perceptions and Interpretations of Turkish Drum and Bugle Music Throughout History. In: Ottoman Empire and European Theatre. Vol. I: The Age of Mozart and Selim III (1756–1808). Michael Hüttler / Hans Ernst Weidinger (eds.), Wien: Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, 2013 (Ottomania 1) pp. 285–305.

Holger Danske. En Opera i tre Acter. Af Jens Baggesen. Componeret og indrettet for Klaveret af Frederik Ludevig Æmilius Kunzen. Kiøbenhavn, trykt og forlagt af S. Sønnichsen, Kongl. Privel. Nodetrykker. [1790]. Lateral-4°. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek, 152 p. Frontispiece.

As the opera is not seen with the eyes of a musicologist, an analysis of the score will not be part of this work. For this the research of Heinrich W. Schwab can be recommended, or the dissertation of Børge Friis, which provides a 40-page musical analysis and several references. However, in general it can be said of Holger Danske that Gluck’s influence seems to be obvious, and there are also elements of Italian opera, opera buffa, French opéra comique, German Singspiel, Nordic Singspiel and even Nordic folksong.56 Friis concludes:

56 See Børge Friis: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, pp. 111–151.

“Die Selbständigkeit und Sicherheit, mit der alle diese Anregungen und Einflüsse zu einem Ganzen verbunden sind, die künstlerische Kraft, mit der Heterogenes miteinander vereint, Widerstrebendes zu einer Einheit zusammengeschlossen sind, das weist der Oper eine besondere Stellung in der Musikgeschichte an. Auf diesem seinen Eigenwert beruht ihre historische Stellung, und Kretschmer sagt nicht zuviel, wenn er behauptet, dass das Werk die “bedeutendste romantische Oper grossen Stils aus dem 18. Jahrhundert” sei.”57

(‘The self-reliance and aplomb with which all this incitation and influence is connected to a whole, the artistic vigour with which the heterogeneous is combined and antagonism is aligned to a oneness, assigns this opera an eminent position in musical history. Its historic position is based on this inherent merit, and Kretschmer is not exaggerating when he claims that this work is “the most outstanding romantic opera in the grand style from the eighteenth century.”’)

Similarities between Kunzen’s opera and Mozart’s music, especially Die Zauberflöte (‘The Magic Flute’) have often been pointed out. This evaluation has to be left to music experts, as the author of this diploma thesis does not feel competent enough in the field to venture an opinion. However, there are similarities of motif in Die Entführung aus dem Serail (‘The Abduction from the Seraglio’), especially in the ‘Turkish’ music. But both Mozart and Kunzen seem to have been influenced by Christoph Willibald Gluck (1714–1784), and it is very likely that Kunzen saw Gluck’s Les pélérins de la Mecque (‘The Pilgrims to Mecca’) which premiered in Copenhagen on 26 November 1776, with the title Det uventede Møde (‘The Unexpected Encounter’), and was performed again in 1786 and 1787. It is nonetheless worth considering that Kunzen at this time had yet to become acquainted with Mozart’s work. His famous colleague was hardly known in Copenhagen, and by 1789 none of Mozart’s major works had been performed there, although Die Entführung aus dem Serail, for example, had been

57 Ibid, pp. 147–148.

49 performed in Altona, Rostock, Hamburg, and even in Lübeck.58 The aforementioned critic and author Knud Lyne Rahbek saw Die Entführung aus dem Serail in Hamburg in 1789 and expressed his disdain for the genre: “en Operette af Bretzner, som du nok er saa lykkelig ikke at kende”59 (‘an operetta by Bretzner, with which you are undoubtedly fortunate enough to be unacquainted’). The difficulties for Kunzen and his Holger Danske would later have parallels with Mozart’s operas in Copenhagen. Also some other possible correlations with Mozart’s work should be pointed out, with reference to the Don Juan motif seen in a broader perspective than Da Ponte’s libretto alone: the passage to Lepanto in connection with Don Juan d’Austria and the battle of Lepanto; the shipwrecking episode which correlates to Lord George Gordon Byron’s (1788–1824) Don Juan; and the location of the island of Tabarca, off the coast of Tunis, which can be traced back to Miguel de Cervantes (1547–1616), among other writers.60

A long time before going in actual production, in fact as early as the autumn of 1788, the opposition had already begun to focus on Holger Danske –

“…den danske Nationalhelt skulde haanes ved at blive kastet ind paa Scenen som en eventyrlig, sværmende Pralhals, for med Triller og

58 Carsten E. Hatting: Mozart og Danmark. Copenhagen: Engstrøm & Sødring Musikforlag A/S, 1991. 190 p. p. 18. 59 Frederik Schyberg: “Teaterrejsens Baggrund og Forudsætninger”, in: Den store Teaterrejse: Michael Rosings Dagbog og Breve fra Pariserrejsen i 1788. Udgivet af Frederik Schyberg, ed. Michael Rosing. Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1943, p. 86. 60 Further correlations will be discussed in an article expected to be published in the spring of 2015: Hans Ernst Weidinger: From Tabarca to Topkapi, or "the Sultan self shan't carry me, unless his highness promises to marry me": Don Juan Crossing the Ottoman World II (working title). In: Ottoman Empire and European Theatre. Vol. III: Seraglios and Harems. A Commemoration of the Bicentenary of Lord Byron’s Sojourn in the Ottoman Capital (1810). Michael Hüttler / Hans Ernst Weidinger (eds.), Wien: Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, 2015.

Roulader at enervere det Folk, paa hvis Mod og Kraft han var et Symbol.”61

(‘…the Danish national hero is to be ridiculed by being thrown on stage as an adventurous, quixotic braggart, and through somersaults and roulades to enervate the people of whom he is a symbol of bravery and strength.’)

Baggesen was shaken and wanted to change Holger back to Huon. But Michael Rosing, the indisputable star at the Royal Theatre and in the Danish term the ‘første elsker’ - the ‘first lover’ of the theatre – insisted on playing the Nordic hero.62 And so it had to be. The opera opened at the Royal Danish Theatre in Copenhagen on 31 March 1789, and was a tremendous artistic success for Kunzen’s music; at the same time, it turned out to be probably the biggest disappointment of his life. Apart from criticism by dedicated opponents of opera, Holger Danske received brilliant reviews and was very popular with the audience:

“Kunzens henrivende, friske og gratiøst flydende Melodier med glimrende og smagfulde Forsiringer i Bravoursagerne, den vekslende pikante og grandiose Behandling af det Instrumentale, Jfr. Møllers brillante og sjælfulde Udførelse af Rezia, de snart lystige, snart storartede Kor, de skønne Danse, prægtige orientalske Dragter, rige Optog og herlige Tableauer begejstrede Publikum til stormende Bifald.”63

(‘Kunzen’s adorable, lively and gracefully flowing melodies, with brilliant and tasteful embellishments in the bravura passages, the by turns piquant and grandiose treatment of the instrumental parts, Miss Møller’s gorgeous and soulful performance as Rezia, the now merry

61 Thomas Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, i dens Historie, fra de første Spor af danske Skuespil indtil vor Tid. Copenhagen: Forlaget af Samfundet til den danske Literaturs Fremme, 1854–1864, 5 vols., vol. 3 (1860), p. 406. 62 Michael Rosing met Mozart in Vienna in 1788 when Rosing was on a study tour with two of his colleagues and visited Joseph Lange. The description of the meeting with the famous composer provides an interesting characterisation of Mozart and of his visitors’ perception of him. 63 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 3, p. 408.

now grand choruses, the most beautiful dances, splendid oriental costumes, rich processions and exquisite tableaux enthused the audience to rapturous applause.’)

Friederike Brun also describes the premiere, in a letter to Christoph Martin Wieland:

“Bezaubert, truncken, entzückt, begeistert, mit einem Randvollem Herzen kam ich gestern aus Kuntzens, und Baggesens, Höon Holger Danske!, u zu wem könnte mein Herz mich wohl lebendiger hinführen, als zu Ihnen, Lieber Großpapa […].”64

(‘Enthralled, intoxicated, captivated, enthused, with a heart full to the brim, I came out yesterday from Kuntzen and Baggesen’s Hüön Holger Danske!, and to whom could my heart lead me more vividly than to you, dear grandpa […].’)

Her only mild criticism involves the actor playing the part of Kerasmin; in contrast to the Italian opera tradition, Baggesen had not given him a female counterpart with whom to fall in love. As previously mentioned, many of Copenhagen’s cultural figures attended the soirées held in Friederike Brun’s home – among these was the critic Johann Clemens Tode (1736–1806), who wrote about the performance:

“Holger Danskes Skiæbne er bestemt. Stykket giør unægteligen saa herlig en Virkning paa Theatret, som nogen anden Oper. Musikken

64 Siegfried Scheibe (Akademie der Wissenschaften) (ed.): Wielands Briefwechsel. Vol. 10: April 1788–Dezember 1790. Berlin: Akad. Verl., 1992, letter no. 207, pp. 177–180. Friederike Brun gives a very colourful – and seemingly hitherto unknown in Denmark – description of the opening night of Holger Danske. Despite her close friendship with Baggesen and her admiration for Wieland, which renders her assessment less than impartial, Friederike Brun’s account is nonetheless a very useful document.

roses af Læg og Lærd, baade Hr. Kuntzens og Hr. Baggesens Arbeid har lykkeligen staaet sine Prøver […].”65

(‘Holger Danske’s destiny is decided. The play has undeniably such a wonderful impact on the stage, like no other opera. The music is praised by layman and learned, both Mr. Kunzen’s and Mr. Baggesen’s work has happily passed the test […]’)

Unfortunately, Tode was wrong. Despite its indisputable artistic success, Holger Danske was performed only six times; due to a fierce dispute, the opera was soon withdrawn from the repertoire. The dispute – later commonly known in Denmark as ‘Holgerfejde’ (‘Holger- feud’) – was triggered by, on one hand, general bourgeois and petit bourgeois opposition to opera as a genre, considering it expensive and aristocratic; on the other hand, rational principles of the Age of Enlightenment, at least as they were applied in Danish society at the time. Many people regarded opera as ‘wrong’, because it appeals to our senses and emotions, rather than to our sense and rationality. That Knud Lyne Rahbek became such a vitriolic opponent of opera in general and Holger Danske in particular, seems strange. As mentioned, he and Kunzen had been friends and shared accommodation during their studies in Kiel, and Rahbek had even helped his friend to make contacts in Copenhagen by providing the letter of recommendation to Rosing. But Rahbek’s opposition was also directed against Baggesen, who regularly wrote for his monthly magazine Minerva. Among other things, Rahbek wrote in a letter to Baggesen that Holger Danske was

“et Stykke, som ikke blot synder imod Smag og Critik, men mod Ærbarhed og Sæder.”66

65 Cf. Ole Kongsted: “Om Holger Danske og Holger-fejden”, in: Magazin fra det Kongelige Bibliotek, 4, 1996, pp. 19–31, p. 21. 66 Jens Baggesen: Til det virkelige Publicum, i Anledning af Herr Rahbeks Epigrammer i Aftenposten. Copenhagen: Johan Frederik Schulz, 1789, p. 16.

(‘a piece not only offending against taste and judgement, but also against respectability and morality.’)

Rahbek also refers to Holger Danske in the March edition of his Minerva. In his article he finds destruction of the national theatre’s financial viability due to expensive opera productions a petty matter when compared with:

“den skade slige tankeløse, smaaglimrende Forlystelser giøre vor national Caracter, i det de vænne os til at elske Tankeløshed, Blødagtighed og Overdaad.”67

(‘the damage such thoughtless, gaudy amusements do to our national character, by accustoming us to love thoughtlessness, effeminacy and sumptuousness.’)

At the same time, he naively admits that he has no understanding of music. Another typical example of the opposition to opera comes from the anti-German patriot and ‘hobby-poet’ Werner H. F. Abrahamson (1744–1812), who had put it bluntly,

“Opera fordærver Smagen, Sæderne og Skuepladsens Finantser.”68

(‘Opera depraves taste, morals and the theatre’s finances.’)

Unfortunately, it was Carl Friedrich Cramer who unconsciously and unintentionally fired up the discussion about opera in general and

67 Knud Lyne Rahbek: “Skuepladsen”, in: Minerva, et maanedsskrivt, Januarii, Februarii og Martii, 1789 [Copenhagen: Trykt hos Johan Frederik Schultz, 1789], pp. 408–409. Also in Gerhard Schepelern: Operaenshistorie i Danmark 1634–1975. Copenhagen: Munksgaard-Rosinante, 1995, p. 35. Here Rahbek’s view on opera is quoted as “en ødelæggende Gift, der ikke blot myrder vor Skueplads, men der anstikker vor National-Caracter” (‘a corrosive poison that not only murders our stage, but also infects our national character’). 68 Cf: Sven Lunn: “Oberons tryllehorn”, in: Dansk Musik Tidsskrift, 4, 1944, pp. 75–80, p. 77.

‘Holger’ in particular. In next to no time he had translated Baggesen’s libretto into German. He printed the preface to this translation in his Magazin für Musik: in the preface he claimed that with Holger Danske Baggesen had proved he was superior to Denmark’s much-loved Ewald,

“… der viel, aber oft wilden Genius hatte, nicht genugsam durch Studium und Kenntnisse gezüchtigten Geistes war, und aufsprühende Feuerflammen oft in verdunkelnde Dampfwolken hüllte.”69

(‘…who had much, but often wild, genius, a spirit that was not sufficiently chastised through studies and knowledge, and who often befogged crackling flames with dulling clouds of vapour.’)

This was the same as pouring oil on the fire. It was not for a German to criticise the nation’s foremost poet, and at the same time to pit him against Baggesen, the obviously more or less assimilated ‘German’. On the other hand, Cramer tried to flatter the Danes by praising their language as being rich, noble and pure – a passage that almost reads like a testimonial for the Danes and their language, but which had been totally overlooked or consciously ignored by his critics.70 What was meant to pour oil on troubled waters was regarded as being a priggish and exaggerated claim by Professor Cramer, who a few months earlier had also made some sharp comments about the popular Danish professor Andreas Christian Hviid’s (1749–1788) travelogue, in which the latter had described Kiel in a not particularly flattering way. The icing on the cake then came from the writer Peter Andreas Heiberg (1758–1841), who published Holger Tydske (‘Holger the German’), a parody of Baggesen’s libretto, on April 15, the same day as the opera

69 19. Freytag. An Wieland. In: Musik von Carl Friedrich Cramer. Erstes Vierteljahr. Copenhagen, bey S. Sönnichsen, Notenducker und Musikalienhändler daselbst. Gedruckt bey dem Universitätsbuchdr. J.F.Schultz.1789. pp. 7–31. p. 27. 70 Ibid, pp. 19–25.

was put on for the benefit of Baggesen and Kunzen.71 This persiflage became the talk of the town; author, composer and translator, Cramer, were ridiculed, and on April 17 the opera was performed for the last time that season. Heiberg’s sharp attacks on ‘Tydskeri’ (‘German-ness’) even prompted a reaction from minister of finance Schimmelmann, which made things even worse. An endless storm of debate followed; within six months more than sixty articles had been published72 and the feud went on for more than a year, which is why the original plan to stage the opera again the following season was dropped. Combining the nationalistic or patriotic tendency targeted against German pre-eminence in the political, social and cultural life of Copenhagen – which had been favoured by the Prince Regent Frederik, not least for financial reasons – with the anti-opera issues, Holger Danske was a perfect peg on which to hang both.

It is important to point out that – although in some ways restricted in comparison to the cabinet order issued by Struensee in 1772 – Denmark still allowed an astonishing freedom of opinion compared to many other nations in the world at that time. The highly political issue of freedom of the press and opinion is a significant ingredient of the feud, if not the foundation on which it could be contested. Had it not been for the degree of free speech still permitted, a good proportion of the dozens of articles would probably never have been published.

Holger Danske’s destiny had been decided. Later reception of the opera showed that judgement on this masterpiece was irrevocable, as the entry in The New Grove proves: “After the failure of his opera Holger Danske (31 March 1789) he moved to Berlin […]”73

71 P.A. Heiberg: Holger Tydske. Heroisk Opera i tre Akter til F.L. Æm. Kunzens Musik. København: 1789, 80 p. 72 Louis Bobé: Frederikke Brun, født Münter, og hendes Kreds hjemme og ude. Kbh.: 1910. (Diss.) 358 p. p. 38. 73 Stanley Sadie (ed.): The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, p. 31.

For 152 years after its premiere, the opera was completely forgotten, apart from a concert performance by the Cäcilie foreningen (‘Cecilia- Society’) in Copenhagen on 19 February 1912.74 But in 1941 Holger Danske made a stunning comeback on the Danish stage, only this time it was as a statement and symbol of Danish patriotism and thus a clear signal aimed against the German occupation. And now some musicologists began to recognise the qualities of the opera and discovered what a masterpiece of early Romanticism it was and, in addition, how significant and fundamental Holger Danske had been for the development of Danish music in general. But, again, it was just a flash in the pan. The time during the German occupation was not appropriate to research Danish national achievements and the opera again disappeared for decades. The first recording of the opera was made in 1995 by the Danish National Radio Symphony Orchestra and Choir, conducted by Thomas Dausgaard, to coincide with the bicentenary of Kunzen’s appointment as Hofkapellmeister in Copenhagen. The recording achieved wide critical acclaim and received an American Grammy Award nomination in 1996. In 2000 Holger Danske was once again on stage at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, in a modern version by the Danish performance group Hotel Pro Forma – to very mixed reviews. Nowadays Holger Danske is still virtually unknown to a wider audience, but it is regarded as the first Danish national opera and it is very interesting to see how the perception of the opera has changed – as we have seen, in the Danish Kulturkanon from 2006–2007, Holger

74 C.A. Martienßen: “Holger Danske”, Oper von Fr. L. Al. Kunzen. In: Alfred Heuß (ed.): Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft. Dreizehnter Jahrgang 1911–1912. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1912. pp. 225–232. p. 225.

Danske features as one of the twelve most important classical works of music in Denmark.75

To end the first act of Kunzen’s life and artistic development, it seems appropriate to allow the composer himself to give a résumé of his experiences, in which he reflects on the circumstances of the creation of the opera:

“Kopenhagen d 10 Aprill 1789

Endlich einmal hohle ich wieder Athem, und nun sey es mir erlaubt, mein Wehrtester, eine der ersten müßigen Stunden Ihnen widmen zu dürfen.

Cramer wird Ihnen ohne Zweifel kund gethan haben, was mich diesen Winter so sehr beschäftigt hat. Der Riese ist bekämpft, und unser der Sieg! Holger Danske ist endlich einmal getauft, und hat einen herrlichen Nahmen erhalten. Es verlohnt sich wirklich der Mühe, im Siegeston davon zu reden; denn es war in der That ein schwererrungener Sieg! Je näher wir, Baggesen und ich, unsrem Ziel zu seyn glaubten, desto dornigter wurde der Pfad. Sie kennen ja dies Land der Cabale oder der Cannibalen, wo ein Genie immer das andre wo nicht an Leib doch an Seele auffressen will; auch Sie kennen die Kleinheit der nationalen Denkungsart, wenn es darauf ankömmt die deutschen drücken und drängen zu können, Sie werden sich also nicht wundern, daß wir nachdem wir allen Chikanen den Kopf zertreten, wir noch am Ende Gefahr liefen, für alle Mühe, ausgepfiffen zu werden. So hieß es wenigstens einige Tage vor der Aufführung, und selbst in den ersten Tagen der Aufführung. Allein diese disharmonischen Cabalen löseten sich in ein lautes consonirendes Bravorufen auf. Die übrigen Dichter, die eigentlich Complott gemacht hatten, und deren Rädelsführer Rahbeck und Thaarup sind leben itzt wie Cramer sagt: in

75 As mentioned in the preface, the homepage of the Kulturkanon has been deleted due to copyright reasons, the lists of the chosen works can though still be found on the internet, amongst others on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Culture_Canon 2014-06-04.

ecclesia oppressa. Rahbeck ist ein geschworener Feind der Oper von jeher, und es ist ihm ein Greuel daß das Opernwesen hier so in Gang kömmt. In seiner Minerva hat er auch darüber einen Aufsatz gemacht, worin er zu zeigen glaubt: daß der Staat bey den Kosten der Oper nicht bestehen können, daß das gute Schauspiel darüber zugrunde geht, daß es die Sitten verderbe, und weich mache, (das schreibt der Uebersetzer von Figaros Hochzeit, und der Verfasser vom empfindsamen Darbye) und mehr solche ungereimte Dinge im Tone des Propheten Jeremias. Der Andre ist mit einer Oper, die für Schulz bestellt war, durchgefallen, und daher deßen Ingrim. Bey Hofe hat es Glück gemacht, ob es sich aber für uns realisiren wird, davon habe ich sehr große Zweifel, und ich fürchte es wird nach der Oper mit meinen Hiesigen Aussichten nicht beßer aussehen, wie vorher. Doch genug von den Leiden u. Freuden des Holger Danske. – […] Ich habe hier in Gesellschaft Cramers einen sehr glücklichen Winter gelebt, ich fürchte nur, daß es auf Kosten des künftigen gewesen ist. Er gehört mir zu den unvergeßlichen Epochen meines lebens.

Ihre Freunde grüßen Sie herzlich, und ich empfele mich Ihrer ferneren Freundschaft und bin

Ihr ergebener Diener

F. L. Æ. Kunzen”76

(‘Copenhagen, 10th April 1789

Finally I can draw breath again, and now I should be allowed, my esteemed friend, to dedicate one of my first idle hours to you.

Cramer will undoubtedly have reported to you what it is that has so greatly occupied me this winter. The giant has been battled against, and victory is ours! Holger Danske is finally baptised, and he has an exquisite name. It really is worthy of the voice of victory, as it was truly a hard-won victory! The closer we, Baggesen and I, thought we approached our objective, the thornier the path. You indeed know this land of cabal or cannibals, where one genius always wants to devour

76 Letter of F. L. Æ. Kunzen from 10 April 1789 to an unknown recepient (probably Gerstenberg). Samling Troensegaard, Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen.

59 the other, not by limb but by soul; you know too the pettiness of national thinking when it comes to pressing and pushing the Germans. So you will not wonder that we, having quashed the worst of the chicanery, were running the risk, after all the trouble, of being booed. Thus it was a few days before the performance, and even a few days after. All these disharmonic cabals dissolved in loud and consonantal bravos. The other poets, who actually started the conspiracy, and whose ringleaders are Rahbeck and Thaarup, live now, as Cramer says, in ecclesia oppressa. Rahbeck has ever since been a sworn enemy of the opera, and he hates it that opera is progressing so well here. He has written an article in his Minerva, in which he believes he can show that the state will not be able to support its cost, that the spoken drama will be ruined, that morals will decline and be rendered soft (thus writes the translator of The Marriage of Figaro and the author of the sensitive Darbye) and more such incongruous things in the tone of the prophet Jeremiah. The other one fell flat with an opera which had been commissioned for Schulz, therefore his rage. It was well received at court, but I strongly doubt that this will help us, and I am afraid that my prospects here after the opera are no better than before. But enough about the joys and woes of Holger Danske. – […] In the company of Cramer I have had a very happy winter here, my only fear is that it has been at the expense of the future. It has been one of the most memorable periods in my life.

The warmest greetings to your friends, and I remain, commending myself to our further friendship,

your most obedient servant,

F. L. Æ. Kunzen’)

3. WANDERJAHRE

3.1. HOLGER DANSKE’S AFTERLIFE

The ‘Holger-feud’ was also a big setback and great disappointment to Jens Baggesen. For him as the librettist – and native Dane – it was probably even harder to bear than it was for Kunzen. As early as May 1789 the then 25-year-old embarked on a convalescence- and educational journey, for which he received financial support from Duke Frederik Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sønderborg-Augustenborg (1765–1814). First he travelled to Bad Pyrmont together with Friederike Brun, his sister Ane Marie (Maria) "Nanna" (1765–1832), Carl Friedrich Cramer and Johan Gottlieb Karl Spazier (1761–1805); with the latter and Count Adam Gottlob Detlef Moltke (1765–1843) he then journeyed onward to Switzerland. On 11 September 1789, Baggesen was in Berne and noted the following in his diary:

“Vi vare indbudne til Frue Zeerleder, en anden Datter at den store Haller, Sophies Tante. Vi bleve her alstaa naturligviis, saa meget mere, da det regnede.

Jeg vidste, at det ikke vilde gaae af uden Musik, at jeg vilde blive plaget om at synge. Jeg besøgte alstaa alle Berns Boglader om Formiddagen, og fandt efter megen Snusen omkring deri, Athalie, La fée Urgele, og La Reine de Golconde.

Medens jeg stod allerbedst i den Hallerske Boglade, faldt det mig ind at spørge om Schulzes Lieder – de vare alle bortsolgte. “Kiender De et ganske nyt Stykke: Holger Danske, en Opera, oversat fra Dansk?” spurgte Boghandleren, der havde mærket, at jeg var forhippet paa Syngestykker. “Saa temmelig,” svarede jeg, “men det har De dog vel

ikke her?” – “O! jo!” sagde han, “eet eneste Exemplar – de øvrige ere alt solgte.”- “Hvor mange har De vel solgt i Bern?” “Ti!” svarede han.

Jeg ved ikke, om Noget har kildret min Forfatter-Forfængelighed mere.

“Saa har du, før jeg kiendte hende, ligget under hende her i Bern” – sagde jeg til Holger Danske, idet jeg tog den i Haanden – (Bogladen er netop i samme Huus, neden under hendes og hendes Moders Værelser).

“Besynderligt!” sagde jeg – og havde kunnet kysse Exemplaret i dette Øieblik – “saa har du, skielmske Holger! fundet hendes Opholdsted før jeg! Din Fader kunde næsten misunde dig!””77

(‘We had been invited by Madame Zeerleder, another daughter of the great Haller, Sophie’s aunt. We stayed there naturally, especially as it rained. I knew that it would not be without music, and that I would be urged to sing. In the morning I therefore visited all of Berne’s bookshops and, after a while of poking around in them, I found Athalie, La fée Urgele, and La Reine de Golconde.

Just as I was standing in Haller’s bookshop, it occurred to me to ask for Schulz’s songs – they had all been sold. “Do you know an entirely new play, Holger Danske, an opera, translated from the Danish?” the bookseller asked, having noticed that I was keen on Singspiele. “Yes indeed,” I replied, “but you don’t have it here, do you?” “Oh yes!” he said, “just one copy – the others are all sold.” “How many have you actually sold in Berne?” “Ten!” he answered.

I don’t know if anything ever excited my author-vanity more.

“So, even before I knew her, you have lain here beneath her in Berne” – I said to Holger Danske, when I took it in my hands – (the bookshop is in the very same house, right beneath the rooms where she and her mother live).

77 Ove Baggesen: Malerisk Reise i Schweiz, fra Basel, Schweiz rundt, Paris, gennem Tyskland til København, Jens Baggesens dagbøger fra 11/8-1789–27/9-1790. [Birkerød] 2007, 1 CD-rom 881 p. pp. 192-193. In part also in: Louis Bobé and Carl Dumreicher (eds.): Gemt og Glemt. Minder fra gamle Dage. Copenhagen: Hagerup, 1915–1916, 3 vols., vol. 2 (1916), pp. 21–148, p. 119. The episode took place during the period when Baggesen became acquainted with his future wife Charlotte Sophie v. Haller (1767–1797).

“Curious!” I said – and could have kissed the copy at this instant – “so you, roguish Holger! found her whereabouts before I did! Your father might almost envy you!”’)

If Baggesen is to be believed, a few interesting conclusions can be drawn from this entry in his diary: a copy of Holger Danske (probably in Cramer’s German translation) had found its way to the fairly small town of Berne and – unless the bookseller was exaggerating hugely – had been quite popular there. The German translation of Holger Danske by Carl Friedrich Cramer had been completed no later than January 1789 and published in his magazine Musik, a sequel to his former Magazin der Musik, in the first quarter of 1789.78 Both the Danish original and Cramer’s German translation had been published in Copenhagen by Johan Frederik Schulz almost at the same time in 1789.79 From a theatre-historical point of view, Holger Danske appears to be the very first opera based on Wieland’s Oberon. It was followed by Paul Wranitzky’s (1756–1808) Singspiel Oberon, which premiered on 7 November 1789, in Vienna.80 The libretto for Oberon was written by Carl Ludwig Giesecke (1761– 1833), who claimed to have used Friederike Sophie Seyler’s Huon und Amande, ein romantisches Singspiel in fünf Aufzügen nach Wielands

78 Holger Danske, eine Oper in drey Acten. In: Musik von Carl Friedrich Cramer. Erstes Vierteljahr. Copenhagen, bey S. Sönnichsen, Notenducker und Musikalienhändler daselbst. Gedruckt bey dem Universitätsbuchdr. J.F.Schultz.1789. Erstes Stück, Dezember 1788, 20. Sonnabend. pp. 31–110. Cramer writes in the preface “das Werk Baggesens und Kunzens zur Aufführung auf dem dänischen Theater im bevorstehenden Februar zu befördern” (‘the work of Baggesen and Kunzen is to be performed in the forthcoming February’), which means that Cramer had written these lines in January at the latest. The 20 December 1788 is therefore feasible as the date the translation already had been finished. 79 Jens Baggesen: Holger Danske. Opera i tre Acter, sat i Musik af Hr. F. L. Æm. Kunzen, ved Jens Baggesen. Trykt hos Johan Frederik Schulz, Universitets- Bogtrykker. Kiøbenhavn, 1789, 86 p. 80 See also, Ulrike Schneider: Between Enlightenment and Orient: Oberon by Christoph Martin Wieland. In: Ottoman Empire and European Theatre. vol. 1: The Age of Mozart and Selim III (1756–1808). Michael Hüttler / Hans Ernst Weidinger (eds.), Wien: Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, 2013 (Ottomania 1) pp. 877–901.

Oberon (‘Huon and Amande, a romantic Singspiel in five acts after Wieland’s Oberon’), Flensburg 1789, as a model, without actually crediting her for it. Seyler’s piece had never been performed and was virtually unknown. But given that Holger Danske had been well known even in Berne, it is almost certain that it also had been available in Vienna. And, since an ambitious theatre man like Emanuel Schikaneder (1751–1812) had discovered Seyler’s Huon und Amande, it is hard to imagine that he had not taken notice of Holger Danske. For the time being, whether or not Holger Danske influenced the development of the Singspiel in Vienna must remain in the sphere of speculation, but it is interesting that Kunzen’s opera seems to have been the first to combine the ever-popular subject of ‘Turks’ and ‘Moors’ with the new wave of magical fairy stories, a genre-combination which to my knowledge had not previously been performed in Vienna at that time. Furthermore, Holger Danske also introduced the ‘magical’ instrument – the horn – which was later followed by numerous other ‘magical’ instruments. Whether or not Kunzen’s opera had been the model for Wranitzky’s Oberon, or had perhaps influenced it, must also remain a matter of speculation. Cramer’s German version had, after all, been published at least eight month earlier. Gieseke and Wranitzky have, not unexpectedly, used a few musical numbers with oriental music:

“In the first act, unlike Wieland’s epos and contrary to Seyler’s suggestion, a number of dervishes dance a wild dance to Oberon’s magic horn. In the second act a choir sings to the honour of the Sultan (sic) of Baghdad.”81

It is a curious coincidence, but that is exactly what Baggesen and Kunzen had done in their version: the choir of the Turkish Singers, together with Singers, Slaves and Courtiers, that praises Sultan

81 Ibid, p. 892.

Buurman at the beginning of the second act, scenes I and II. And shortly after, in scenes IV to VI, Kerasmin makes the entire court dance an ecstatic dance by sounding his horn – an effect Holger repeats in the third act, scene XII, at the court in Tunis, where he makes Sultan Bobul, Sultana Almansaris and the entire court dance wildly. But, as mentioned, these quite significant parallels to Wranitzky’s version could just be happenstance. A closer analysis of Gieseke’s libretto and Wranitzky’s music might reveal more congruence with the Danish counterpart, but that would need a separate study. Holger Danske and Oberon would cross paths again a few years later – with several consequences for Kunzen. This topic will be revisited later. In 1788 Baggesen and Kunzen actually had plans for three operas, one with a classical, one with a romantic, and one with a historical subject: the second of these was Holger Danske, the third Erik Eiegod (or Ejegod) which they accomplished in 1798 in Copenhagen; and the first one should have been another project with a magic instrument, Trylleharpen (‘The Magic Harp’), which they unfortunately never worked on together. Kunzen later composed ‘The Magic Harp’ in an adaptation by Johann Nikolaus Kleiber, premiered with the title Ossians Harfe around 1800 in Vienna, allegedly at the Theater an der Wien.82 The details of this production still need to be clarified and verified, as different dates have been suggested. Baggesen also eventually did his own version, Trylleharpen, which opened on 30 January 1817, at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, with music by

82 There are many divergent dates for the premiere of this opera. It is definitely incorrect that it was in Copenhagen in 1799, and likewise incorrect that it was in Vienna in 1806. Some sources write that Ossians Harfe premiered around 1800 in Vienna at the Theater an der Wien. This has yet to be investigated. The first (and possibly only other) performance in Hamburg was in 1802, which we know about from an anonymous review: “Theater. 1. Ueber die teutsche Oper in Hamburg. [Kritik e. anonymen Beiträgers an der Auswahl der Stücke, deren unvorteilhafte Besetzung und Ausstattung als Ursachen für mißlungene Aufführungen. – Vorschläge zur Verbesserung]”, in: Journal des Luxus und der Moden. Herausgegeben von F[riedrich] J[ustin] Bertuch und G[eorg] M[elchior] Kraus. Siebenzehnter Band. Jahrgang 1802. Mit ausgemahlten und schwarzen Kupfertafeln. Weimar, 1802. Im Verlag des Industrie-Comptoirs. [Nebst] Intelligenz-Blätter, 17, 1802, pp. 335-339, p. 336.

Daniel Friedrich Rudolph Kuhlau (1786–1832) – an event that indirectly contributed to Kunzen’s death.

3.2. FINDING MOZART

Due to the spectacular feud, and despite its great artistic and public success, Holger Danske was removed from the repertoire of the Copenhagen opera company after only six performances, and Kunzen could see no future for himself in this city, although he was assured of support by J.A.P. Schulz. Like Baggesen, Kunzen left Copenhagen a disappointed man, albeit several months later. He left Denmark on 14 October 1789,83 an established fact as recorded in the Danish passport register. He first travelled to Lübeck and from there to Ludwigslust, where his sister Louise Ulrike Friederike and her husband Johann Friedrich Braun were employed as musicians in the Duke’s Hofkapelle and where his father had been Hofkapellmeister. At the end of the year Kunzen travelled onward to Berlin and an unknown and uncertain future, as there was no job in sight for him. But he was probably full of hopes, as King Friedrich Wilhelm II (1744–r.1786–1797) was known to have an eclectic taste in music and an interest in new styles and new talents. The ‘Königliches Nationaltheater’ (‘Royal National Theatre’), with its mainly German opera and Singspiel repertoire, must have been a particularly desirable venue in which the young composer could show his talents. And with warmest recommendations from Johann Abraham Peter Schulz to the Prussian Hofkapellmeister Johann Friedrich Reichardt (1752–1814), Kunzen’s prospects seemed to be favourable. With his brother-in-law Johann Friedrich Braun, a respected oboe virtuoso, he organized subscription concerts in the “Konzertsale zur

83 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. p. 83.

Stadt Paris”84 and together with Johann Friedrich Reichardt and Johan Gottlieb Karl Spazier he tried his hand as co-publisher for the weekly music journal Musikalisches Wochenblatt85 which was published by the similarly newly-founded “neuen Berlinischen Musikhandlung auf der Jägerbrücke”86 – through which Kunzen also published and sold old and new compositions. Both undertakings, however, had but moderate success. Spazier and Kunzen already knew one another from Copenhagen, and, as mentioned, Spazier had also been Baggesen’s travelling companion, and had come to Berlin in the summer of 1790, not least to visit Kunzen. Baggesen wrote in his diary

“Sonnabend. 21st VIII.

Ich war im Begriff eine Brief an unserer Mutter zu endigen, als Kunzen in die Stube hereintrat. Sophie war in Kabinette. Mein Gott! mit welcher Freude umarmete wir uns wieder. Er hatte mich indessen, auf Cramers bericht, lange erwartet, und gab mir ein Brief von den lieben. Wir hatten so unendlich viel zu verzählen, dass wir nicht wusten wie wir es anfangen hatten, als Sophie herauskam.”87

(‘I was about to finish a letter to our mother, when Kunzen entered the parlour. Sophie was in the boudoir. My God! With what great delight we did embrace one another. He had, due to a report from Cramer, expected me for a long time, and gave me a letter from the dear. We had such an endless amount to relate that we did not know how to begin, and then Sophie came out.’)

84 Ibid, p. 107. 85 Musikalisches Wochenblatt. I. Berlin. In der neuen Berlinischen Musikhandlung. [Oct. 1791] 86 See footnote 89. 87 Ove Baggesen: Malerisk Reise, p. 596. This and the following quote are from Ove Baggesen’s transcripts of Jens Baggesen’s original letters, digitalized by the Royal Library in Copenhagen. They differ from other quotes, such as those, for example, Heinrich W. Schwab has used, as Schwab has taken them from an autobiographical novel Baggesen wrote in 1792-93 about his 1789–90 travels in Europe, with the title Labyrinthen (‘The Labyrinth’), based on his diaries from the journey. Schwab uses the Danish edition from 1829–31, edited and published by Jens Baggesen’s sons after the poet’s death in 1826.

And the following day, Baggesen reports, was spent pursuing a varied programme together with, among others, Johann Friedrich Reichardt and Carl August Struensee (1735–1804) - the brother of the aforementioned Johann Friedrich Struensee - in whose house the evening involved

“Musik. Holger Danske gespielt von Kunzen und gesungen von ihm

und Reichard. Auch etwas aus Aline.”88

(‘Music. Holger Danske played by Kunzen and sung by him and Reichard. Also a little from Aline.’)

Reichardt did indeed try to further Kunzen’s career in Berlin; for example, he recommended Holger Danske to the king, who allegedly also wanted it to be staged, but this never materialized. While, on the one hand, his close relationship with Hofkapellmeister Reichardt gave Kunzen opportunities through patronage and a very good network, on the other hand he was ignored or even antagonised by Reichardt’s opponents. Reichardt travelled a great deal – from October 1791 he even started a three year long holiday – which did not make the situation any easier. In July 1792 Reichardt and Kunzen published the first issue of their Musikalische Monathsschrift in which not less than three articles focussed on Kunzen and his work. A very positive and extensive review of Holger Danske featured on pages 5 to 14, and this is probably the most profound analysis and description of the opera as it was at the time. In the main very positive, the author, who

“ – sie zu hören, darf er wohl sagen, das Glück gehabt hätte, denn sie ist ein wahres Genieproduckt, und wird – nicht mehr gegeben!”89

88 Ibid, p. 598.

(‘ - having heard [the opera], can say he has had the good fortune, as it is a real stroke of genius and – is no longer performed!’) makes a real effort to give an in-depth description of the opera. But the review did not seem to have any substantial effect. And we might wonder why a review of Holger Danske was first being published now. However, the first issues of the Musikalisches Wochenblatt simply had no space for any operas other than Reichardt’s Olimpiade. The magazine functioned more or less as a marketing instrument for the Hofkapellmeister. Young Kunzen had to bide his time and wait until the fourth edition, in which his Zerstreute Kompositionen was reviewed, and then again until the ninth edition, in which he was commended for his subscription concert together with Braun. The second article about Kunzen in the Musikalische Monathsschrift reads like some kind of postscript to his time in Berlin and sums up his experiences during the last two years in the city. As this period in his life could not be described any better or more succinctly, I am here inserting a facsimile of the original article, with the English translation in the footnote:90

89 Holger Danske oder Oberon. Eine Oper in drey Acten. Clavierauszug von Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. Herausgegeben von C.F. Cramer. Copenhagen 1790. Gedruckt bey S. Sönnichsen. In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. pp. 5–14. The author also remembers to add: “152 Seiten gr. Queer-Qu. Preis 5 Rth. – Ist in der neuen Berl. Mus. Handl. Auf der Jägerbrücke zu haben.” 90 Nachricht von merkwürdigen Tonkünstlern. Kunzen. In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. p. 23. ‘This young and honest artist, who had already at an early stage in Lübeck, his hometown, presented himself as an excellent pianist and promising composer, and soon after in Copenhagen with his admirable opera Holger Danske was epoch-making, came to Berlin at the end of 1789 with the notion that he would accomplish his talent and his reputation. The most respected artists and the best part of the musical audience had been fair and friendly towards him. But at court he found opposition on all sides. Reichardt, who himself never gave music lessons, recommended him to Princess Friederike as Piano and Singing master, a teacher she was lacking after the departure of Madame Todi, and it was taken amiss that he had recommended someone else. He told the king about Kunzen’s admirable opera, which had been adapted for the German theatre through Cramer’s translation, and the king wanted to hear it, and wanted it to be heard at the new theatre in Charlottenburg; Kunzen was introduced by Reichardt to the king’s chamber

concerts, once played the Fortepiano at one of the king’s concerts to much acclaim – and was forgotten. He was more fortunate with the audiences. In the year 1792, together with Mr Braun, he established a series of public concerts, held once a week during Lent, and due to the choice of the musical pieces, their performance and for his excellent playing he deservedly received much acclaim. The concerts were and remained very well attended, and were repeated this year with the same fortunate success. When, in October 1791, Reichardt commenced his three-year holiday, which had been stipulated by the king, and his majesty was worried about the performance of his opera Olimpiade, which was to be repeated in the carnival season in 1792, Reichardt suggested Mr Kunzen to the king, saying that he was the one who knew the work very well, who could comprehend the meaning of it and who could therefore perfectly discharge his position at the piano. The king was greatly satisfied with this, and told Mr Reichardt to give Kunzen the mandate for this function. However, during Reichardt’s absence Mme Mara, for whom the main character in Olimpiade had been written, stayed away, Mlle Niklas, who had sung the role twice during the festivities in October, was of frail health, and Mlle Cantoni was incapable of singing music of such a nature, all of which was used as reason to thwart the re-staging of the opera Olimpiade, and so Kunzen’s talent remained once again unused. He worked from another angle for the audience, and this with promising success. From the very start of this weekly music paper and until his departure he played a great part as an editor and contributor, and he would have rejected several more profitable offers in favour of this interesting work, had not the position of Music Director at the recently-established Frankfurt National Theatre beckoned, and been a weighty signal that he should leave a place where his true talents, his effort and his fervour could not win recognition due to the cabal, which is so dangerous for German talent. And once again one of our most beautiful and prolific talents has disappeared, of whom our expectations could not be set too high, but the fulfilment of which we can be assured, all the more as Kunzen is not a mechanical artist, but a man of heart and a well-educated head.’

The third article in which Kunzen is mentioned in the paper, Auszüge aus Briefen eines deutschen Reisenden, is about his new job in Frankfurt and therefore makes for particularly interesting reading:

“Frankfurt am Mayn den 18ten Januar. Die Herren Directoren des hiesigen künftigen besseren Nationaltheaters […] haben bereits zwei

sehr verdienstvolle Männer zur Direction des Singtheaters und des Orchesters engagirt. Herr Kunzen, der sich seit einigen Jahren durch die Herausgabe seiner Oper Holger Danske, seines Bardiets Hermann und die Fürsten, und durch verschiedene Sammlungen für den Gesang und für das Clavier sehr rühmlich bekannt gemacht hat, ist zum Director des Singetheaters und Hr. Fränzel, ein würdiger Sohn des berühmten Violinisten in Mannheim […] ist zum Director des Orchesters engagirt worden. Beide mit ansehnlichem Gehalt und ehrenvollen Bedingungen.”91

(‘Frankfurt am Main, 18 January. The Gentlemen Directors of the forthcoming new and better National Theatre here […] have already engaged two highly commendable men as Director of the opera and for the orchestra. Mr Kunzen, who has for several years made a laudable reputation with the publishing of his opera Holger Danske, his bard- canto Hermann and the Sovereigns, and several collections for voice and for piano, has been appointed as Director for the Singspiel and Mr Fränzel, a worthy son of the famous Violinist in Mannheim, as Director for the orchestra. Both with a considerable wage and under honourable conditions.’)

On leaving Berlin, Kunzen could not look back upon much noteworthy success in that city. But there was something else that he could take with him and which was of great importance: he had seen Die Hochzeit des Figaro (‘The Marriage of Figaro’) in Berlin, and also Don Giovanni - staged with the title: Don Juan oder der steinerne Gast (‘Don Juan or the Stone Guest’) – which had premiered at the Nationaltheater in Berlin on 20 December 1790.92 Both productions were performed in German. It was in Berlin that Kunzen had begun to develop a great admiration for Mozart’s music – and this music would accompany him and his career for the rest of his life.

91 Auszüge aus Briefen eines deutschen Reisenden. In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. p. 21. 92 L(udwig) Schneider: Geschichte der Oper und des Königlichen Opernhauses in Berlin. Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1852. 525 p. p. 239.

In 1792 Kunzen embarked upon his new role at the newly-founded Nationaltheater in Frankfurt am Main –

“…als eigentlichen musikalischen Oberleiter, das bedeutende Mitglied der Berliner Liederschule Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, der durch seine nordische “Oberon”=Oper “Holger Danske” der Schöpfer der skandinavischen Nationaloper wurde.”93

(‘…as the de facto director of music, the distinguished member of the Berlin Song School Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, who through his Nordic “Oberon”=opera “Holger Danske” became the creator of the Scandinavian national opera.’)

Bacher refers to Ferdinand Fränzel’s position as that of Konzertmeister. In Gerber’s Lexikon der Tonkünstler J.A.P. Schulz tells us that Kunzen was offered the position of Musikdirektor – with an income of 900 Gulden per annum – partly because he had the most precise knowledge of Mozart’s “Singstücken” (‘vocal pieces’).94 The first opera performance Kunzen was in charge of was Mozart’s Die Entführung aus dem Serail (‘The Abduction from the Seraglio’). It premiered on 6 May 1792,95 and became an overwhelming success. The first few months of Kunzen’s work in Frankfurt were reported in the Musikalische Monathsschrift:

“Frankfurth a. M.den 7. Aug. 1792. Von unserem Theater kann ich Ihnen bis itzt weniges sagen, weil wir lauter bekannte Opern einstudieren, um erst ein Repertorium zu formiren. […] Die Musik hat hier den Beifall erhalten, den sie verdient, da sie ohne Zweifel zu den

93 Otto Bacher: Die Geschichte Der Frankfurter Oper Im 18. Jahrhundert. Veröffentlichungen Der Deutschen Musikgesellschaft Ortsgruppe Frankfurt a. M. Band 1. Frankfurt Am Main, Englert und Schlosser, 1926. 112 p. pp. 90–92. 94 Gerber: Neues historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler. Dritter Theil, K–R. 1813. col.150. 95 Wolfgang Saure: Die Geschichte Der Frankfurter Oper Von 1792 Bis 1880. Köln: Philosophische Fakultät Der Universität Köln, 1958. 355 p. p. 23.

schönsten Produkten gehört, die unsere deutsche Bühne aufzuweisen hat. Für die künftige Messe wird die Zauberflöte von Mozart und der wüthende Roland von Haydn einstudirt, zwei Musiken von denen man sich viel verspricht. Es wird itzt stark an den dazu gehörenden Dekorationen gearbeitet. Herr Kunzen hat uns bis itzt erst eine Arie von seiner Arbeit hören lassen, die er in eine Operette eingelegt, diese hat indeß so viel Glück hier gemacht, daß wenn es dereinst mit einer Oper verhältnißmäßig so gienge, er obendrauf seynmüßte. Wir hoffen daß er uns bald seinen vortreflichen Oberron wird hören lassen.”96

(‘Frankfurth a. M., 7 Aug. 1792. I have little to report up to now about out theatre, as we are rehearsing several well-known operas to form a repertory. […] The music has received the acclaim it deserves, as it is without doubt among the best products the German stage has to offer. For the forthcoming trade fair The Magic Flute by Mozart and The Paladin Orlando by Haydn are being rehearsed, two operas of which we expect great things. Now they are working hard on the stage scenery. Mr Kunzen has so far only allowed us to hear one aria from his work, which he had inserted in an operetta, but it received so much acclaim that it must be very satisfying for him when one day an opera thus falls into place. We hope that he will soon let us hear his admirable Oberon.’)

By April 1793 Kunzen had already staged eighteen operas in Frankfurt, as he wrote in a letter to Count Ferdinand Anton Christian Ahlefeldt (1747–1815), who had become the new Lord Chamberlain at the Danish court and who was in charge of the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen.97 That his productions in Frankfurt had been hugely successful is beyond doubt. Frau Rath Goethe mentions several times in letters to her son that the theatre is constantly sold out and often many people

96 Nachrichten aus Briefen. In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Drittes Stück. September 1792. [Berlin]. p. 85. 97 See Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. pp. 132–133. In the letter he offers his services (and those of his spouse) to Ahlefeldt, which means he already tried to return to Copenhagen in the spring of 1793.

74 have to be turned away.98 Die Zauberflöte (‘The Magic Flute’) was particularly successful; the opera had its German premiere on 16 August 1793 and Goethe’s mother reported to her son that

“Neues gibt’s hir nichts, als dass die Zauberflöte 18 mahl ist gegeben worden – und dass das Hauß immer geproft voll war – kein Mensch will von sich sagen laßen – er hätte sie nicht gesehn – alle Handwercker – gärtner – ja gar die Sachsenhäußer – deren ihre Jungen die Affen und Löwen machen gehen hinein so ein Specktackel hat mannhir noch nicht erlebt – das Haußmußjedesmahl schon vor 4 uhr auf seyn – und mit alledem müßen immer einige hunderte wieder zurück die keinen Platz bekommen können – das hat Geld eingetragen! Der König hat vor die 3 mahl als Er das letzte mahl hir war, und nur die einzige kleine Loge von Willmer innehatte 100 Carolin bezahlt.”99

(‘Nothing new here, except that The Magic Flute had been shown 18 times – the theatre is always chock-a-block – no one wants to be talked about for not having seen it – all craftsmen – gardeners – even the Sachsenhausener – their youngsters are performing the monkeys and the lions, are going there, such a spectacle has never been seen here before – the theatre has to be opened at 4 o’clock every time – and still there are a few hundred who cannot get a seat and have to be sent away – that has certainly made money! For the 3 times he was last here, and only had Willmer’s single little box, the king has paid 100 Carolins.’)

3.3. EXCURSUS: DEMOISELLE OBERON

Kunzen staged many operas in Frankfurt, but his Holger Danske was not one of them – he was probably unable to present it because of Wranitzky’s Oberon, which had already caused a furore in Frankfurt

98 Albert Köster (ed.): Die Briefe der Frau Rath Goethe. Leipzig: Insel Verlag, 1956, XXII + 666 p. p. 261, p. 264, p. 269, p. 274. 99 Ibid, pp. 277–278.

75 when it was performed for the coronation of Leopold II (1747–1792) on 15 October 1790.

Playbill of the Frankfurt premiere of Paul Wranitzky’s Oberon, 15 October 1790. (Facsimile Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Frankfurt)

This is a very interesting date, as Mozart was in Frankfurt that very day giving a private concert, likewise to mark the coronation of Leopold II. Mozart reports to Constanze about the concert in his letter dated 15 October:

“Noch habe ich keine Nachricht auf keinen von meinen Frankfurter Briefen, welches mich nicht wenig beunruhiget – heut 11 Uhr war meine Academie, welche von Seiten der Ehre herrlich, aber in Betreff des Geldes mager ausgefallen ist. – Es war zum Unglück ein groß Dejeuné bei einem Fürsten und großes Manoever von den Hessischen Truppen, – so war aber alle Tage meines Hierseyns immer Verhinderung.”100

(‘I have not yet received a reply to any of my letters from Frankfurt, which makes me rather anxious. My concert took place at eleven o’clock this morning. It was a splendid success from the point of view of honour and glory, but a failure as far as money was concerned. Unfortunately, the Prince was giving a big déjeuner and the Hessian troops were holding a grand manoeuvre. But in any case some obstacle has arisen every day during my stay here.’)101

In his travel diary, Count Ludwig von Bentheim-Steinfurt also reported about Mozart’s concert, which took place “im großen Stadt- Schauspielhause”102 (‘in the grand municipal playhouse’), which means that both the concert and the opera took place on the same stage. He also noted that a young woman, obviously very noteworthy, with the name “Succarini” was present at Mozart’s concert. This young woman happened to be the Oberon singer in the aforementioned premiere of Paul Wranitzky’s opera of the same name, at the same place, in the evening of the same day. It is therefore very likely that Demoiselle Zuccarini was also present at the déjeuner Mozart mentions

100 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Letter to his wife, Frankfurt, October 15, 1790, letter no. 1140, in: Mozart: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen. Gesamtausgabe. Herausgegeben von der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg. Gesammelt und erläutert von Wilhelm A. Bauer und Otto Erich Deutsch, auf Grund deren Vorarbeiten erläutert von Joseph Heinz Eybl. Erweiterte Ausgabe mit einer Einführung und Ergänzungen herausgegeben von Ulrich Konrad. Kassel-Basel-London-New York-Prague: Bärenreiter/Munich: dtv, 2005 (orig. 1962f.), 8 vols.(= MBA), vol. 4, p. 118. 101 Mozart: Letter to his wife, Frankfurt, October 15, 1790, letter no. 588, in: The Letters of Mozart & His Family, ed. Emily Anderson. London: Macmillan, 1938, 3 vols., vol. 3, p. 1407. 102 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 122.

77 in his letter – and would an attractive young singer not draw the attention of Wolfgang Amadé? Mozart very likely saw Johanna Margaretha Antonetta Zuccarini (1766–1842) singing Oberon in the evening: everyone of distinction would have been at the theatre that evening, so his presence can be regarded as almost certain. Knowing a little about the common theatre practice, it can therefore be assumed that the two most likely met each other; indeed, a meeting seems almost inevitable. Demoiselle Zuccarini, who was the Oberon singer of the time, was also partly the reason for the success of Wranitzky’s Oberon in Frankfurt, as well as later in Mainz and in Hamburg. Johanna Margaretha Antonetta Zuccarini was the daughter of a court musician from Trier and the sister of a fairly well-known actor and singer in Hamburg. The Taschenbuch für Schauspieler und Schauspielliebhaber (‘Pocket book for Actors and Admirers of the Theatre’) writes that Herr Zuccarini was a member of the Seylerischen Gesellschaft and the book also features an etching of his silhouette.103 Heinrich W. Schwab quotes a few notes about Demoiselle Zuccarini from a journal of the time, the Journal des Luxus und der Moden (‘Journal of Luxury and Fashion’), in which her performance as Oberon in Mainz (5 March 1791) was mentioned as having been very good, as well as her performance at the premiere of the same opera in Hamburg on 17 October 1791. On 25 August 1792 the Journal reports from Hamburg that

“Demoiselle Zuccarini betrat als Oberon heute zum letztenmale die Bühne, und gieng zum Nationaltheater nach Frankfurt am Mayn.”104

(‘Miss Zuccarini entered the stage today for the last time as Oberon, and joined the National Theatre in Frankfurt am Main.’)

103 Ulrich Weis: Taschenbuch für Schauspieler und Schauspielliebhaber. Offenbach am Mayn, bey Ulrich Weis, 1779. p. XVI. 104 c.f. Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 118.

Heinrich W. Schwab writes that it is a pity that not even basic biographical notes can be found about her. After intense research, it was possible to find further information about Zuccarini, who was a popular and successful singer at the time. In the Hamburgische Theater-Geschichte (‘Hamburg Theatre-History’) she is mentioned in connection with the premiere of Oberon. (Here the opera, probably for patriotic reasons, has a libretto “…nach Wieland von Friederike Seyler” (‘…after Wieland by Friederike Seyler’)).105

“Demois Zuccarini, eine neue, vom Mainzer Theater verschriebne Sängerin, sang den Oberon mit Beifall, den ihre melodische obgleich noch unausgebildete Stimme verdiente. Zu spielen war an diesem König nicht, auch war die Sängerin keine Spielerin. […] Oberon ward vor Jahresende 11 mal, im folgenden Jahre, gewöhnlich an Montagsabenden, 16 mal wiederhohlt. Dies Montagsstück ward der Direktion sehr einträglich.”106

(‘Miss Zuccarini, a new singer transferred from the Mainz Theatre, sang the role of Oberon with acclaim, which her melodic, albeit still untrained voice deserved. Nothing had to be acted in the role of the king, and the singer was no actress either […] Oberon was performed 11 times before the end of the year, and repeated 16 times the following year, typically on Monday evenings. This Monday-piece had brought in a good revenue for the management.’)

In contrast to the aforementioned journal, the Hamburger Theater- Geschichte dates her departure differently:

“Am 25. Sept. sang Dem. Zukkarini zuletzt den Oberon und gieng nach Frankfurt am Main.”107

105 Johann Friedrich Schütze: Hamburgische Theater–Geschichte. Hamburg: Gedruckt bei J.P. Treder, 1794. 712 p. p. 646. 106 Ibid, p. 647. 107 Ibid, p. 668.

(‘On 25 Sept. Miss Zuccarini sang Oberon for the last time, and left for Frankfurt am Main.’)

In a supplement to Gerber’s Neues Historisch-biographisches Lexikon Der Tonkünstler we can read in which role she made her debut at the National Theatre in Frankfurt:

“Zuccarini (Demoiselle) steht itzt (1793) als erste Sängerin beym Nationaltheater in Frankfurth am Mayn. Sie debütierte in der Liebe im Narrenhause von Dittersdorf; ihr ward von dem Publico, das viel gerechte Vorliebe für sie hat, entgegen applaudirt, und sie sang ihr Recitativ, wozu ihre schöne Stim[m]e so viel beyträgt, unverbeßerlich.”108

(‘Zuccarini (Demoiselle) is now (1793) the leading singer at the National Theatre in Frankfurt am Main. She made her debut in Love at the Madhouse by Dittersdorf; she received from the audience, which has deserved fondness for her, much applause and she sang her recitative, to which her beautiful voice adds so much, impeccably.’)

Schwab notes:

“Erst in der Spielzeit 1792/93 gehörte sie also dem Frankfurter Ensemble an. Im Jahre 1795 gemeinsam mit F.L.Ae. Kunzen nach Kopenhagen berufen, hat sie sich jedoch kaum noch in der Öffentlichkeit hören lassen.”109

(‘First a member of the company in Frankfurt for the 1792/93 season. In 1795, together with F.L.Ae. Kunzen, appointed to Copenhagen, she had hardly ever performed publicly.’)

108 Ernst Ludwig Gerber and Othmar Wessely: Historisch-biographisches Lexikon Der Tonkünstler (1790–1792) Und Neues Historisch-biographisches Lexikon Der Tonkünstler (1812–1814), Mit Den in Den Jahren 1792 Bis 1814 Veröffentlichten Ergänzungen Sowie Der Erstveröffentlichung Handschriftlicher Berichtigungen Und Nachträge, Bd. 4. Graz, 1969. p. 400. 109 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. p. 118.

It will be shown later that quite the opposite was true, that she was highly active in the time between Frankfurt and Copenhagen and that her work might even have had crucial impact on Kunzen’s future. Frankfurt National Theatre playbills show that she sang, among other roles, Baroness Eugenia in Paisiello’s La Molinara (‘The Miller´s Wife’), Agathe in Wranitzky’s Die Post-Station (‘The Coaching Inn’), Alcina in Haydn’s Der Ritter Roland (‘The Paladin Orlando’), The Queen of the Night in Mozart’s Die Zauberflöte (‘The Magic Flute’) and Donna Elvira in Mozart’s Don Juan. Eine komische Operette in zwey Aufzügen nach dem Italiänischen (‘Don Juan, a comic operetta in two acts derived from the Italian’).110 Don Giovanni had earlier been performed in Frankfurt by the Mainzer Nationaltheater (on 3 May 1789) which also staged the German (and in German) premiere on 13 March 1789. Schwab concludes from the extant documents about Kunzen’s re-premiere – Kunzen had used provided material from the Mainzer production – that he had probably inserted an aria for Donna Elvira. As it was an out-and-out coloratura aria, Schwab further assumes that the purpose was to produce a kind of showcase for the singer in the Donna Elvira role. Given his position and her ability, it seems a legitimate addition.111 As mentioned, the success of Wranitzky’s Oberon in Frankfurt in 1790 was still remembered and was probably the main reason why Kunzen could not put on his own version of Wieland’s epic there (and possibly at many other theatres). Holger Danske would most likely have been overshadowed by Oberon. And financial reasons also spoke for a re- premiere of an existing production, instead of staging a new and expensive grand opera. So Kunzen saw himself forced to re-introduce Wranitzky’s Singspiel in Frankfurt in 1793 – with Zuccarini of course

110 This was the title on the playbill of Don Juan at the Frankfurter Nationaltheater from Saturday, January 4, 1794, which is regarded as the premiere. 111 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. pp. 129–130.

81 singing the part of Oberon. That the celebrated Oberon singer was soon to become Mrs Kunzen constitutes a good dose of irony.112 Kunzen’s work in Frankfurt was largely reduced to putting on other composers’ work, but this did not mean he had given up composing. Finally, Kunzen got the opportunity to stage his new operetta Die Weinlese oder Das Fest der Winzer (‘The Grape Harvest or The Feast of the Winegrowers’), which was premiered on 4 April 1793, again with his wife in a leading role, as Fräulein von Tasberg, which suited her high and virtuoso coloratura soprano. However, the way in which Die Weinlese came about is rather strange. In the previously mentioned obituary, Levin Christian Sander writes that Kunzen had spread the rumour that he was working on an opera with the title Cora, in order to mislead any possible opponents. Die Weinlese, on the other hand, was originally presented as a work by Giuseppe Sarti, who was at that time Kapellmeister for Catharina II in St Petersburg. Kunzen may have chosen him because he remembered that Sarti had been in Copenhagen between 1753 and 1775, and because St Petersburg was far away. That he did not reveal himself as the composer until the evening of the third performance (when the success of the operetta was undeniable and it was too late for any opponents to ruin it) shows how hard the experience with Holger Danske must have hit Kunzen.113 And it also shows how factors other than artistic skill can determine success – an ongoing reality, even in our day.

112 Schwab assumes that they must have married between 26 December 1792 and 4 April 1793. See Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. p. 124. 113 The author of the libretto, Johann Jakob Ihlee (1762–1827), who was at the time an actor at the theatre and later became theatre manager, must also have been involved in the plan. As Heinrich W. Schwab points out, he had also probably been interested in a ‘neutral’ judgement of his first libretto. See also Krogh: Zur Geschichte des dänischen Singspiels im 18. Jahrhundert, pp. 223–224. Krogh cites the second performance of Die Weinlese on 16 April as being the one at which Kunzen revealed himself and Ihlee to be composer and librettist. And Sander remarks in the obituary that later attempts to ruin the success of the operetta fortunately failed.

It is not yet known what exactly ended Kunzen’s Frankfurt contract. Some suggest that it might have been his poor salary – 900 Gulden, as J.A.P. Schulz writes in Gerber’s lexicon, was indeed a comparatively humble wage, particularly when there was a daily full house – that made him look for new employment. According to Torben Krogh, he had been promised a salary increase by the summer (1793), but had not received it. Perhaps it was because he did not receive any payment for his Weinlese, although the Singspiel had been a success. Or it might have been because he felt that his work was not really appreciated. Sander mentions an offer he supposedly had from Amsterdam, with a salary of 3,000 Gulden, but for some reason this job never came about. In April 1793 Kunzen already had hopes of being able to return to Copenhagen,114 which at this time did not come about either. He might also have been motivated to leave Frankfurt with hopes for a better future stimulated by promises he received from a director at a theatre in Prague. Kunzen later wrote about his experiences with Die Weinlese in an article titled “Komponistenglück” (‘A Composer’s Fortune’), which was printed in the Zeitung für die elegante Welt (‘Magazine for the Elegant World’) in 1804. This article has particular significance, as it reflects both the difficult circumstances for composers at the time and some of the common practices at the theatres in general:

“Sobald ich mit der Arbeit fertig war, trug ich sie der Direkzion an. Man gab sie mit Beifall. An Bezahlung hatte ich freilich nicht gedacht, denn junge Komponisten müssen sich noch glücklich schätzen, wenn sie nur ihre Produkte ans Tageslicht bringen können; daß mir aber von der Direkzion auch nicht ein Wort des Dankes zur Aufmunterung gesagt werden würde, war freilich gegen meine Erwartung. Ich versuchte nun mein Glück außerhalb und schickte das Stück nach Hamburg, wo es auch angenommen und mir mit 9 holl. Dukaten

114 See footnote 97.

bezahlt ward. Von diesem Gelde erhielt der Kopist 5 Dukaten, und die übrigen 4 theilte ich mit dem Dichter. Bei meinem nachmaligen Aufenthalte in Prag bat mich der damalige Direkteur des Theaters um die Mittheilung der Oper, und versprach mir ein ansehnliches Honorar; ich erhielt aber – nichts. Von hieraus ist das Stück sehr vielen Theatern mitgetheilt, denn es existirt jetzt zum wenigsten bei zwanzig Theatern, deutsch und italienisch; und ob ich gleich einen schriftlichen Revers in Händen habe, der diese Mittheilung verhindern sollte, so scheinen doch die Erben des Verstorbenen darauf keine Rücksicht genommen zu haben. Denn nach der löblichen Weise der Theaterunternehmer, können sie für eine Oper, die sie sich anschaffen, zwanzig andere von den übrigen Theatern durch Tausch erhalten.

Nach dieser simpeln Darstellung erhellt, daß ich für meine Arbeit, außer der zweideutigen Ehre, ein Stück für den Gaumen des großen Hauses geliefert zu haben, an baarem Gelde 2 holl. Dukaten, also noch 3 Duk. weniger als der Kopist, erhalten habe. Unterdessen hat sich die Kasse der Unternehmer, laut allen Nachrichten, sehr wohl bei der Aufführung des Stückes befunden. Sollte mir es nur allein so gegangen seyn, oder ist dies nicht mehr oder weniger das Schicksal aller Komponisten, die für deutsche Theaterunternehmer arbeiten? Nun wundere man sich noch, wenn Meisterwerke, wie Mozart und Salieri sie geliefert haben, immer seltener werden und nur der Ländler seinen frischen Gang fortgeht.”115

(‘As soon as I was finished with the work, I proposed it to the directorate. And it was performed to acclaim. Naturally I hadn’t thought of payment, as young composers must feel fortunate to have the chance to showcase their products; but that I didn’t hear a single word of encouragement from the directorate went somewhat against my expectations. I now tried my luck abroad and sent the piece to Hamburg, where it was accepted and I received 9 Dutch ducats in remuneration. From that money the copyist got 5 ducats, the remaining 4 I shared with the librettist. At my later stay in Prague, the director of the theatre asked me to disclose the opera to him and he

115 Ludw. Aemil Kunzen: “Komponistenglück”, in: Zeitung für die elegante Welt, 64, [Dienstag 29. Mai] 1804, col. 508–510.

promised me a considerable fee for it. But I received – nothing. From there the opera was passed on to many theatres, and it is now to be found in twenty theatres at least, both in German and Italian; and although I have a written undertaking, which should impede such a disclosure, the heirs to the deceased seem to have been ignorant of it. And there is this splendid practice employed by theatre entrepreneurs, that for the one opera they purchase they can get twenty others by bartering with other theatres. Elucidated by this simple description, I received for my work – apart from the dubious honour of having supplied a piece to the taste of large audiences –2 Dutch ducats in cash, which is 3 duc. less than the copyist. Meanwhile, according to all reports, the entrepreneurs’ cash registers have been ringing at the performances of the opera. Am I the only one to whom this has happened, or is it more or less the fate of all composers working for German theatre entrepreneurs? It can be conjectured as to why masterpieces such as the kind written by Mozart and Salieri are becoming rarer, while only the Ländler remains ever popular.’)

Die Weinlese did indeed become a very popular Singspiel, and it was later performed at many theatres in Germany. But there is little information to be found about a production in Prague. Robert Eitner has wrongly placed the point of origin and the premiere of Die Weinlese in Prague in 1795.116 Gerber also claims that it was written for Prague, but dates it 1793.117 Both are wrong, but an uncommented entry that could be found in the Taschenbuch für die Schaubühne, auf das Jahr 1792. (‘Pocketbook for the Stage, for the Year 1792’) blurs the picture: here Die Weinlese is mentioned in the category of “neueinstudierte deutsche Stücke” (‘newly-staged German plays’) in the repertory of the

116 Eitner: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten. vol. 5, p. 478. 117 Gerber: Neues historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler. Dritter Theil, K–R. 1813. col. 152.

Vaterländische Theater in Prague, under the director Mihule.118 Wenzel Mihule (1758–after 1807) was the Director of the Vlastenské Divadlo / Vaterländisches Theater in the Divadlo U Hybernů / Neustädter Theater bei den Hibernern from 12 April 1790 until 12 May 1793.119 If Die Weinlese was a new production in his repertory, it must have premiered in the spring of 1793 at the latest. It is listed in the Taschenbuch for the year 1792. Oscar Teuber’s Geschichte des Prager Theaters (‘History of the Theatre in Prague’) claims that Die Weinlese was already in the German repertory of the theatre in the 1790–91 season.120 Surprisingly, Schwab refers to Teuber’s note, but without commenting on the contradictory production dates involved. Further research in the Prague newspapers of the time might shed more light on the conflicting information. It could also help to clarify Kunzen’s account, in his article “Komponistenglück”, of the circumstances surrounding his Weinlese at the theatre in Prague: if there really had been a performance of the Singspiel under the direction of Wenzel Mihule, it also seems possible that he was the malicious director described by Kunzen; later information, however, points in another direction.

3.4. MYSTERIOUS PRAGUE

The Kunzens moved from Frankfurt to Prague; this is documented fact. Hitherto, this fact seems to be one of but very few certainties about the time they spent in this city.

118 Taschenbuch für die Schaubühne, auf das Jahr 1792. Gotha, bey Carl Wilhelm Ettinger, 1792. pp. 300–305. (The Taschenbuch für die Schaubühne is commonly known as Theaterkalender: auf das Jahr ….). 119 Alena Jakubcová and Jitka Ludvová: Deutschsprachiges Theater in Prag. Spielstätten und Quellen. In: Alena Jakubcová, Jitka Ludvová, Václav Maidl: Deutschsprachiges Theater in Prag. Begegnungen der Sprachen und Kulturen. Prague, 2001. pp. 492–511. pp. 498–499. 120 Oscar Teuber: Geschichte des Prager Theaters. Von den Anfängen des Schauspielwesens bis auf die neueste Zeit. Prag: Hofbuckdruckerei A. Haase, 1885. Zweiter Theil. p. 300.

A comparision of the entries in the most relevant biographical works about Kunzen provides some interesting information. Eitner writes that Kunzen –

“…verheiratete sich mit der Sängerin Zucherini, folgte derselben 1793 (oder 94) nach Prag und erhielt dort beim Theater die Musikdirektorenstelle.”121

(‘…married the singer Zuccarini, followed her 1793 (or 94) to Prague and there assumed the position of Music Director at the theatre.’)

Eitner might have a point as regards Zuccerini, which will be shown later, but 1793 is definitely wrong as the Kunzens were premiering Don Giovanni in Frankfurt on 4 January 1794. He remains silent about which theatre had employed Kunzen. Gerber – or rather J.A.P. Schulz – tells us that

“Diesem Vorbilde [Mozart] arbeitete er nun mit so glücklichem Erfolge nach, daß, als er etliche Jahre nachher, ebenfalls als Musikdirektor bey der Schauspielergesellschaft in Prag, sein “Winzerfest” auf das dortige Theater brachte, das Prager Publikum es mit dem lautesten Beyfalle aufnahm, ohngeachtet solches so sehr durch Mozartschen Singstücke verwöhnt war, daß in langer Zeit kein anderes dort hatte aufkommen können. […] Er ist mit einer Zucherini, einer sehr braven Sängerin, verheyrathet, die sowohl auf der Frankfurter, als Prager Bühne als erste Sängerin engagirt war.”122

(‘He now followed this [Mozart’s] ideal with such fortunate success that when, several years later and also as Music Director for the playhouse in Prague, he brought his “Vintage Festival” [=“Die Weinlese”] to the

121 Eitner: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten. vol. 5, p. 478. 122 Gerber: Neues historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler. Dritter Theil, K–R. 1813. col. 151.

stage, it was received with the loudest applause notwithstanding the audience being so indulged by Mozart’s vocal pieces that for a long time no others could win recognition.[…] He is married to a certain Zuccarini, a very good singer, who was employed at the Frankfurt as well as the Prague theatre as leading singer.’)

His opinions about Kunzen’s allegiance to Mozart’s music and about Zuccarini can be corroborated; the rest is vague and, like Eitner, he avoids mentioning the name of the theatre. Sander’s obituary tells a slightly different story, however, albeit he, too, is fairly vague:

“Reisende Kunstnere og Kunstvenner udbredte nu imidlertid hans Roes, og gave derved Anledning til, at man kaldte ham til Prag, Böhmens Hovedstad og Musikens Hjem. Henimod Slutningen af Aaret 1794 tog han imod denne Indbydelse, dog kun under den Betingelse, at hans Kone tillige blev ansat som første Sangerinde. Strax efter den første Fremstilling af Viinhøsten blev han her eenstemmigen fremkaldet, en Æresbeviisning, som dengang ei endnu var vanhelliget ved Misbrug. Om sit Ophold i Böhmen pleiede han siden stedse at tale med glade Erindringer;”123

(‘Travelling artists and friends of the arts spread his reputation, and thereby brought about his summons to Prague, the capital of Bohemia and the home of music. Towards the end of the year 1794 he accepted this invitation, but only under the condition that his wife would be employed as the leading singer there. Immediately after the first presentation of The Grape Harvest he was unanimously called on stage, a distinction which at that time had yet to be debased by misuse. He later always spoke of his stay in Bohemia with happy memories.’)

123 Sander: Nekrolog 1817. p. VII.

Torben Krogh would seem to have selected parts from the aforementioned sources that had been to his liking, and he is thereby merely parroting them.124 Finally, the Danish Biographical Lexicon sums up:

“Da hans 3aarige Engagement I Frankfurt var udløbet, blev han ansat ved Theatret I Prag, hvor hans Ophold dog blev endnu kortvarigere.”125

(‘When his 3-year contract in Frankfurt expired, he got a job at the theatre in Prague, where his sojourn was of even shorter duration.’)

Very little seems to be known about the circumstances under which he and his wife lived in ‘Mozart’s Prague’ during their stay there in 1794– 95. As shown, the few standard sources relating to this period actually blur the picture rather than casting light on it. Heinrich W. Schwab has added some very interesting aspects to this chapter in Kunzen’s life by looking at the correspondence between the composer and a number of his closest acquaintances: J. A. P. Schulz and Carl Friedrich Cramer, for example; the newly appointed Lord Chamberlain Adam Wilhelm Hauch (1755–1838), the director of the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen; his newly-adopted publisher Hans Georg Nägeli (1773–1836), who contacted Kunzen in June 1794 after the success of Die Weinlese and who remained a faithful advocate of Kunzen’s work long after the composer’s death.126 Some of the letters and notes draw a picture of Kunzen’s great success as Music Director at the theatre in Prague, where he

124 Krogh: Zur Geschichte des dänischen Singspiels im 18. Jahrhundert. p. 225. 125 C.V. Ravn: Kunzen, Frederik Ludvig Æmilius. In: Dansk Biografisk Lexikon, p. 603. 126 Letters written by Nägeli from Zurich to Kunzen in Frankfurt until at least September 1794 are another indication that the Kunzens did not move to Prague before the autumn of 1794. See Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, pp. 130–132.

“…die schwersten Singstücke von Mozart” aufgeführt habe. Sie hätten auch “unter seiner Direction den größten Effect auf alle Musikliebhaber gemacht, und außerordentlichen Beyfall erhalten”.127

(‘staged “…Mozart’s most difficult vocal pieces”. They had, “under his direction, the strongest effect on all music-lovers and received exceptional applause.”’)

as J.A.P. Schulz writes in a memorandum. A letter from Nägeli congratulates Kunzen for the success of Die Weinlese in Prague:

“Die Nachricht, daß Ihre Weinlese in Prag mit so viel Beyfall aufgenommen worden, intereßirt mich sehr.”128

(‘The message that your Grape Harvest had been received with so much acclaim interests me greatly.’)

Both accounts support the positive picture drawn by the chronologists. A letter from Adam Wilhelm Hauch is addressed

“an den Herrn Musik Director F. L. Æ. Kunzen auf dem Rossmarckt № 826 in Prag”129

(‘to the Music Director F. L. Æ. Kunzen, Rossmarckt № 826 in Prague’)

Schwab asks whether this would have been the private address of the Kunzens, or the address of the theatre, and he remarks that it might

127 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 135. Schwab quotes a pro memoria written by Schulz and dated 20 February1795, which is in the Danish National Archive (Rigsarkivet). 128 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 137. Schwab quotes a letter from Nägeli to Kunzen, dated 2 May 1795. 129 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 135. The letter is dated 21 March 1795.

90 have been the Vlastenské Divadlo or Vaterländisches Theater, which was on the Rossmarkt. However, that cannot be so: the Vlastenské Divadlo was only at this location between 1786 and 1789, a place commonly called “Bouda”, ‘The Shack’. In 1794/95 (in all, from 1789 until 1802/03) the Vlastenské Divadlo was in the Divadlo U Hybernů / Neustädter Theater bei den Hibernern, a monastery on Kapuzinerplatz. Schwab again mentions the production of Die Weinlese in Prague, but again only by referring to Teuber, where it is listed in the 1790/91 repertory, which seems quite impossible. After intensive research, and supported by colleagues in Prague,130 the author of this diploma thesis still could not find one single piece of evidence that F.L.Æ. Kunzen had been employed in Prague – neither in a particular job, nor at a particular theatre; not for conducting Mozart’s operas there, nor for the production of Die Weinlese. No proof or even hint could be found about when or on which stage the performances had taken place.131 There can be several reasons for reviewing his time in Prague in a good light. Schulz, in particular, was very interested in making Kunzen his successor in Copenhagen and would therefore of course present him and his wife in the best possible way: as, for example, in his earlier quoted contribution to Gerber’s lexicon. And there is no reason for Sander to highlight a less successful period of his life. However, the correspondence Schwab has analysed also reveals a different picture. Schulz’ memorandum includes the following lines –

“Vor etlichen Tagen ist mir von einem seiner Freunde ein Brief von ihm [Kunzen] communicirt worden, der Ihnen, wie ich hoffe, durch den Hrn. Thaarup, mit welchem ich dieserhalb eine Unterredung hatte, mit

130 I would particularly like to mention the generous help of Alena Jakubcová of The Czech Theatre Studies Department at The Arts and Theatre Institute in Prague. 131 Annals of Opera mentions a production of Die Weinlese in Prague, again unspecified: “In German, also staged in Prague 1794”, Alfred Loewenberg: Annals of Opera: 1597–1940. Cambridge: W. Heffer & Sons Limited, 1943, p. 1793.

getheilt seyn wird. Aus diesem Briefe erhellet, dass Kunzen grade um diese Zeit außer Dienst und in einer mißlichen Lage sich befindet.”132

(‘Several days ago a friend communicated to me a letter written by him [Kunzen], which has hopefully also been reported to you by Mr Thaarup, with whom I had a conversation about this matter. The letter reveals that Kunzen is currently without employment and is in an invidious situation.’)

And in another letter from Nägeli, dated 25 February 1795, we find these encouraging lines:

“Daß Sie sich in Prag wieder aufs Neue mit den laestigen Theatergeschäften abgeben müßten, ist ein fataler Umstand, und ich bedaure Sie von ganzem Herzen. Indeßen bin ich unbesorgt für ihre Muse, sie wird so gewiß ihre Reinheit und Keuschheit behalten, als es unmöglich ist, daß der Saenger Oberons sich zu seinen in Geschmack und Sitten so verdorbenen Zeitgenoßen erniedrigen kann.”133

(‘That, once again in Prague, you have to deal with this annoying theatre business is a grave circumstance, and I commiserate with you from the bottom of my heart. I am, however, not worried for your muse, as she will surely retain her purity and chasteness for it is impossible that the singer of Oberon could lower herself to the manners and taste of her tarnished contemporaries.’)

And in a letter, dated 25 April 1795, about the departure of the Kunzens from Prague:

132 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 145. 133 Ibid, p. 145.

“…freue ich mich doch von ganzem Herzen darüber, weil sie dadurch in eine glücklichere Lage kommen.”134

(‘…I still rejoice with all my heart, because you will thereby find yourself in a more contended situation.’)

All three references are in clear contrast to the general perception of his radiant success in Prague. So what are we to think of these rather mysterious circumstances in Bohemia?

When attending a symposium of the Mozart Society of America held in Prague, June 2009, the programme included a visit to the Villa Betramka and a guided tour by Tomislav Volek, followed by a chamber concert. A plaque in the Villa Betramka drew the attention of the author:

“In 1794 one could hear The Magic Flute in Prague in three different versions: as a Singspiel in the original German version, as a play with songs in Czech translation, and finally in Italian with composed recitatives as opera seria. In the 1793-94 season the repertoire of Franz Spengler’s theatrical company included four works by Mozart.”135

But of even greater interest was an exhibited playbill in the Villa Betramka for Die Zauberflöte (‘The Magic Flute’) – featuring “Mad. Kunzen” as “Königin der Nacht” (‘Queen of the Night’).

134 Ibid, p. 139. 135 Unfortunately this plaque no longer exists, as Villa Betramka, when handed over to the Czech Mozart Society on 2 December 2009, had been reduced to a state of disrepair. The Mozart Society of America describes how the Villa “…was handed back to its owners as an empty shell, stripped of its furnishings, its lighting fixtures, its exhibition including instruments and paintings as well as wall displays, part of its heating system, its kitchen cabinetry, and much else. A storage building, which had housed the Mozart Society’s archive, was found in a state of complete disrepair and providing shelter for a family of martens.” http://mozartsocietyofamerica.org/bertramka/history.php 2.12.2014

Alena Jakubcová, at the Theatre Institute provided photocopies of photographs of the extant playbills mentioning “Mad. Kunzen”. These refer to three different performances: On 16 November 1794 by the “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler im königlichen altstädter Nationaltheater” Die Zauberflöte. Below the cast list, in a fairly large font:

“N.B. Madam Kunzen, welche als Mademoiselle Zuccarini auf den Hoftheater zu Mainz, den Nationaltheater zu Frankfurt und Hamburg, rühmlichst bekannt ist, wird heute die Ehre haben sich in der Rolle der Königin der Nacht, einem hohen Adel, und verehrungswürdigen Publikum, bestens zu empfehlen.”136

(‘N.B. Madam Kunzen, who is most illustriously known as Mademoiselle Zuccarini at the Court Theatre in Mainz and the National Theatre in Frankfurt and Hamburg, will today have the honour of presenting herself to the high nobility and the venerated audience in the role of The Queen of the Night.’)

136 Playbill from the performance of Die Zauberflöte on 16 November 1794 by the “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler im königlichen altstädter Nationaltheater” in Prague.

Playbill from the performance of Die Zauberflöte on 16 November 1794, given by the “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler im königlichen altstädter Nationaltheater” in Prague.

The article Fortsetzung der Nachricht über das Theater zu Prag, in Allgemeines europäisches Journal, Brno, 1794, tells us about Spengler’s company:

“Hr. Spengler kann den diesjährigen Winter unter seine besten zählen. […] Das Sonderbarste dabei ist, dass die vorzüglichsten oder doch beliebtesten Subjekte dieser Gesellschaft eben diesen Winter abgegangen sind… […] Er bekam dafür aus Regensburg einen gewissen Hrn. Neumann und Hrn. Kindler, und aus Frankfurt Mad. Kunzen, sämmtlich fürs Singspiel.

Da keines dieser Mitglieder eine grosse Zelebrität oder hervorragende Talente und Vorzüge hat. So wird man mir gerne ihre Karakteristik nachsehen; denn so viel Hoffnung einzelne auch für die Zukunft allenfalls versprechen mögen, so würde man für die Gegenwart bei den meisten doch nur zu tadeln und wenig zu loben haben.”137

(‘Mr Spengler can count this winter season as one of his best. […] The most curious aspect, however, is that the most exquisite, or rather most popular, members of his company had left this winter… […] Instead he procured from Regensburg a certain Mr Neumann and Mr Kindler, and from Frankfurt Mme Kunzen, all for the Singspiel.

As none of these members is a celebrity, or in possession of outstanding talent and quality, I must be forgiven for not mentioning their characteristics; as much hope as some individuals might promise for the future, for the present most of them would have to be rebuked and praised just a little.’)

Kindler and Neumann had already performed in Die Zauberflöte on 7 October, so they had arrived in Prague earlier than Mme Kunzen. The Allgemeines europäisches Journal lists the repertory of the Nationaltheater in Frankfurt for October 1794, and this basically included all the plays in which Mme Kunzen was singing leading roles. At the end of the list there is a note: “Abgegangen sind […] Hr. und Mad. Kunze.”138 (‘Mr and Mme Kunze [sic] have left.’) In the following edition, the Journal lists the repertory for November 1794, where Die Zauberflöte was the only one left of all the productions in which Mme

137 Allgemeines europäisches Journal. Brünn, bei Joseph Georg Traßler, 1794. Cf. Tomislav Volek: Miscellanea Musicologica. Vydává Ústav Pro Dějiny Hudbypři Universitĕ Karlovĕ v Praze. Repertoir Nosticovské hodivadla v Praze z let 1794, 1796–8. Zpracoval Tomislav Volek. XVI. Svazek, 1961. pp. 34–35. Also in: Tomislav Volek: “Repertoire pražské Spenglerovy divadelní společnosti v sezóně 1793–1794” [‘The Repertoire of Spengler’s Prague Theater Company in the Season 1793–1794’]. Miscellanea musicologica XIV, 1960, p. 23. 138 Allgemeines europäisches Journal. Brünn, bei Joseph Georg Traßler, 1794. Zweiten Bandes zweites Stück. pp. 341–342. Performances on the 4th Die Liebe im Narrenhause, on the 12th Oberon, on the 15th, 26th and 30th Die Zauberflöte, on the 18th Don Juan and on the 28th Ritter Roland.

Kunzen had starred; many of the other productions listed had remarks about the singers who had made their debuts.139 One possible conclusion could be that the Kunzens probably arrived in Prague at the beginning of November 1794. The performance of Die Zauberflöte in Prague was repeated on 30 November 1794 “Auf hohes und gnädiges Verlangen” (‘at eminent and gracious request’), the playbill again highlighting Mme Kunzen –

“N.B. Madam Kunzen wird auf ausdrückliches Begehren, sich nochmals als Königinn der Nacht, einem hohen und gnädigen Adel und dem verehrungswürdigen Publikum bestens zu empfehlen suchen.”140

(‘N.B. Madam Kunzen will, from express request, once again present herself as Queen of the Night to an eminent and gracious nobility and the venerated audience.’)

The text on the playbill also promotes two productions for the following week, for Tuesday Das Liebesgeständniß (‘The Love Confession’) and for Thursday

“… eine neue große Oper mit Flugwerken und ganz neuer Kleiderpracht, betittelt: Victor und Heloise, wovon der Anschlagszettel das mehrere anzeigen wird.”141

(‘…a new opera with flying scenery and entirely new splendid costumes, titled: Victor and Heloise, about which the placard will provide more information.’)

No playbill has been preserved from the announced premiere on the Thursday of the following week (4 December). For Sunday 7 December

139 Allgemeines europäisches Journal. Brünn, bei Joseph Georg Traßler, 1794. Zweiten Bandes drittes Stück. pp. 536–537. 140 Playbill from the performance of Die Zauberflöte on 30 November 1794 by the “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler im königlichen altstädter Nationaltheater” in Prague. 141 Ibid.

and for the repeat performance on Thursday 11 December – the latter for the benefit of the composer, Franz Xaver Partsch (1760–1822) – the playbills announce Victor und Heloise oder Das Hexengericht (‘Victor and Heloise or The Witches Tribunal’), both featuring Mme Kunzen in the role of “Mandragora, Hexenkönigin”.142 Allgemeines europäisches Journal again reports on her performance:

“Einige Arien, vorzüglich die der ersten Hexe Mandragora, sind so schwer, dass in selben Läufer vorkamen, die wohl die Hand auf dem Fortepiano, jedoch die menschliche Kehle nur mit äusserster Kunst und Anstrengung hervorbringen kann. […] Mad. Kunzer [sic] als Mandragora sang treflich, und bezwang die ungeheuren Schwierigkeiten ihrer Arien durch Festigkeit und Anmuth ihrer Stimme.”143

(‘Some arias, primarily those of the first witch Mandragora, are so difficult because they follow a musical line which the hand on the fortepiano can master, but which the human throat can only bring forth with the utmost skill and endeavour. […] Mme Kunzer [sic] as Mandragora sang delightfully and overcame the immense difficulties of her arias with firmness and gracefulness in her voice.’)

But the production was, although featuring expensive scenic elements and with a reportedly respectable standard of music, a failure. Of the performance on the 7 December the Journal remarks:

“Das Hexengericht wiederholt mit eben so wenig Beifall und vieler Unzufriedenheit.”

(‘The Witches Tribunal was repeated with equally meagre applause and much discontent.’)

142 Playbills from the performances of Victor und Heloise oder Das Hexengericht on 7 and 11 December 1794 by the “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler im königlichen altstädter Nationaltheater” in Prague. 143 Cf. Volek: Miscellanea Musicologica. p. 50.

And of 11 December:

“Das Haus war beinahe ganz leer.”144

(‘The theatre was almost completely empty.’)

Finally, on 26 December, Mme Kunzen could present her famous Oberon, again for Spengler’s company. A playbill still exists from the performance on 28 December. Oberon had already been successfully staged several times by Mihule at his Divadlo U Hybernů / Neustädter Theater bei den Hibernern. It was Spengler’s first production of the opera. The review in the Journal also includes a significant observation for the theatre in general:

“Dekorazionen und Maschinen waren gut. Mad. Kunzer sang als Oberon vortreflich, und mit Recht verdient sie heute das Lob einer gebildeten hohen, starken und melodischen Stimme. Ihre Aussprache ist nicht so angenehm, doch lässt sich hoffen, dass sie auch hierin die Wünsche des Publikums erfüllen wird, indem ihr bis itzt unser Dialekt noch zu fremd ist und ihre Sprachorgane mit dem hiesigen Theatergebäude noch nicht bekannt genug sind. Mad. Reinwarth erhielt als Amande wenig oder gar keinen Beifall. Kabale, Neid und Missgunst spielen hier, so wie in den meisten Schauspielergesellschaften, wichtige Rollen; weil sie einmal erste Sängerin war, so lässt sie sich noch itzt die ersten, oder da wir itzt Mad. Kunzen haben, wenigstens die zweiten Singrollen nicht nehmen, und ringt, uneingedenk des gänzlichen Verlustes ihrer Stimme, in Zuversicht auf die grosse Nachsicht unsers Publikums demselben ihr Quitschen auf.”145

(‘Scenery and machines were good. Mme Kunzer [sic] sang admirably as Oberon and she today quite rightly deserves praise for a trained,

144 Ibid, p. 52. 145 Ibid, p. 53.

high, strong and melodic voice. Her pronunciation is not so pleasant, but it can be hoped that in this she will also fulfil the wishes of the audience, as our dialect is still too alien for her and the organs of her voice are not yet familiar enough with the theatre building here. Mme Reinwarth as Amande received little or no applause. Cabal, envy and malevolence also, as in most theatre companies, play an important part here; because she was once the leading singer, she still does not want to relinquish the lead role, nor - now that we have Mme Kunzen - the supporting role, and in disregarding the total loss of her voice and in relying upon the great forbearance of our audience, she imposes her squeaking upon them.’)

In this we can perhaps detect a hint of the machinations at the theatre, which had been so difficult for Kunzen to bear and probably for his wife as well, and to which Nägeli’s letter of 25 April 1795 refers.146

From all this material we still do not know much more about Kunzen’s employment in Prague. But the extremely divergent testimonies, together with the newly-added information about his wife’s career, have made me consider a third version: What if Kunzen actually followed his wife to Prague, as Eitner reports? (see page 87 and footnote 121). That it was in fact her career the two based their future on when they left Frankfurt, at least to begin with in Prague? And Kunzen went there with hopes for a job in this town so famous for its music? Returning to Kunzen’s article “Komponistenglück”, some circumstances now appear in a slightly different light.

146 Nägeli writes “…daß der Saenger Oberons sich zu seinen in Geschmack und Sitten so verdorbenen Zeitgenoßen erniedrigen kann.” (see page 92). Could this not just as well refer to Mme Kunzen?

100

“Bei meinem nachmaligen Aufenthalte in Prag bat mich der damalige Direkteur des Theaters um die Mittheilung der Oper, und versprach mir ein ansehnliches Honorar; ich erhielt aber – nichts.”

(‘At my later stay in Prague, the director of the theatre asked me to disclose the opera to him and he promised me a considerable fee for it. But I received – nothing.’)

Nowhere does he write that he has a job as Music Director in Prague (at least, if any such documents exist, they have yet to be found). The Director mentioned might well have been Franz Spengler, as Kunzen’s wife was on contract with his company. Kunzen’s later request to the director of the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, A.W. Hauch, for permission to stay in Prague until the end of May 1795 due to a commitment,147 might be referring to his work on Die Weinlese – for which, however, no records in the Prague repertory have yet been found. Unfortunately, a register for 1795 is missing. Another detail points at Spengler, as he died on 2 September 1796 and in the article Kunzen mentions that although he had a written undertaking about the work in hand “the heirs to the deceased seem to have been ignorant of it.” As mentioned earlier, the Hofkapellmeister at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, Kunzen’s long-time acquaintance J.A.P. Schulz, had a strong personal interest both in presenting Kunzen (and his wife) as more than eligible to become his successor, and in ensuring that they were paid as small a wage as possible. Due to health problems, he wanted to retire – but with as generous a pension as possible. And that depended on the overall budget of the Royal Theatre. Could Schulz’s praise for Kunzen – that he had performed the most difficult pieces of Mozart (“…die schwersten Singstücke von Mozart”) in Prague – have

147 Schwab: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen, p. 136. This time Schwab makes no reference to the letter.

101 been a deliberate spin? And could Mrs Kunzen’s success with Mozart have been presented as Mr Kunzen’s success? To my knowledge, the documents about Mrs Kunzen have not hitherto been included in any research about F.L.Æ. Kunzen, and I hope that they can contribute to a more complex picture of the time spent in Frankfurt and particularly in Prague. Admittedly, and as already mentioned, ideas about reasons for conflicting accounts of his occupation in Prague must remain speculation until there is further proof for one or the other. Only analysis of newspapers and magazines as regards the 1794/95 repertory at the theatres in Prague, or other new finds in the archives, can answer this question.

102

4. RETURN TO COPENHAGEN

From the previously-mentioned letter written by Kunzen to the director of the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, Lord Chamberlain Adam Wilhelm Hauch, we know that in 1793 he had already expressed his wish to return to Denmark, so when he was offered the position of “Over- Opsyndet ved Bestyrelsen af Capellet” (‘head supervisor of the management of the orchestra’) in Copenhagen, he immediately accepted. Schulz had recommended Kunzen as his successor, and it was in a way he who dictated the conditions. Schulz wished to retire with a pension of 2/3 of his pay, which had been a reasonable 2,000 rigsdaler (Rd.) per annum, and, to make that palatable for the king, he suggested paying the Kunzens – Mme Kunzen was to be engaged as singing teacher – the rather humble joint amount of 1,200 Rd. per annum. The theatre could thus even save 800 Rd. a year, he argued, which was approximately the same sum as the deficit in the orchestra finances. Schulz was convinced that Kunzen would accept the offer, especially with the prospect that he would undoubtedly soon have the title of Hofkapellmeister and a salary increase.148 Knowing of Kunzen’s obviously miserable situation in Prague, many additional obligations for compositions and other work were added to his contract and the one for his wife, which was initially limited to two years. Shrewd Hauch knew how far he could go with his adhesion contract, and Schulz knew how badly Kunzen wanted to return to Copenhagen. When Kunzen embarked on his new job in the summer of 1795, his obligations were numerous, his salary ridiculously meagre,149 and his enthusiasm for Mozart met with indignant scepticism.

148 Kunzen did indeed advance, in 1797, to Hofkapellmeister and his salary increased by 200 Rd. per annum. 149 In comparison, Royal Theatre rules in 1796 guaranteed, for example, 400 Rd. to authors for a full play, or 140 Rd. for a translation of a Singspiel. On top of his other obligations, Kunzen had to deliver one opera, two minor Singspiels, one

103

At the end of the eighteenth century, Copenhagen preferred the French Singspiel with its emphasis on the drama rather than the music, where arias were short and simple, the orchestra was of a moderate size, and the scenic demands were reasonable. The Singspiel was tailor-made for the artistic and financial limitations of the Royal Theatre at that time, and for the aspirations of some very influential pillars of society. Operas that were very successful elsewhere in Europe, regularly failed in Copenhagen. The Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung (‘General Music Times’) in Leipzig writes, for example, that

“So sehr nun auch das Publikum Musik liebt, so hält es doch äußerst schwer, im Theater seinen Geschmack zu befriedigen, indem es zugleich mit der guten Musik, auch ein gutes und interessantes Sujet verlangt. Da dies nun eine seltene Erscheinung ist, so geschieht es nur zu oft, daß Stücke, die auswärts schon Ruf haben, hier durchfallen. […] Mozarts Zauberflöte, so sehr man auch die schöne Musik liebt, wagt man nicht dem Publikum aufzutischen; vielweniger die übrigen Schikanederschen und andern sinnlosen Wiener Produkte.”150

(‘However much the audience loves music, it is extremely difficult to satisfy their taste in the theatre, as in conjunction with the music they also demand a good and interesting story. As this rarely occurs, too often pieces that have a fine reputation abroad, flop here. […] they would not dare present Mozart’s Magic Flute, as much as they like the music, to their audience. Not to mention the rest of the Schikanederschen theatre shows and all the other meaningless Viennese products.’)

It took Kunzen more than three years to convince the director of the theatre, Adam Wilhelm Hauch – a man known for his canniness and extreme correctness, but also for lacking in taste and a sense of

Passionsmusik, plus Kirchenmusik or other Gelegenheitsmusik every year. For the rules, see Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 3, p. 688. 150 Anonymous: “Nachrichten. Ueber den Zustand der Musik in Kopenhagen”, in: Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, 35, [Den 29ten May] 1799, col. 548–549.

104 beauty – to present a Mozart opera. At the theatre, Hauch had the nickname “Staldmesteren”151 (‘equerry’) as he also was the head of the royal stables and a committed horse breeder. Despite Mozart’s fame, none of his dramatic works had hitherto been seen in Copenhagen. The first documented performance of a Mozart work is dated 17 April 1795: a concert programme that opened with a grand Mozart symphony, albeit no mention of which one.152 At least some of his chamber music had almost certainly been performed earlier. Several concerts given in Copenhagen in 1796 and 1797 featured Mozart compositions; but, again, there was generally no specific reference, simply “a big symphony” or a “harpsichord concerto” – but excerpts from Die Zauberflöte (‘The Magic Flute’) were sometimes named. Kunzen was the first person to conduct the first act of ‘The Magic Flute’ in its entirety, at a concert performance on 24 January 1798.153 When the decision was finally made to put on one of Mozart’s operas, the choice unfortunately fell on Così fan tutte (‘Thus Do They All’), mainly because it was fairly inexpensive to produce and it required the least number of singers. Seven of the thirty-one musical pieces had to be cut, and recitatives were drastically curtailed. What was left of them had to be spoken – a questionable tradition at the theatre which remained, without exception, until 1844, when a new production of Figaros Hochzeit (‘The Marriage of Figaro’) was staged. What is more, the plot was changed so that the reputation of the women was left intact and the men won their wager against the old philosopher.154 On the other hand, a short ballet was inserted into the opera, as could be read in the note about the premiere in a newspaper of 17 October

151 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 3, p. 735. 152 Gerhard Schepelern: “Mozarts Operaer i Danmark”, in: Mozarts Operaer: En kritisk Studie. Oversat efter den engelske 2.Udgave og forsynet med en Artikel om Mozarts Operaer i Danmark af Gerhard Schepelern, ed. Edward J. Dent. Copenhagen: Thaning & Appel, 1961, Appendix, pp. 278–301, p. 279. 153 Hatting: Mozart og Danmark, pp. 27–28. 154 Ibid, p. 42.

105

1798, the opera in the meanwhile having been supplied with a new title:

“Fredagen den 19 October Kl. 6 bliver paa det Kongelige Theater opført: Veddemaalet eller Elskernes Skole, et nyt Syngespil i 2 Acter, sat i Musik af Mozart og oversat til samme af Hr. Thoroup; med en Entree af Børn, comp. af Hr. Balletmester Galleotti.”155

(‘On Friday 19 October, 6 pm, at the Royal Theatre, a performance of: The Bet or The Lovers School, a new Singspiel in 2 acts, with music by Mozart and translation by Mr Thoroup; with an entrée of children, comp. by ballet master Mr Galeotti.’)

Although he complied with Kunzen’s wishes, Hauch had his own, quite special, opinion of Mozart’s operas, namely that they were

“…Bizarrerier, som nok kunde være ganske kurieuse for Kjendere, men vilde blive noget kjedeligt Tøi for Publikum, der var vant til melodieus Musik.”156

(‘oddities, which might be rather interesting for the connoisseur, but would be pretty dreary stuff for an audience used to melodious music.’)

Hauch was not the only one opposed to Mozart’s opera. While the director was afraid that the work was difficult for the audience, the musicians were alarmed by the musical challenge. When compared with a note from Adam Oehlenschäger (1779–1850), who would later become one of Denmark’s major poets and playwrights, and who made his unfortunate debut as an actor (or more precisely as an extra) in the infamous Così fan tutte premiere, the picture becomes somewhat more complex:

155 Kiøbenhavns Kongelig alene privilegerede Adresse-Contoirs Efterretninger, Onsdagen den 17. October, no. 280, Ao. 1798. 156 Schepelern: “Mozarts Operaer i Danmark”, p. 280. Also in Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 4, p. 57.

106

“Mozart kiendte man endnu slet ikke til, skiønt det alt var 12 Aar siden han døde. [sic] Deri var Italienerne Skyld, som misundte ham. Al denne dumme Snak om, at den melodirigeste af alle Komponister var umelodiøs, at han havde skrevet sin Musik for Orchestret og ikke for Sangerne, blev bragt herhid – og troet! Ja det hjalp ikke, at man opførte hans Così fan tutte, Musiken blev slagen i Hartkorn med anden italiensk Musik. – At Stykket var under al Kritik, kunde Enhver bedømme, at Musiken er guddommelig, kunde kun Faa mærke – og dette himmelske Mesterstykke blev pebet ud!”157

(‘Mozart was still entirely unknown, although it was 12 years since his death. [sic] It was the fault of the Italians, who envied him. All this foolish talk that the most melodious composer of them all was unmelodious, that he had written his music for the orchestra and not for the singers, was brought hither – and believed! Yes, the staging of his Così fan tutte did not help, the music was lumped together with other Italian music. – That the play was beneath contempt was obvious to all, that the music is divine was perceived by but a few – and this heavenly masterpiece was booed!’)

There was also strong opposition from the singers, who felt overstretched by the difficulty of the music and only had five rehearsals before performance, shared between two directors who were at odds with one another. In their defence, it must be said that they had been employed primarily as actors, not so much as singers, and they were far better at coping with French Singspiel. Italian opera had been almost exclusively staged at the Hoftheater (‘The Court Theatre’), but not often during the previous two decades. Therefore, the setting for an impending disaster was perfect, and the situation only became worse – Oehlenschäger described what reads like the worst nightmare a theatre can experience:

157 Adam Oehlenschläger: Oehlenschlägers Erindringer. Første Bind. Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høsts Forlag, 1850, p. 112.

107

“Elskerne I stykket skulle gå hen og klæde sig om for at narre deres elskerinder til at tro, de nu var andre mennesker. Disse elskere spilledes af Frydendahl og Quist. Frydendahl tog fejl og klædte sig for tidligt om, Quist gjorde efter, hvad han så Frydendahl gøre. Da de nu kom og ville ind på scenen, gjorde regissøren dem opmærksomme på deres fejltagelse. Frydendahl blev ganske forstyrret i hovedet, trak i maskinmesterens kommandosnor og råbte: “Lad gå ned!” Han mente nemlig tæppet for tilskuerne. Men maskinfolkene oppe på loftet troede, der skulle changeres, og stuen, hvori Knudsen stod og spillede, forvandlede sig til en skov; hvorpå Knudsen, der – besynderligt nok – troede endnu at kunne vedligeholde illusionen, råbte: “Hvilket kogleri!” Parterret skoggerlo, og nu måtte man begynde forfra igen.”158

(‘The two men had to change costume in order to trick their beloved women into believing that they now were other people. These lovers were played by Frydendahl and Quist. Frydendahl made a mistake and changed too early, Quist then did the same, as he had seen Frydendahl do. When they were about to go onstage, the stage manager alerted them to their mistake. Frydendahl became completely confused, pulled the chief machinist’s command rope and shouted: “Down with it!” He meant the stage curtain. But the machinists up in the fly loft thought they had to make a scene change, and the parlour in which Knudsen was acting changed into a forest; upon which Knudsen, who strangely thought he could maintain the illusion, shouted: “What magic!” The pit roared with laughter, and they had to start again.’)

Thus was the tone of the performance. On top of it all, the general view was that

“…den særdeles jammerlige Text […] [er] yderst usyngeligt og meningsløst oversat af Thoroup.”159

158 Oehlenschläger: Oehlenschlägers Erindringer, .pp. 112–113. 159 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 3, p. 730.

108

(‘…the particularly miserable text […] [is] utterly un-singable and in a meaningless translation by Thoroup.’)

Thomas Thaarup (1749–1821) – the correct spelling of his name – was the official translator at the theatre, but he was also one of the members of the board, which probably made it difficult for Kunzen or the singers to reject his translation. Moreover, the situation was not made easier by the fact that he was also one of the two stage directors who were at loggerhead. The premiere of Così fan tutte or Væddemaalet eller Elskernes Skole on 19 October 1798 remained the one and only performance of this opera at the Royal Theatre for the next 88 years.

Fortunately, Kunzen could comfort himself with a great personal success at the beginning of the year. On 30 January 1798, he premiered his second grand opera, Erik Ejegod, again with a libretto by Jens Baggesen, who was to become a member of the board of the theatre that same year. It is also worth mentioning that Baggesen had already offered Schulz the libretto in 1789, but Schulz did not think himself competent enough to compose the music. Erik Ejegod was the second part of the trilogy Kunzen and Baggesen had in mind back in 1788, and it can be regarded as the second Danish ‘national opera’. This time around even the Danish patriots were pleased, as Erik Ejegod is a story about the eponymous Danish king who reigned in Denmark from 1095–1103 and successfully fought against the Germans and the Wends. As the Danish historian and chronicler Saxo Grammaticus (c.1150–c.1220) has recorded, Erik visited Constantinople on a pilgrimage in 1103 in order to meet the Byzantine emperor, but he died in Cyprus that year without ever reaching Jerusalem. As the opera ends with ceremonial obeisance to King Erik, it was particularly suitable for the birthday festivities in honour of King Christian VII (born on 29 January) and the Prince Regent Frederik (born on 30 January), for which it was composed. One of Kunzen’s obligations was

109 actually to compose one opera or Singspiel or an equivalent every year for the king’s birthday. Thomas Overskou describes how this excellent opera gave Kunzen delayed redress for the Holger Danske feud, although the opponents of opera in general, and of grand opera in particular, had mobilized again – nevertheless, after a couple of performances the music and the libretto won.

“Kunzens ved ædle, henrivende Melodier og herlig harmonisk Behandling storartede Musik; Rosings kraftfulde, kjække og fyrigt erotiske Erik; Mad. Frydendahls brillante Udførelse af Fylla; Knudsens ved Høihed i Udseende og Sangforedrag mageløse hundredeaarige Ullin, og det glimrende costumerigtige Udstyr, som havde kostet henved 5000 Rdlr., vakte stor Beundring og samvirkede til stadigt at fylde Huset.”160

(‘Kunzen’s splendid music, with its noble, delightful melodies and magnificent harmonies; Rosing’s powerful, bold and ardently erotic Erik; Mme Frydendahl’s brilliant performance of Fylla; Knudsen’s flawless centenarian Ullin with majestic appearance and spoken song, and the marvellous and appropriate costume accoutrements, which had cost almost 5,000 Rd., aroused great admiration and helped to keep the house constantly full.’)

Michael Rosing (1756–1818), who performed the title role, had been on a study tour in 1788 with two of his colleagues. Among other places, they travelled to Vienna where they visited Mozart at home. In a diary entry dated Sunday 24 August 1788, Rosing wrote about this visit:

“Kl. 4 kom Jünger, Lange og Doctor Werner derud, og fulgdte os hen til Capelmester Mozart, som fantaserede saaledes for os, at jeg gierne selv

160 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 3, pp. 707–708.

110

vilde have væred saadan fantast; især giorde hans pedal I den anden fantasie en allerkiæreste Virkning.”161

(‘At 4 o’clock Jünger, Lange and doctor Werner came and accompanied us to Kapellmeister Mozart, who improvised for us in such a way that I would myself have liked to be such an improviser; in particular, his pedal work in the second improvisation had a most charming effect.’)

His travel companion, Joachim Daniel Preisler (1755–1809), was no less enthusiastic about this visit to Mozart:

“Om Eftermiddagen hentede Jünger, Lange og Werner os for at gaae til KapellmesterMozardt. Her havde jeg den gladeste Time, Musikken nogentid har skienket mig. Denne lille Mand og stoere Mester phantaseerte To Gange paa et Pedal-Clavecin, saaledes! saaledes! at jeg ikke vidste hvor jeg var. De sværeste Ting, og de behageligste Themata imellem hinanden. – Konen skar Penne til Nodeskriveren; en Eleve componeerte, en lille Dreng paa Fiire Aar gik omkring I Haven og sang Recitativer; kort sagt: Alting hos denne fortreffelige Mand var musikalsk!”162

(‘In the afternoon Jünger, Lange and Werner picked us up to go to Kapellmeister Mozart. There I spent the happiest hour music ever had gifted me. This little man and big master improvised twice on a pedal harpsichord, in such a way! in such a way! that I no longer knew where I was. The most difficult things and most pleasant themes intertwined. – His wife cut pens for the copyist; a pupil composed; a little four-year-old boy walked around in the garden singing recitatives; in short: everything at the home of this excellent man was musical!’)

161 Frederik Schyberg and Michael Rosing: Den Store Teaterrejse, Michael Rosings Dagbog Og Breve Fra Pariserrejsen I 1788. Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1943. 468 p. p. 285. 162 Joachim Daniel Preisler: Journal over En Reise Igiennem Frankerige Og Tydskland I Aaret MDCCLXXXVIII. Copenhagen, 1789. 2 vol. Vol. II, p. 251. It was, however, mostlikely a Hammerklavier (fortepiano) and not a Cembalo (harpsichord) Mozart was playing.

111

The last two years had been a very successful period for Kunzen’s dramatic works on the national stage: on 22 November 1796 his Singspiel Fruentimmerne og Hemmeligheden (‘The Bowers and the Secret’) had premiered, followed on 22 December 1796 by Viinhøsten eller: Hvem fører Bruden hjem? (‘The Grape Harvest or: Who Sees the Bride Home?’), which was the adapted title of Die Weinlese oder das Fest der Winzer (‘The Grape Harvest or The Feast of the Winegrowers’) in Copenhagen, and also here the Singspiel became a great success, with 49 performances during Kunzen’s time as Kapellmeister. Dragedukken (‘The Dragon Puppet’) opened on 14 March 1797 and another, minor, Singspiel in one act, Jockeyen (‘The Jockey’) on 14 December 1797.163 With other types of music – cantatas, oratorios, a symphony, works for piano, music for plays, as well as many other compositions facilitated by his creativity and demanded by his obligations – he was able to fulfil his exceptional talent. The greater part of his enormous output is far beyond the scope of this paper. However, I would like to mention three particularly outstanding works: the oratorio Opstandelsen (‘The Resurrection’), 1796, libretto by Thaarup; the hymn Skabningens Halleluja (‘The Hallelujah of Creation’), 1797, text by Baggesen; and, in honour of the great master, but also as documentation of his own musical achievement, Overtüre nach dem Thema der Overtüre zur Zauberflöte (‘Overture on the Theme of the Overture to The Magic Flute’), 1808.

After the disaster with Così fan tutte, it took Kunzen many years of hard work before he was allowed to stage another of Mozart’s dramatic works. There was still strong opposition to Italian opera, which was considered to be expensive, difficult to sing and unnatural. In addition, narrow-minded theatre managers were of no help either. From a letter

163 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 3, pp. 663–667.

112 written by Miss Sophie Ørsted to her brother Adam Oehlenschläger, dated March 8, 1806, we learn of the following:

“Seer Du, man talte om i Vinter, at Don Juan skulde gives her, men der blev intet deraf, og det af en saare prægtig Grund. Kierulf fandt, at det kunde skade Publikum og befordre Tro paa Spøgelser, at der lod sig see en Aand, men reent at lade den blive ude, meente han dog lod sig ikke giøre; han foreslog derfor at indrette det saaledes, at en af Don Juans Venner skulde, for at skræmme ham, agere Aand, dog saaledes, at Publikum vidste den Ting. Kunzen sagte reent ud Nei til den Forandring, men saa blev Stykket heller ikke givet; thi Kierulf blev ved at paastaae, at Alt, hvori der var Aand, var skadeligt for Publikum.”164

(‘During the winter there had been talks about putting on Don Juan, but it never worked out, for a truly magnificent reason: Kierulf [one of the three theatre managers] believed it could harm the audience and promote the belief in ghosts if such a phantom appeared on stage. But to cut it completely, he said, would not be possible either. So he suggested that one of Don Juan’s friends should play a ghost in order to scare him, but in such a way that the audience would know that this was the case. Kunzen said a blunt no to these changes, and so the play was not put on at all, because Kierulf stuck to his claim that everything to do with ghosts is harmful to the audience.’)

This sounds most peculiar, especially since the story of Don Juan was very well known to the audience: Jean Baptiste Molière’s (1622–1673) Don Juan had been performed for the public since 1722 and at the Royal Theatre since 1749, where the play was a fixture of the repertoire. Antonio Sacco’s (1708–1788) ballet with the same title was staged in 1764 and 1767, and Vincenzo Galeotti’s Don Juan ballet played from 1781 to 1784. However, Kierulf had similarly curious thoughts about Shakespeare’s plays and managed to the end of his

164 Oehlenschläger: Oehlenschlägers Erindringer, p. 46. Overskou describes this episode in a very similar way: Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 4, pp. 57– 58.

113 days to keep Shakespeare away from the Royal Theatre stage. The pressure on Kierulf increased, however, when the very popular singer, Edouardo du Puy (1773–1822), also pleaded for a production of Don Juan, and finally the prince regent, Frederik

“…var endog bleven foranlediget til at befale dets Opførelse.”165

(‘…had felt called upon to order the staging of this opera.’)

Who persuaded him to give the order is not known, but in the light of some forthcoming incidents, we can venture a guess about who this might have been. However, there were still a few conditions to comply with: instead of recitatives there had to be spoken dialogue and these had to be in verse. Furthermore, Don Juan’s ‘libertinage’ had to be excused in some way and therefore a justification had to be inserted in his text, which meant new lines had to be added for Don Juan. Having learned from the disaster with Così fan tutte, sixteen rehearsals with orchestra were held, and the premiere on May 5, 1807, in the presence of his majesty, King Christian VII, was a tremendous success.

165 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 4, p. 118.

114

Playbill for the premiere of Don Juan (‘Don Giovanni’) at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, on 5 May 1807. Royal Library, Copenhagen.

Of the premiere, we read the following report:

115

“I den første Forestillings Begyndelse bleve de enkelte Numere modtagne med det Bifald, der I Almindelighed skjænkes et behageligt Musikstykke; fra Don Juans af Du Puy med uovertræffelig gratiøs Lidenskabelighed foredragne Arie “Kjølende Druer” fik Bifaldet Opsving til Begejstring, og efter den mageløse første Finale, med Don Juans friske, kjække Trods og Chorets majestætisk fremrullende Hævntorden, var Forestillingens store Lykke afgjort, endskjøndt anden Act ikke dengang, selv i dens herligste Musiknumere, behagede i samme Grad, men fornemmelig kun fandt Bifald ved Donna Annas Arie og den berømte Sextet. […] Den meest Beundrede var Du Puy, der i Don Juan, som Kunzen og han i Forening med megen Smag havde transponeret for hans Stemme, baade som Sanger og Skuespiller havde sin Glandsrolle. […] Det Eneste, Kunzen beklagede, var, at han ikke, uagtet han samlede Alle ved Theatret, som kunde synge, og anvendte Alt for at faae frembragt den størst mulige Effect, kunde opnaae at give Aandechoret, der afslutter Operaen, den grandiøse Virkning, som det havde for hans Phantasie.”166

(‘At the beginning of the first performance the numbers were each received with the kind of applause commonly given to a pleasant piece of music; from Don Juan’s aria “Cooling Grapes” [‘aria №11, “Fin ch’han del vino”’], performed by Du Puy with unrivalled graceful passion, the applause grew in enthusiasm, and after the flawless first finale, with Don Juan’s fresh, bold defiance and the chorus’ majestic, rolling thunder of vengeance, the success of the performance was assured, albeit on that evening the second act, not even in its most exquisite musical pieces, did not please in the same way, and was only acclaimed for Donna Anna’s aria and the famous sextet. […] The most admired singer was Du Puy who in Don Juan, which he and Kunzen had jointly and most elegantly transposed for his voice, had found his star role both as singer and as actor. […] Kunzen’s only regret was that although he had assembled everyone at the theatre who could sing, and had applied everything he could to create the greatest possible

166 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 4, pp. 120–121.

116

effect, he was unable to give the chorus of ghosts, which ends the opera, the grandiose impact he had in mind.’)

From which can be concluded that the final scene, as so often, was not performed – and, according to Schepelern, it was not used in Copenhagen for the next hundred years or more. However, Mozart had now been launched even in Copenhagen, and Kunzen’s mission was (almost) complete. That Don Juan was only performed five times – the premiere, and then May 9, 13, 15 and 23 – was due to another, and only partly artistic reason: the much-adored Edouardo du Puy identified with his character to such a degree that he gained access to the Royal Danish chambers: first legitimately, as her music teacher, he then embarked on an illicit erotic affair with Princess Charlotte Frederikke (1784–1840), the wife of Prince Christian Frederik (1786–1848), the later King Christian VIII. The affair inevitably became known publicly; Du Puy was expelled from the country and was never allowed to return. Charlotte Frederikke had to leave Copenhagen; she went on, however, to enjoy a merry life in the Danish provinces and later in Rome.

Kunzen’s lifelong struggle for his own and for Mozart’s work was finally recognized in a very special way when the production of Don Juan re- premiered at the Royal Theatre on 6 February 1811. For Kunzen this probably represented some kind of delayed satisfaction. A year earlier the Danish diplomat Georg Nicolaus Nissen (1761–1826) had returned home from Vienna with his new wife Constanze Nissen (1762–1842), formerly Mozart. After spending some time north of Copenhagen, Nissen and Constanze moved to the city centre; they later bought a house in Lavendelstraede, where a small commemorative plaque is still to be found today.

117

Plaque on 1 Lavendelstræde in Copenhagen, where Constanze Nissen lived with her second husband, Georg Nicolai Nissen. The plate says: Constanze Mozart, widow of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, lived in this house in the period 1812–1820.

They bought the then recently-built house in 1812 and moved into the first- floor corner flat. 1 Lavendelstræde, ca. 2010.

From a number of documents we know that Constanze took part in the social and musical life of Copenhagen during the ten years she lived in the city. For example, she was often invited to the house of Friederike Brun where, twenty-five years, earlier Copenhagen society had met for

118 musical soirées. Kunzen had been a regular back then, and still was. We also know that she frequented the Royal Theatre. According to Schepelern, Constanze saw Don Juan in 1811 and remarked about the performance that

“…hendes Mand maatte have levet endnu, saa han kunde have oplevet “hvor mesterligt hans ‘Don Juan’ blev udført af det danske Orkester, og nydt en Glæde, som han endnu aldrig nød i Tyskland”.167

(‘…her husband, had he still been alive, would have experienced “how masterly his Don Juan was executed by the Danish orchestra, and would have enjoyed a satisfaction that he to date had never enjoyed in Germany.”’)

Several years later, probably in 1827, she noted that

“…die Werke Mozart nirgens beßer aufgeführt werden als in dieser Hauptstadt […]. was das Orgester betrift, für die Singstimen, blieb dan noch Vieles zu wünschen überig […].”168

(‘Mozart’s work is nowhere better performed than in this capital city […] as far as the orchestra is concerned, for the singing a lot was left to be desired […].’)

It seems most unlikely that Constanze Mozart and Kunzen did not meet during the seven years they both lived in Copenhagen, until his sudden death on 28 January 1817, caused by a stroke. The stroke followed a huge argument with Jens Baggesen about the opera Trylleharpen (‘The Magic Harp’), the project the poet and the composer had in mind thirty years before as the third part of their trilogy, together with Holger Danske and Erik Ejegod. Baggesen was furious

167 Schepelern: “Mozarts Operaer i Danmark”, p. 285. Unfortunately Schepelern does not reveal the source for his Constanze Mozart quotation. The quote is not to be found in MBA. 168 Constanze Nissen: note, in: MBA, vol. 4, no. 1424, p. 495.

119 when he heard that Kunzen had already used the idea for his opera Ossians Harfe (Ossian’s Harp’) many years ago, without ever informing him about it, and Kunzen likewise became angry when he heard that Friedrich Kuhlau (1786–1832), of all people, had composed the music for the Singspiel, which was to premiere on 30 January.169

The actor, playwright, theatre historian and most commendable chronicler of Danish theatre, Thomas Overskou, summarized Kunzen’s life in a sober fashion:

“Under 22 Aars Embedsførelse havde han, som genial Componist, dygtig Sanglærer, smagfuld og energisk Orchesteranfører og en i alle Forhold aandslivlig og praktisk Mand, gjort sig høiligen fortjent af Theatrets Musikvæsen og vundet almeen Agtelse ved en fast og retskaffen Charakteer.”170

(‘Throughout his 22 years of discharging his duties, he has as a brilliant composer, skilful singing teacher, elegant and energetic orchestra leader, and an in every respect inspired and practical man, served the music at the theatre most eminently, and with his sound and upright character won universal respect.’)

On 1 April 1813, Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen brought his final Mozart opera to a successful Danish premiere at the Royal Theatre: perhaps, coincidentally, this final production was the first of Mozart’s operas that Kunzen had ever brought to the stage, the ‘Turkish’ opera Die Entführung aus dem Serail. (‘The Abduction from the Seraglio’) Although we have no records to confirm this, and therefore might

169 A description of the tragic circumstances can be found in: Jens Immanuel Baggesen: Trylleharpens Historie Med Procedure I Sagen Justitsraad Og Professor Jens Immanuel Baggesen Contra Student Peder Hiorth Og Dom Afsagt I Den Kongelige Lands-Over-, Samt Hof- Og Stadsret I Kiøbenhavn, Den 25de Mai 1818. Kiøbenhavn: Hartvig Friderich Popp, 1818. XII, 290 p. pp. 217–220. A short excerpt can be found in English translation in: Dan Shore: The Emergence of Danish National Opera, 1779–1846. Ann Arbor, Proquest, Umi Dissertation Publishing, 2008. 223 p. p. 124. 170 Overskou: Den Danske Skueplads, vol. 4, p. 468.

120 never know for certain, we may assume that in all likelihood this premiere took place in the esteemed presence of Constanze Mozart. – Curtain.

Playbill for the premiere of Bortførelsen af Serailet, eller: Constance og Belmonte (‘The Abduction of [sic] the Seraglio, or: Constance and Belmonte’) at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen on 1 April 1813. Royal Library, Copenhagen.

121

5. SUMMARY

Ziel dieser Diplomarbeit ist es, Leben und Wirken des deutsch- dänischen Komponisten Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen (1761– 1817) einer breiteren Öffentlichkeit zur Kenntnis zu bringen. Sowohl in seiner Wahlheimat Dänemark als auch in der Musikwissenschaft ist Kunzen weitgehend unbekannt, obwohl sein erstes Opernwerk Holger Danske (‘Holger der Däne’) als erste Nationaloper Dänemarks gilt und im dänischen Kulturkanon zu den zwölf wichtigsten Kompositionen in der Musikgeschichte des Landes gezählt wird. Nicht nur diese erste Oberon-Oper der Geschichte verdient ob ihrer musikalischen Qualität und möglichen historischen Bedeutung Aufmerksamkeit, sondern auch zahlreiche andere Werke des heute beinahe vergessenen Komponisten. Für diese Aufgabe wurde ein biographisch-historischer Zugang gewählt und eine theaterwissenschaftliche Perspektive, auch da dem Verfasser die Musikwissenschaft als Forschungsfeld nicht vertraut ist. Dabei stehen die dramatischen Produkte von Kunzen im Zentrum, in ihrem politischen, kulturellen und sozialen Kontext. Grundsätzlich galt das Bemühen, für diese Arbeit vorwiegend Primärquellen heranzuziehen, was dem Verfasser aufgrund seiner Dänischkenntnisse sowohl in der Königlichen Bibliothek als auch im dänischen Reichsarchiv in Kopenhagen weitestgehend möglich war. Als Leitfaden stand die Forschungsarbeit von Prof. Heinrich W. Schwab zur Verfügung, dessen unermüdliches Wirken über viele Jahre eine zumindest teilweise Aufmerksamkeit auf das Werk von Kunzen mit sich gebracht hat. Nach der Einleitung zu Herkunft und Werdegang des aus einer Musikerfamilie stammenden Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen fokussiert das folgende Kapitel auf Entstehung und Rezeption der auf Christoph Martin Wielands Versepos Oberon basierenden Oper Holger Danske. Dabei liegt neben dem Inhalt das Hauptaugenmerk auf der speziellen politischen und kulturellen Konstellation in Kopenhagen im

122 letzten Drittel des 18. Jahrhunderts. Die Spannungen zwischen den vor allem in Politik und Wirtschaft führenden Deutschstämmigen im Lande und der sich herausbildenden nationalen dänischen Bewegung zeigten größte Auswirkungen auf das Bühnenwerk. Heftige antideutsche Polemik und gleichzeitig erbitterter Widerstand gegen das verschwenderische Genre Oper, begünstigt durch eine für diese Epoche in Europa einzigartige Pressefreiheit, führten 1789 zum größten Theaterdisput in der Geschichte Dänemarks und schließlich zur Absetzung der künstlerisch überaus erfolgreichen Oper, deren Parallelen mit dem Werk Mozarts von Musikwissenschaftlern immer wieder hervorgehoben wurde. In umgekehrter Funktion, nämlich als patriotisches Signal an die deutsche Besatzung, erlangte Holger Danske erst 1941 eine erneute Aufführung am Königlichen Theater. Überregionale Bedeutung hatte die Oper unter Umständen durch ihren möglichen Einfluss auf Paul Wranitzky’s Singspiel Oberon und im Zuge dessen auf Mozarts Die Zauberflöte. Nach der Holger-Fehde ging Kunzen nach Berlin, wo er sich als Mit- Herausgeber vom Musikalisches Wochenblatt und Mit-Betreiber einer Musikhandlung betätigte und mit Erfolg Subskriptions-Konzerte gab. Trotz der Protektion durch Hofkapellmeister Johann Friedrich Reichardt gelang es ihm jedoch nicht, in der Stadt künstlerisch Fuß zu fassen. Er lernte in Berlin aber die Musik von Mozart kennen, was seine Karriere entscheidend prägen sollte und ihm bei seinem Engagement als Musikdirektor im neu gegründeten Nationaltheater in Frankfurt 1792 entgegenkam. Als Höhepunkte seiner dortigen Zeit ist vor allem der große Erfolg mit Die Zauberflöte – über den Frau Rath Goethe eingehend zu berichten wusste – wie auch jene mit Die Entführung aus dem Serail, Don Giovanni und ausgerechnet Wranitzkys Oberon hervorzuheben. Letzteres, dort bereits 1790 in Anwesenheit von Mozart aufgeführtes Werk stand dabei seiner eigenen Oberon-Oper im Wege. Nicht zuletzt basierte dessen Erfolg auf der gesanglichen Glanzleistung von Johanna Margaretha Antonetta Zuccarini in der

123

Rolle des Oberon. Als verehelichte Frau Kunzen gab sie mit ihrem virtuosen Koloratursopran u. a. auch die Rolle des Frl. von Tasberg in Kunzens einzigem in Frankfurt präsentierten Werk, dem Singspiel Die Weinlese oder Das Fest der Winzer (1793), welches ein großer Erfolg auf zahlreichen deutschen und internationalen Bühnen werden sollte, ohne jedoch für Kunzen entsprechende Einnahmen zu bringen. Auf Frankfurt folgte eine noch sehr im Dunkel liegende Zeit der Kunzens in Prag, da für zahlreiche kolportierte Erfolge von Kunzen mit Mozart in Prag jegliche Nachweise fehlen. Dokumente belegen jedoch Auftritte von Frau Kunzen in mehreren Produktionen der “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler”, unter anderem als Königin der Nacht in Die Zauberflöte. Gleichzeitig kolportierte Nachrichten, dass F.L.Æ. Kunzen in Prag ohne Engagement sei, erweckten die Vermutung auf möglicherweise bewusst lancierte Meldungen, um eine Anstellung für ihn am Königlichen Theater zu bescheidenen Konditionen zu erwirken, was 1795 auch geschah. Der letzte Abschnitt der Arbeit konzentriert sich auf die ungewöhnlichen Umstände der auf Drängen von Hofkapellmeister Kunzen erfolgten dänischen Erstaufführungen von Così fan tutte (1798), Don Giovanni (1807) und Die Entführung aus dem Serail (1813) am Königlichen Theater in Kopenhagen – letztere mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit in Anwesenheit von Constanze Nissen, vormalige Mozart.

124

ABSTRACT Born in Lübeck into a family of musicians, Friedrich Ludwig Æmilius Kunzen (1761–1817) followed his calling to become a composer and, encouraged by Carl Friedrich Cramer (1752–1807), moved to Copenhagen in 1784, where he presented his first opera, Holger Danske, at the Royal Theatre in 1789. However, cultural and political circumstances resulted in a major public dispute centred on the opera, which was consequently withdrawn from the repertoire. A deeply disappointed Kunzen then moved to Berlin, where he only had moderate success, but where he became acquainted with the work of Mozart, which was to have great influence on his career and musical development. In 1792, Kunzen embarked upon his new job as Director for the Singspiel of the recently formed Nationaltheater in Frankfurt. He had overwhelming success, particularly with Mozart’s Die Entführung aus dem Serail (‘The Abduction from the Seraglio’) and Die Zauberflöte (‘The Magic Flute’). He premiered his new operetta Die Weinlese oder Das Fest der Winzer (‘The Grape Harvest or The Feast of the Winegrowers’) to great acclaim, but Paul Wranitzky’s (1756–1808) Singspiel Oberon stood in the way of his Holger Danske. The celebrated Oberon-singer of the day and of this production was Johanna Margaretha Antonetta Zuccarini (1766–1842), who became Kunzen’s wife during their tenure in Frankfurt. It might well have been her reputation that took the Kunzens to Prague in 1794, where her singing engagements are documented but Kunzen’s alleged success with Mozart’s operas remains unverified. He returned to his beloved Copenhagen in 1795, taking over the post of Hofkapellmeister with the support of retiring incumbent Johann Abraham Peter Schulz (1747– 1800). Kunzen’s enthusiasm for Mozart met with indignant scepticism, but after a disastrous production of Cosi fan tutte in 1798, he triumphed with Don Giovanni in 1807 and with The Abduction from the Seraglio in 1813 – the latter in all likelihood in the presence of Constanze von Nissen, Mozart’s widow.

125

REFERENCES

Allgemeines europäisches Journal. Brünn, bei Joseph Georg Traßler, 1794. Zweiten Bandes zweites Stück.

Allgemeines europäisches Journal. Brünn, bei Joseph Georg Traßler, 1794. Zweiten Bandes drittes Stück.

Anderson, Emily (ed.): The Letters of Mozart & His Family. London: Macmillan, 1938, 3 vols, vol. 3.

[Anonymous]: “Nachrichten. Ueber den Zustand der Musik in Kopenhagen”, in: Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, 35, [Den 29ten May] 1799.

[Anonymous]: “Theater. 1. Ueber die teutsche Oper in Hamburg. [Kritik e. anonymen Beiträgers an der Auswahl der Stücke, deren unvorteilhafte Besetzung und Ausstattung als Ursachen für mißlungene Aufführungen. – Vorschläge zur Verbesserung]”, in: Journal des Luxus und der Moden. Herausgegeben von F[riedrich] J[ustin] Bertuch und G[eorg] M[elchior] Kraus. Siebenzehnter Band. Jahrgang 1802. Mit ausgemahlten und schwarzen Kupfertafeln. Weimar, 1802. Im Verlag des Industrie-Comptoirs. [Nebst] Intelligenz-Blätter, 17, 1802, June IV, pp. 335–339. http://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/receive/jportal_jparticle_00087214 01.12.2014

[Anonymous]: “Auszüge aus Briefen eines deutschen Reisenden.” In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. p. 21.

[Anonymous]: “Nachricht von merkwürdigen Tonkünstlern. Kunzen.” In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. p. 23.

126

[Anonymous]: “Nachrichten aus Briefen.” In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Drittes Stück. September 1792. [Berlin]. p. 85.

Aumont, Arthur, and Edgar Collin: Det Danske Nationalteater 1748–1889: En statistisk fremstilling af Det Kongelige Teaters historie fra skuepladsens aabning paa kongens nytorv 18. december 1748 til udgangen af sæsonen 1888–89. Copenhagen: J. Jørgensen & Co., 1896.

Bacher, Otto: Die Geschichte Der Frankfurter Oper Im 18. Jahrhundert. Veröffentlichungen Der Deutschen Musikgesellschaft Ortsgruppe Frankfurt a. M. Band 1. Frankfurt Am Main, Englert und Schlosser, 1926.

Baggesen, Jens: Holger Danske. Opera i tre Acter, sat i Musik af Hr. F. L. Æm. Kunzen, ved Jens Baggesen. Copenhagen: Johan Frederik Schulz, 1789.

Baggesen, Jens: Til det virkelige Publicum, i Anledning af Herr Rahbeks Epigrammer i Aftenposten. Copenhagen: Johan Frederik Schulz, 1789.

Baggesen, J[ens] I[mmanuel]: Trylleharpens Historie Med Procedure I Sagen Justitsraad Og Professor Jens Immanuel Baggesen Contra Student Peder Hiorth Og Dom Afsagt I Den Kongelige Lands-Over-, Samt Hof- Og Stadsret I Kiøbenhavn, Den 25de Mai 1818. Kiøbenhavn: Hartvig Friderich Popp, 1818.

Baggesen, Ove: Malerisk Reise i Schweiz, fra Basel, Schweiz rundt, Paris, gennem Tyskland til København, Jens Baggesens dagbøger fra 11/8- 1789–27/9-1790. [Birkerød] 2007, 1 CD-rom 881 p.

Bobé, Louis: Frederikke Brun, født Münter, og hendes Kreds hjemme og ude. Kbh.: 1910. (Diss.)

Bobé, Louis, and Carl Dumreicher (eds.): Gemt og Glemt: Minder fra gamle Dage. Copenhagen: Hagerup, 1915–1916, 3 vols., vol. 2 (1916).

127

Burgh, Allatson: Anecdotes of Music, historical and biographical; in a series of letters from a Gentleman to his daughter. Vol. III, London: Printed for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown, Paternoster Row. 1814.

Cabinet order from 4 September 1770, signed by King Christian VII. Rigsarkivet, Danske Kancelli, E2. Samling af kabinetsordrer, 1768– 1778.

Cramer, Carl Friedrich: 19. Freytag. An Wieland. In: Musik. Erstes Vierteljahr. Copenhagen, bey S. Sönnichsen, Notenducker und Musikalienhändler daselbst. Gedruckt bey dem Universitätsbuchdr. J.F.Schultz.1789. 346 p. Erstes Stück, Dezember 1788, pp. 7–31.

Cramer, Carl Friedrich: Holger Danske. In: Musik. Erstes Vierteljahr. Copenhagen, bey S. Sönnichsen, Notenducker und Musikalienhändler daselbst. Gedruckt bey dem Universitätsbuchdr. J.F.Schultz.1789. 346 p. Erstes Stück, Dezember 1788, 20. Sonnabend. pp. 31–110.

Cramer, Carl Friedrich (ed.): Magazin der Musik. Hamburg, 1783–1786.

Eitner, Robert: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten christlicher Zeitrechnung bis Mitte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts. 2. verbesserte Auflage in 11 Bänden. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1959, 11 vols, vol. 5.

Friis, Børge: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. Sein Leben und Werk. I. Teil: Bis zur Oper Holger Danske (1789). Diss. Copenhagen 1943.

Gerber, Ernst Ludwig: Historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler, welches Nachrichten von dem Leben und den Werken musikalischer Schriftsteller, berühmter Komponisten, Sänger, Meister auf Instrumenten, kunstvoller Dilettanten, Musikverleger, auch Orgel- und Instrumentenmacher, älterer und neuerer Zeit, aus allen Nationen enthält.Leipzig, 1790–1792. Erster Theil, A–M, 1790.

Gerber, Ernst Ludwig: Neues historisch-biographisches Lexikon der Tonkünstler, welches Nachrichten von dem Leben und den Werken

128

musikalischer Schriftsteller, berühmter Komponisten, Sänger, Meister auf Instrumenten, kunstvoller Dilettanten, Musikverleger, auch Orgel- und Instrumentenmacher, älterer und neuerer Zeit, aus allen Nationen enthält. Leipzig, 1812–1814. Dritter Theil, K–R. 1813.

Gerber, Ernst Ludwig, and Wessely, Othmar. Historisch-biographisches Lexikon Der Tonkünstler (1790-1792) Und Neues Historisch- biographisches Lexikon Der Tonkünstler (1812-1814), Mit Den in Den Jahren 1792 Bis 1814 Veröffentlichten Ergänzungen Sowie Der Erstveröffentlichung Handschriftlicher Berichtigungen Und Nachträge, Bd. 4. Graz, 1969.

Gurlitt, Wilibald: Riemann Musik Lexikon. Zwölfte völlig neubearbeitete Auflage in drei Bänden. Mainz: B. Schott’s Söhne, 1959. Band 1, Personenteil A–K.

Hatting, Carsten E.: Mozart og Danmark. Copenhagen: Engstrøm & Sødring Musikforlag A/S, 1991.

Heiberg, P[eter] A[ndreas]: Holger Tydske. Heroisk Opera i tre Akter til F.L. Æm. Kunzens Musik. København, 1789.

Holger Danske. Danish National Radio Symphony Orchestra and Choir, conductor Thomas Dausgaard, Dacapo Records, Cat. No. 8.224036-37, 1995. Booklet.

Jakubcová, Alena and Jitka Ludvová: Deutschsprachiges Theater in Prag. Spielstätten und Quellen. In: Alena Jakubcová, Jitka Ludvová, Václav Maidl: Deutschsprachiges Theater in Prag. Begegnungen der Sprachen und Kulturen. Prague, 2001. pp. 492–511.

Jensen, Anne Ørbæk: “Klubs, Gesellschaften und Salons: Das Kopenhagener Konzertleben 1760–1820”, in: Wahlverwandtschaften: Zwei Jahrhunderte musikalischer Wechselwirkungen zwischen Dänemark und Deutschland, ed. Anne Ørbæk Jensen, Claus Røllum- Larsen, and Inger Sørensen. Copenhagen: Det Kongelige Bibliotek, 2004 (= Serie Göttinger Bibliotheksschriften, 28).

129

Kiøbenhavns kongelige allene privilegerede Adresse-Contoirs Efterretninger, 9te Aargang, N.41 (1767), Tirsdagen den 17. Martii, col. 1–2.

Kiøbenhavns Kongelig alene privilegerede Adresse-Contoirs Efterretninger, Onsdagen den 17.October, no. 280, Ao. 1798.

Kongsted, Ole: “Om Holger Danske og Holger-fejden”, in: Magazin fra det Kongelige Bibliotek, 4, 1996, p. 19–31.

Köster, Albert (ed.): Die Briefe der Frau Rath Goethe. Leipzig: Insel Verlag, 1956.

Krogh, Torben: Zur Geschichte des dänischen Singspiels im 18. Jahrhundert. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaards Forlag, 1924.

Kunzen, Frederik Ludevig Æmilius:Viser og Lyriske Sange satte i Musik af Frederik Ludevig Æmilius Kunzen. Kiöbenhavn. Trykt hos August Friderich Stein.[1786].

Kunzen, Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius: Holger Danske. Libretto. Opera i 3 akter. Tekst af Jens Baggesen. Copenhagen: Johan Frederik Schulz, 1789.

Kunzen, Frederik Ludevig Æmilius: Holger Danske. En Opera i tre Acter. Af Jens Baggesen. Componeret og indrettet for Klaveret af Frederik Ludevig Æmilius Kunzen. Kiøbenhavn, trykt og forlagt af S. Sønnichsen, Kongl. Privel. Nodetrykker. [1790].

Kunzen, Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius: Letter from 10 April 1789. Samling Troensegaard, Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen.

Kunzen, Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius: Holger Danske oder Oberon. Eine Oper in drey Acten. Clavierauszug von Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen. Herausgegeben von C.F. Cramer. Copenhagen 1790. Gedruckt bey S. Sönnichsen. In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. pp. 5–14.

130

Kunzen, Ludwig Aemil: “Komponistenglück”, in: Zeitung für die elegante Welt, 64, [Dienstag 29. Mai] 1804, col. 508–510.

Kunzen, Joh[ann] Paul: “Aller-unterth. Freudenzuruff an K. M. Christian den Sechsten auf Dero Krönungs-tag in einer Cantata abgestattet und in Music gesetzet | Joh. Paul Kunzen. – Hamb. [1731]”, in: Jørgen Friis: Danmarkes og Norges Glæde over Kong Christian den Siette, da Hs. Maj. til sit Højst-Kongl. Regimente blev salvet og indviet paa Friderichsborgs Slott d. 6. Junij 1731. Copenhagen: s.typ., 1731, s.p.

Langen, Ulrik: Den afmægtige: En biografi om Christian 7. Copenhagen: Jyllands-Postens Forlag, 2009.

Laursen, John Christian: “David Hume and the Danish Debate about Freedom of the Press in the 1770s”, in: Journal of the History of Ideas 59/1 (1998), pp. 167–172.

Loewenberg, Alfred: Annals of Opera: 1597–1940. Cambridge: W. Heffer & Sons Limited, 1943.

Lunn, Sven: “Oberons tryllehorn”, in: Dansk Musik Tidsskrift, 4, 1944, p. 75–80.

Luxdorph, B.[olle]W.[illum]: Luxdorphs dagbøger: Indeholdende bidrag til det 18. aarhundredes stats-, kultur- og personalhistorie, ed. Eiler Nystrøm, vol. 2: 1774–1788. Copenhagen: Gad, 1925–1930.

Martienßen, C.A.: “Holger Danske”, Oper von Fr. L. Al. Kunzen. In: Alfred Heuß (ed.): Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft. Dreizehnter Jahrgang 1911–1912. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1912. pp. 225–232.

Mattheson, Johann: Grundlage einer Ehren-Pforte, woran der Tüchtigsten Capellmeister, Componisten, Musikgelehrten, Tonkünstler etc., Leben, Werke, Verdienste etc. erscheinen sollen. Hamburg: 1740. 428 p., pp. 158–165.

131

Mozart: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen. Gesamtausgabe. Herausgegeben von der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg. Gesammelt und erläutert von Wilhelm A. Bauer und Otto Erich Deutsch, auf Grund deren Vorarbeiten erläutert von Joseph Heinz Eybl. Erweiterte Ausgabe mit einer Einführung und Ergänzungen herausgegeben von Ulrich Konrad. Kassel-Basel-London-New York-Prague: Bärenreiter/Munich: dtv, 2005 (orig. 1962f.), 8 vols. (= MBA), vol. 4.

Mozart Society of America. http://mozartsocietyofamerica.org/bertramka/history.php 2.12.2014

Musikalisches Wochenblatt. I. Berlin. In der neuen Berlinischen Musikhandlung. [Oct. 1791]

Neiiendam, Robert: “Kong Christian den Syvende som Skuespiller: Et Bidrag til Hoftheatrets Historie i dets tidligste Tid”, in: Historisk Tidsskrift 8/2 (1909–1910), pp. 304–324.

Oehlenschläger, Adam: Oehlenschlägers Erindringer. Første Bind. Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høsts Forlag, 1850.

Overskou, Thomas: Den Danske Skueplads, i dens Historie, fra de første Spor af danske Skuespil indtil vor Tid. Copenhagen: Forlaget af Samfundet til den danske Literaturs Fremme, 1854–1864, 5 vols, vol. 3 (1860), vol. 4 (1862).

Parmentier, William F. II.: The Mether: Cultural Perceptions and Interpretations of Turkish Drum and Bugle Music Throughout History. In: Ottoman Empire and European Theatre. Vol. I: The Age of Mozart and Selim III (1756–1808). Michael Hüttler / Hans Ernst Weidinger (eds.), Wien: Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, 2013 (Ottomania 1) pp. 285–305.

Preisler, Joachim Daniel: Journal over En Reise Igiennem Frankerige Og Tydskland I Aaret MDCCLXXXVIII. Copenhagen, 1789. 2 vol. Vol. II.

132

Rahbek, Knud Lyne: “Skuepladsen”, in: Minerva, et maanedsskrivt, Januarii, Februarii og Martii, 1789 [Copenhagen: Trykt hos Johan Frederik Schultz, 1789], p. 407–410.

Rahbek, Knud Lyne: Erindringer af mit liv. Anden deel. Kjöbenhavn: Jens Hostrup Schultz, 1825.

Ravn, V.C.: Koncerter og musikalske Selskaber i Ældre Tid. Festskrift i Anledning af Musikforeningens Halvhundredaarsdag. København, 1886.

Ravn, C.V.: Kunzen, Frederik Ludvig Æmilius. In: Carl Frederik Bricka (ed.): Dansk biografisk lexikon. Tillige omfattende Norge for tidsrummet 1537–1814. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandels Forlag (F. Hegel & Søn), 1887–1905, 19 vols, vol. 9 (1895), pp. 601–606.

Reddaway, William F.: “King Christian VII”, in: The English Historical Review 31(1916), pp. 59–84.

Sadie, Stanley (ed.): The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited, 1980, 20 vols, vol. 9, pp.496– 497.

Sander, Levin Christian: Nekrolog 1817. In: Dagspostens Søndagsblad. Udgivet af Jens Kragh Høst, 1817, No. 2.

Saure, Wolfgang: Die Geschichte Der Frankfurter Oper Von 1792 Bis 1880. Köln: Philosophische Fakultät Der Universität Köln, 1958.

Scheibe, Siegfried (Akademie der Wissenschaften) (ed.): Wielands Briefwechsel. Vol. 10: April 1788–December 1790. Berlin: Akad. Verl., 1992.

Schepelern, Gerhard: “Mozarts Operaer i Danmark”, in: Mozarts Operaer: En kritisk Studie. Oversat efter den engelske 2.Udgave og forsynet med en Artikel om Mozarts Operaer i Danmark af Gerhard Schepelern, ed. Edward J. Dent. Copenhagen: Thaning & Appel, 1961.

133

Schepelern, Gerhard: Operaens historie i Danmark 1634–1975. Copenhagen: Munksgaard-Rosinante, 1995.

Schneider, L[udwig]: Geschichte der Oper und des Königlichen Opernhauses in Berlin. Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1852.

Schneider, Ulrike: Between Enlightenment and Orient: Oberon by Christoph Martin Wieland. In: Ottoman Empire and European Theatre. vol. 1: The Age of Mozart and Selim III (1756–1808). Michael Hüttler / Hans Ernst Weidinger (eds.), Wien: Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, 2013 (Ottomania 1) pp. 877–901.

Schulz, J. A. P.: Lieder im Volkston, bey dem Klavier zu singen. Berlin: George Jakob Decker, 1782.

Schütze, Johann Friedrich: Hamburgische Theater–Geschichte. Hamburg: Gedruckt bei J.P. Treder, 1794.

Schwab, Heinrich W.: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen (1761–1817): Stationen seines Lebens und Wirkens. Ausstellung aus Anlaß des Jubiläums der Berufung zum Musikdirektor der Königlichen dänischen Hofkapelle im Jahre 1795. Heide/Holstein: Westholsteinische Verlagsanstalt Boyens & Co., 1995.

Schyberg, Frederik and Michael Rosing: Den Store Teaterrejse, Michael Rosings Dagbog Og Breve Fra Pariserrejsen I 1788. Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1943.

Shore, Dan: The Emergence of Danish National Opera, 1779–1846. Ann Arbor, Proquest, Umi Dissertation Publishing, 2008.

Taschenbuch für die Schaubühne, auf das Jahr 1792. Gotha, bey Carl Wilhelm Ettinger, 1792.

Teuber, Oscar: Geschichte des Prager Theaters. Von den Anfängen des Schauspielwesens bis auf die neueste Zeit. Prag: Hofbuckdruckerei A. Haase, 1885. Zweiter Theil.

134

The Annual Register or a View of the History, Politics and Literature for the Year 1770, 2nd ed. London: Printed for J. Dodley, 1774.

Volek, Tomislav: Miscellanea Musicologica. Vydává Ústav Pro Dějiny Hudbypři Universitĕ Karlovĕ v Praze. Repertoir Nosticovské hodivadla v Praze z let 1794, 1796–8. Zpracoval Tomislav Volek. XVI. Svazek, 1961.

Volek, Tomislav: Repertoire pražské Spenglerovy divadelní společnosti v sezóně 1793–1794. [‘The Repertoire of Spengler’s Prague Theater Company in the Season 1793–1794’] Miscellanea musicologica XIV, 1960.

Weidinger, Hans Ernst: From Tabarca to Topkapi, or "the Sultan self shan't carry me, unless his highness promises to marry me": Don Juan Crossing the Ottoman World II (working title). In: Ottoman Empire and European Theatre. Vol. III: Seraglios and Harems. A Commemoration of the Bicentenary of Lord Byron’s Sojourn in the Ottoman Capital (1810). Michael Hüttler / Hans Ernst Weidinger (eds.), Wien: Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, 2015.(in preparation).

Weis, Ulrich: Taschenbuch für Schauspieler und Schauspielliebhaber. Offenbach am Mayn, bey Ulrich Weis, 1779.

135

DEPICTIONS

Page 5: Friedrich Ludwig Aemilius Kunzen (1761-1817). Etching by Johann Heinrich Lips, 1809, after a miniature by by Mathias Møller Heinrichsen. 15,6 x 10,5 cm. Enscribed: “M. Henrichsen del.H.Lips sculps. Zu finden in Zürich bey H.G. Nägeli & Comp.” Facsimile. Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen.

Page 28: Cabinet order from 4 September 1770, signed by King Christian VII. Rigsarkivet (Danish State Archive), Danske Kancelli, E2. Samling af kabinetsordrer, 1768–1778. Photograph by the author.

Page 46: Jens Baggesen: Holger Danske. Opera i tre Acter, sat i Musik af Hr. F. L. Æm. Kunzen, ved Jens Baggesen. Kiøbenhavn, 1789. Trykt hos Johan Frederik Schulz, Universitets-Bogtrykker. 8°. Frontispiece. Facsimile. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek.

Page 48: Holger Danske. En Opera i tre Acter. Af Jens Baggesen. Componeret og indrettet for Klaveret af Frederik Ludevig Æmilius Kunzen. Kiøbenhavn, trykt og forlagt af S. Sønnichsen, Kongl. Privel. Nodetrykker. [1790]. Lateral-4°. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek, 152 p. Frontispiece. Facsimile. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek.

Page 71: Nachricht von merkwürdigen Tonkünstlern. Kunzen. In: Musikalische Monathsschrift. Erstes Stück. Julius. 1792. [Berlin]. p. 23. Facsimile. Copenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek.

Page 76: Playbill of the Frankfurt premiere of Paul Wranitzky’s Oberon, 15 October 1790. Facsimile. Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt.

136

Page 95: Playbill from the performance of Die Zauberflöte on 16 November 1794, by the “deutschen Schauspielergesellschaft des Franz Spengler im königlichen altstädter Nationaltheater” in Prague. Photocopy courtesy of Institut umění - Divadelní ústav / Arts and Theatre Institute (Prague/ Czech Republic).

Page 115: Playbill for the premiere of Don Juan (‘Don Giovanni’) at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen, on 5 May 1807. Royal Library, Copenhagen. Photograph by the author.

Page 118: Plaque on 1 Lavendelstræde in Copenhagen, where Constanze Nissen lived with her second husband, Georg Nicolai Nissen. Photograph by the author.

Page 118: 1 Lavendelstræde in Copenhagen. Photograph by the author.

Page 121: Playbill for the premiere of Bortførelsen af Serailet, eller: Constance og Belmonte (‘The Abduction of [sic] the Seraglio, or: Constance and Belmonte’) at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen on 1 April 1813. Royal Library, Copenhagen. Photograph by the author.

All depictions are in the public domain and may therefore be used for non-commercial purposes, hence for this thesis.

137

CURRICULUM VITAE

Geboren 1963 in Wien. Österreicher.

Beginn des Studiums der Theaterwissenschaft 1981/82 an der Universität Wien.

Ab 1983 praktische Arbeiten als Regieassistent und Produktionsassistent bei TV, Film und Theater.

1985/86 Gastsemester an der Universität Kopenhagen, Institut für Filmwissenschaft.

Fortsetzung der Theaterarbeit als Regieassistent in Wien (Volkstheater, Drachengasse, Ronacher) und in Berlin für Royal Shakespeare Company – Direktor Terry Hands.

Erste eigene Regiearbeit 1993 in Wien. Seither ca. 40 Inszenierungen am Volkstheater, Vienna’s English Theatre, Theater Drachengasse, Künstlerhaus, Konzerthaus, Ensembletheater u.a. sowie Tiroler Landestheater, Niederösterreichisches Landestheater, Neue Bühne Villach, Theater Vorpommern, Schauspielhaus Düsseldorf und in Istanbul.

1995–2000 Aufenthalt in London mit Inszenierungen u.a. am Gate Theatre, Lyric Hammersmith und White Bear Theatre. Dabei auch Zusammenarbeit mit Tom Stoppard, David Farr und Michael Kingsbury.

Seit 2000 neben Wien auch wohnhaft in Kopenhagen. Dort Regiearbeiten am Café Theater, Grønnegade Theater, beim “Hamlet- Festival” auf Schloss Kronborg in Helsingör, sowie am staatlichen Museum für Kunst / Königliches Theater.

Daneben zahlreiche Übersetzungen von Theaterstücken skandinavischer Autoren ins Deutsche.

Seit 2008 Wiederaufnahme des Studiums der Theaterwissenschaft an der Universität Wien und selbständige Forschungsprojekte zum Thema “Ottoman Empire and European Theatre” mit dazugehörigen Vorträgen bei gleichnamigen Symposien in Wien und Istanbul und Publikationen dieser Projekte im Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag, Wien, 2013–2015. (Ottomania I – III).

138