XX Introduction

The three pieces edited in this volume are arrangements by the manner in which he formulates his correspondence with me is composer of original sacred works for solo voices, four-part simply too whimsical to deprive you of, and I am thus enclosing chorus and organ. Whereas the two pieces with English texts his letter. It is one of many of his strange, half-crazed nature.”4 – the Anthem “Why, o Lord, delay for ever” MWV A 19 and In the enclosed letter, Broadley had asked Moscheles a few days the Hymn “Hear my prayer” MWV B 49 – were commissions, earlier: “With reference to the Prelude, you were kind enough the orchestral transcription of the organ part of the “Ave Maria” to say you would name to Mr. Mendelssohn, I beg to say that op. 23 no. 2 MWV B 19 was practically necessitated by the Organists in England generally indulge on those occasions in a unique conditions encountered by musicians in Düsseldorf. style rather florid – at one time with an extra-low pedal bass – at another time on the very top of the Instrument either in thirds, or after the manner of some of the ad libitum passages in the Anthem “Why, o Lord, delay for ever” MWV A 19 for Solo Gems a la Paganini of yours; I think this has a very good effect (Alto or Mezzosoprano), Chorus and Orchestra for organ Prelude, particularly on the Swell. If Mr. Mendels- sohn will take the trouble to write me such a prelude, for my The Anthem MWV A 19 can be briefly described as an orches- own private Album, without his publishing the same, or letting tration and revision of MWV B 33,1 written in 1840, which it be known, I shall be happy to pay him a proportionate extra had been printed in 1841 both by Cramer & Co. and Sim- Fee. […] Perhaps you will intimate to Mr. Mendelssohn for his rock as Drei geistliche Lieder for solo, chorus and organ. The prelude, that English organs generally go from G to G 5 octaves: author of the libretto – a paraphrase of the 13th Psalm – had but that the York organ (with which I am acquainted) goes from commissioned both the musical setting as well as the orchestra- C to C, six octaves (being half an octave higher, and half an tion: Dr. Charles Bayles Broadley (1800–1866), Deputy Queen’s octave lower than the G organ).”5 Mendelssohn justifiably re- professor of civil law at Cambridge University’s Trinity College. jected this request, however, in a reply addressed to Moscheles, Ignaz Moscheles (1794–1870), who gave Broadley composition he inquired: “May I ask you […] to present my apologies to him lessons, characterized him as a headstrong, engaging, yet com- [Broadley] (and to you) for not being able to send the desired manding and learned presence. Praeludium; it is not for the lack of good will, but I simply do From an entry of 1841 in her husband’s diary, Charlotte not know how to write a Praeludium that is truly integral to Moscheles estimates that: “Among the many students of the the work, without altering its form and providing it with an ap- past years was the tirelessly original Mr. B.: ‘The huge figure pearance it does not deserve; I would rather leave it up to every strove to create huge works, with ideas bubbling forth from be- organist to let his fingers revel in E flat major and related keys, neath a wig of curls. He brings me a freshly baked psalm, a mo- to the extent that he is capable of, be it long or short, lovely or tet, a hymn for perusal, and I correct by taking a white sheet of frightful.”6 paper, putting to music his often eccentric texts and asking him: One and a half years later, in October 1842, Moscheles once ‘Is not that what you meant to express?’ whereupon he always again contacted Mendelssohn at Broadley’s behest, and once replied with: ‘Oh yes and just so.’”2 Elsewhere, Felix Mosche- again concerning the Anthem: “Mer Broadley begs me to ask les (1833–1917), the composer’s son, described Broadley as “an you to orchestrate the Psalm which you wrote for him, and to eccentric, wealthy music lover who unsuccessfully attempted to send him the manuscript score, for which he offers you 10 guin- produce compositions of his own.”3 eas.”7 This time the composer replied in the affirmative: “I shall Even before the publication of the work with organ accom- try to see whether I can drape Broadley’s piece in an orchestral paniment MWV B 33, Broadley had requested a prelude for garment, and in the event that it works, I shall send it to you this piece, as Moscheles informed Mendelssohn on 9 February post-haste.”8 Broadley was apparently endeavoring – most likely 1841: “It is his [Broadley’s] wish to own a Prelude of yours (one since the summer of 1842 at the latest – to have all three com- page long, as it were) for this psalm, which he can conserve in missioned psalm settings available at hand, and scored for cho- his album, and would like to have a few measures following the rus and orchestra. Louis Spohr also later orchestrated his Psalm chorale printed as a prelude to the last number. The curious 128 “O Bless’d for ever, bless’d are they.” He completed a version

1 Publication and history of its origins in Series VI, Vol. 2 of this edition. 2 Aus Moscheles’ Leben. Nach Briefen und Tagebüchern, ed. by Charlotte Moscheles, Leipzig, 1873, Vol. 2 (hereafter: Aus Moscheles’ Leben), p. 82. 3 Briefe von Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy an Ignaz und Charlotte Moscheles, ed. by Felix Moscheles, Leipzig, 1888 (hereafter: Briefe an Moscheles), p. 204, note 2. 4 Letter from Ignaz and Charlotte Moscheles to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 9 February 1841, Bodleian Library, University of Oxford (hereafter: GB-Ob), MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 39, Green Books XIII-66, printed in: David Brodbeck, Some Notes on an Anthem by Mendelssohn, in: Mendels- sohn and his World, ed. by R. Larry Todd, Princeton, 1991, pp. 43–64 (hereafter: David Brodbeck, Some Notes), p. 60, note 5. 5 Letter from Charles B. Broadley to Ignaz Moscheles of 8 February 1841, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 39, Green Books XIII-62 (Letter originally enclosed in Green Books XIII-66), printed in: David Brodbeck, Some Notes [note 4], pp. 57–58, quotation on p. 58. 6 Letter to Ignaz Moscheles of 14 March 1841, University of Leeds, Leeds University Library, Brotherton Collection, without shelfmark (album Men- delssohn’s Letters to Moscheles 1826–1847) (hereafter: GB-LEbc, Mendelssohn’s Letters to Moscheles), fol. 43, printed in: Briefe an Moscheles [note 3], pp. 206–209, quotation on p. 207. 7 Letter from Ignaz Moscheles to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 20 October 1842, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 42, Green Books XVI-78. 8 Letter to Ignaz Moscheles of 18 November 1842, GB-LEbc, Mendelssohn’s Letters to Moscheles, fol. 45, printed in: Briefe an Moscheles [note 3], pp. 219–223, quotation on p. 223. XXI for organ in April 1841, and the manuscript of the version with keyboard instrument as opus 100 in 1842 or early 1843.15 In full orchestra is dated September 1842.9 Here, too, only the ver- addition, all three works by Mendelssohn, Moscheles and Spohr sion with keyboard instrument was printed with differing opus contain chorales or chorale-like segments, which let us assume numbers, first by Cramer, Chappell & White in England, then, that Broadley also expressly wished for this, as chorales did not in autumn 1842, by Simrock in Germany. With the setting of usually belong to the inventory of English church music.16 Psalm 93 that had been assigned to him, “Robed in pow’r Jeho- Mendelssohn did not simply settle for orchestrating the piece vah reigneth”, Ignaz Moscheles approached his task in a more as stipulated, but used the opportunity to write an expansive leisurely way:10 By February 1841 he had nothing but a few choral fugue on the slightly altered wording of the last lines sketches to show for himself. Incidentally, he had considerable of the poem.17 Joining the woodwinds and strings in this clos- trouble completing the work, as he intimated to Mendelssohn: ing fugue are trumpets and timpani. The work was completed “As you can see, he [Broadley] was envisioning the building of on 5 January 1843,18 the copy transcribed by Eduard Hensch‑ a cloverleaf of psalms, in that, thanks to me, he had Spohr be ke was brought to an end on 14 January;19 two days later asked to write one as well. I dare not even think of the role I am Mendelssohn sent it to Moscheles with a cover letter: “Herewith to play here. I have completed the draft of my piece (Psalm 93) enclosed is a score for Mr. Broadley. I inserted an additional […] Ah! if only I had the benefit of your advice and opinion! If fugue and feel that this is now the best piece of the lot. It is like only I had the same luck as F. Hiller, who is able to work close the little shopkeeper who throws in an extra biscuit. […] Now by you, and must certainly get advice from you! I am confi- I’ve completed it, and beg you to kindly pass it on to him with dent, at least, that my efforts can be sung and that no one will my greetings; I shall also write him a few lines that I will enclose confuse it with a stage work – but that is not enough!”11 Even herewith.”20 In his note of thanks, Broadley addressed himself though Mendelssohn comforted him with the words “[…] if directly to Mendelssohn: “I have received from Mr. Moscheles only I could hear your Psalm right away, and immediately take the Orchestral Parts to your Anthem composed to my version of pleasure in it; you surely know how valuable it would be to me; the 13th Psalm and feel much obliged by the additional Fugue, yet how could I dare, as I stand before you, offer you any kind which I think exceedingly beautiful. The three first movements of advice or think of the most beautiful parts that I would find of the Anthem are frequently performed at the Chapel Royal, within it, and what I and we owe you in such a vast measure.”12 Windsor, by her Majesty’s Command. Mr. Moscheles has been But it took more than another year until Moscheles was able to good enough to arrange the Fugue for the Organ.”21 play his finished work to Sigismund Neukomm (1778–1858): Performances at Windsor Castle cannot be verified, but as for “I had a strange conversation with Neukomm. I played him those mentioned by Broadley, they apparently still took place in my Psalm (93), and he often said: ‘lovely, lovely! good, good!’ the version with organ accompaniment (MWV B 33). and declared the richly melodious Chorus no. 2 as his favorite Ignaz Moscheles’ arrangement of the closing fugue that Broad- piece. I asked for a critique, and he pointed out a few harmonic ley had also referred to, and for which he arranged the orchestral progressions that he felt were too audacious (I was reminded parts to the organ as a kind of piano reduction, was printed by of how useful his well-written but often so monotonous works the arranger in the first half of 1843. The new final movement could be), but merely replied: ‘The unreachable Beethoven was was published by Chappell & White in May 1843 and, in this even bolder.’”13 In keeping with Broadley’s concept, the piece form, was intended as an addition to the three-movement An- was composed in an orchestral version;14 nevertheless, the pub- them MWV B 33 published in 1841. This emerges from the lication took place in a version with the accompaniment of a pagination, which – taking into account the empty, final verso

9 The British Library, London (hereafter: GB-Lbl), Add. Ms. 31779. 10 The commission was sent to all three composers in early October 1840. Up until early summer of 1842, Moscheles, who had appeared in public until then almost exclusively with piano and orchestral works, had not yet completed his setting. 11 Letter from Ignaz and Charlotte Moscheles to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 9 February 1841, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 39, Green Books XIII-66, printed in: David Brodbeck, Some Notes [note 4], p. 60, note 5. 12 Letter to Ignaz Moscheles of 14 March 1841, GB-LEbc, Mendelssohn’s Letters to Moscheles, fol. 43, printed in: Briefe an Moscheles [note 3], pp. 206–209, quotation on p. 207. 13 Aus Moscheles’ Leben [note 2], p. 89 (1842). 14 The autograph source is preserved in GB-Lbl,Add. Ms. 31798. Together with the respective manuscripts of both versions of the Psalm settings by Men- delssohn and Spohr, it was long housed in the sheet music collection of Julian Marshall (1836–1903), see also Critical Report. 15 The work does not appear, however, in the printed work catalogue, see Aus Moscheles’ Leben [note 2], pp. 347–355. There, listed under opus 100, on p. 352, we find a four-hand ballade published by Spehr. 16 See also David Brodbeck, Some Notes [note 4], pp. 60–61, note 5. 17 Instead of the half sentence formulated as part of the prayer: “glad to sing thy hallow’d praises, aye rejoicing in thy love” in the newly composed section, the wording changes and is now heard as an invitation to believers: “Let us sing his hallow’d praises, aye rejoicing in his love”. In view of the semantics of the text, Mendelssohn clearly takes up the tradition of the Handelian anthem, whereas musically, the formal principle of the closing fugue is considered as entirely untypical for the English anthem and comes closer to the character – which corresponds to the Italian and German psalm settings – of a (purely) musical doxology. 18 Closing date of the autograph score, Source A. 19 In Mendelssohn’s “Haushaltsbuch” we have for January 1843 beneath “expenses:” “14 Henschke Copie der Partitur für Broadley […] 2. [Rthl.],” in: GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn f. 7, fol. 14r. The copy of the score in question is that of SourceB . 20 Letter to Ignaz Moscheles of 16 January 1843, GB-LEbc, Mendelssohn’s Letters to Moscheles, fol. 46, printed in: Letters to Moscheles [note 3], pp. 224–227, quotation on p. 225. 21 Letter from Charles B. Broadley to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 25 February 1843, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 43, Green Books XVII-101, printed in excerpts in: David Brodbeck, Some Notes [note 4], p. 50. XXII page of the English first edition of 1841 that encompassed entry in the Mendelssohn Work Catalogue (MWV). Mendels- 13 pages and a new title page – begins with “16” and the lead sohn’s orchestration of the first three movements is anything heading “Mendelssohn’s Anthem.” but a transposition of the musical material of the organ to the Broadley’s receipt voucher for the sum paid for the orchestral orchestral instruments; rather, one is impressed by the will to transcription also apparently contained the acquisition of the clarify one more time and with greater intensity than in the publication rights for the closing fugue. Mendelssohn com- organ version, albeit solely through means of sound, both the mented on this to Moscheles: “I did not sign the receipt which text and the structure of the Verse Anthems with their antiphony he enclosed, but the enclosed one which he will have to be of soloist and chorus. For example, in the first movement the content with. In his receipt he had written: received für das solo part is generally assigned only to the strings, before the copyright einer additional fugue and for arranging the whole wind instruments meld into the choral texture. For the accom- Anthem for the Orchestra – and that is not right. For I gave him paniment of the solo singers in the chorale of the second move- the fugue as a gift, and cannot certify that I obtained money for ment, Mendelssohn reduces the sound to the uncommon yet it. He also offered me that money through your solicitude for extremely charming instrumental combination of clarinets in a the orchestral arrangement, nothing of which should be found very low register, divisi violas with frequent double-stops, and in the receipt. If he feels it is important to confirm the copyright violoncello. This combination is reprised once again at the be- of the aforementioned fugue, then I am ready to give it to him ginning of the third movement, whereby the bassoons now add separately, in a form already found in my previous letter, and their particular sound to the group; by integrating trumpets and I should think that he is able to sufficiently prove his identity, timpani in the closing movement, there is no room to doubt even before a court of law. Should this not be the case, I shall, as that here, in the sound as well, we have reached the pinnacle of I said before, gladly confirm the copyright; only, I neither want majesty, the climax of the entire work. money for this, nor have I taken in any money for this. He can publish the fugue and the whole piece if he so wishes, whenever and however this takes place in England, as the piece should “Ave Maria” MWV B 19 not be published with orchestral accompaniment in Germany. Many thanks for all the trouble I have caused you with this mat- Within the framework of his duties as municipal Music Direc- ter and similar ones. The money has been correctly entrusted tor in Düsseldorf, and starting in October 1833, Mendelssohn to my brother by your father-in-law.”22 Although it was already was also responsible for the musical organization of religious planned, a publication of the orchestral version in England services. However, he had only few original choral pieces at his did not come about during Mendelssohn’s lifetime.23 Broadley disposal which were suitable for use in a Catholic church; these turned to Mendelssohn one last time, albeit three years later and were mainly a cappella pieces from the early 1820s, of which in another matter.24 only the three pieces written in 1830 from the “Kirchen-Musik From Moscheles’ arrangement of Eduard Henschke’s score für Chor” op. 23 (1832) had been printed. If we consider that, for string orchestra,25 it can be inferred that the piece was in addition, the two chorales based on texts by Martin Luther performed in England at least in this reduced orchestral ver- “Aus tiefer Not” op. 23 no. 1 MWV B 20 and “Mitten wir im sion for strings until 1846, the year in which Moscheles left Leben sind” op. 23 no. 3 MWV B 21 were only suitable for the London for Leipzig. In Germany, the work, now designated Catholic liturgy to a limited extent, the “Ave Maria” op. 23 no. 2 as Hymne, remained widely unknown up into the second half MWV B 19 necessarily assumes a weightier role. Due to the lack of the 20th century, and thus also misunderstood, despite the of singable music at hand for the Düsseldorf services, Mendels- German vocal text that was also underlaid to the posthumous sohn had to undertake “archival journeys” to Elberfeld, Bonn German editions of the orchestral version.26 Nonetheless, and and Cologne in order to assemble a basic stock of manuscript thanks to recent analytical studies,27 it is now possible to attri- sacred pieces reflecting his taste, such as music by Palestrina and, bute to this work the character of autonomous sacred music above all, Lassus.28 There was a considerable number of religious much more convincingly than that of a merely orchestrated ver- services with music in Düsseldorf, and a substantial amount of sion – a character achieved first of all through the addition of a works needed to fill these gaps: “The sacred works intended for completely new fugue that provides a new element of symmetry performance are to be laid down by the priests and performed and balance. Consequently, this is also reflected in a separate in alternation in the two parish churches for the most important

22 Letter to Ignaz Moscheles of 15 April 1843, GB-LEbc, Mendelssohn’s Letters to Moscheles, fol. 47, printed in: Briefe an Moscheles [note 3], pp. 227–230, quotation on pp. 227–228. 23 The posthumous first edition (published in Bonn in 1852 and in London in 1855 as “op. 96”) oriented itself along the autograph (SourceA ) and did not take into consideration the autograph revision of the piece in the Henschke copy made for Broadley (Source B). 24 Letter from Charles B. Broadley to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy and Ignaz Moscheles of 7 January 1846, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 49, Green Books XXIII-8. The topic here is a planned visit to Leipzig by the composer and organist Samuel Sebastian Wesley (1810–1846). 25 See Critical Report, Source B, source description. 26 Paul Mies delivers a typical judgment in his Über die Kirchenmusik und über neu entdeckte Werke bei Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, in: Musica Sacra 83 (1963), Vol. 7 (July), p. 217: “Seen from a sacred perspective, this sometimes rather weak work is not at the height of the previously named [Works for solo voices, chorus and orchestra]. The fugue seems more academic than others in Mendelssohn’s hand.” 27 See also on the following issues Armin Koch, Musik und Text in späten geistlichen Chorwerken Felix Mendelssohns, M.A. dissertation, Würzburg, 1995, typewritten (hereafter: Armin Koch, Musik und Text), pp. 32–33. 28 See in particular Peter Schmitz, “Ich bekam Lust, meine Domainen zu bereisen und gute Musik zu suchen”. Bemerkungen zu Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdys Bibliotheksreise im Oktober 1833, in: Mendelssohn und das Rheinland. Bericht über das Internationale Symposium Koblenz 29.–31.10.2009, ed. by Petra Weber-Bockholdt, Munich, 2011 (= Studien zur Musik; Vol. 18) (hereafter: Mendelssohn und das Rheinland), pp. 97–114. XXIII religious holidays.”29 The holidays of the liturgical year – Men- acting mayor Joseph von Fuchsius, and asked him: “[…] to be delssohn listed them in one of his notebooks30 – were, specifi- so kind as to present this to the church committee when it next cally: Easter, Ascension Day, Pentecost (Whitsunday), Corpus convenes. Everyone who loves church music must know how Christi, the feast of Peter and Paul (29 June), the city’s feast important a good organ is, and how it can contribute to the edi- day St. Apollinaris (Sunday after 20 July), the Assumption of fication of the congregation; it will thus leave no one indifferent Mary (15 August), the patron saints’ holidays in the Maximilian upon hearing, in this city’s principal church, an instrument that church (Sunday after 12 October) as well as All Saints and All is entirely ruined and nearly unusable. […] If the repairs are Souls Day (1/2 November); the feast of St. Cecilia on 22 No- postponed now, it is foreseeable that the instrument will ulti- vember was usually celebrated with a church concert. The partly mately deteriorate to the point of being irreparable, and a great – for the period from May 1834 to July 1835 – extant rehearsal deal of money will have to be spent on a new organ chest.”35 The schedules of the Gesang-Musik-Verein31 contain only two orig- enclosed cost estimate of 7 November of the previous year put inal pieces by Mendelssohn: “Verleih uns Frieden” MWV A 11 together by the Düsseldorf organ builder Anton Weitz36 – his and “Ave Maria”.32 Actually, Mendelssohn had already ordered costs totalled altogether somewhat more than 534 Reichsthaler the score and parts of the “Ave Maria” and the motet “Aus tiefer – included, among other items, the replacement of the key- Not” from Simrock on 17 November 1833 “for the society board manuals, the disassembly and transfer of the Rückpositiv based here.”33 One liturgical performance of the “Ave Maria” in the Hauptwerk, the extension of the pedal keyboard and the ascertainably took place within an archiepiscopal solemn mass windchest, and the replacement of many pipes. This hints at along with Luigi Cherubini’s Messe solennelle (1816) in one of the desolate condition in which the organ must actually have Düsseldorf’s two principal churches, St. Maximilian, possibly been. Yet it was not until 17 November 1834 that the church on 4 May 1834, since Mendelssohn reports home: “[…] we committee produced a contract with the organ builder.37 The truly began to edify the people with our singing when we took work was scheduled for completion by Easter 1835. However, on Cherubini’s C-major Mass, into which we inserted my Ave the restored instrument was not inspected and approved until Maria as a graduale, so outstandingly sung by Woringen. The 13 March 1838. According to the expertise on the instrument Archbishop even had someone ask me where one could obtain in question, additional work – recommended by Mendelssohn the graduale, and I had someone answer him […] that it came and accepted by the church committee – had become necessary; out in his very own diocese, and costs &c. Indeed, church music the costs for these improvements were estimated at a consider- on the whole seems to be thriving […].”34 Whereas an organ able 196 thalers, which then rose to another 70 thalers for three was able to serve as an accompaniment at this performance, new pedal stops.38 Thus, during his entire tenure in Düssel- this was not possible at the performances in the second main dorf, Mendelssohn was unable to use the organ in the principal church, St. Lambertus. There the organ was defective and in church of St. Lambertus, firstly, due to its condition, not for the urgent need of renovation. In early 1834 Mendelssohn person- accompaniment of choral singing, and later not at all because of ally committed himself to this issue by sending a sketch to the the extensive renovations. At the latest for performances of the

29 From a memorial of the Düsseldorf Comitte für die Kirchen=Musik of 16 October 1833, in: Stadtarchiv Düsseldorf, file Verein für Tonkunst (Städt. Musikverein) XX 96. 30 GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn g. 4, fol. 23v and fol. 24r; see also Matthias Wendt, Amt und Alltag. Annotationen zu Mendelssohns Notizen aus Düsseldorfer Zeit, in: Bürgerlichkeit und Öffentlichkeit. Mendelssohns Wirken in Düsseldorf, ed. by Andreas Ballstaedt, Volker Kalisch and Bernd Kortländer, Schliengen, 2012 (= Kontext Musik. Publikationen der Robert Schumann Hochschule Düsseldorf; Vol. 2), pp. 56–78, here in particular on pp. 58–59. 31 GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn c. 49, fols. 15–17. 32 See also Matthias Wendt, Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdys Düsseldorfer Probenplan Mai 1834 – Juli 1835, in: “Übrigens gefall ich mir prächtig hier”. Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy in Düsseldorf, ed. by Bernd Kortländer, Düsseldorf, 2009 (catalogue for the exhibition of the Heinrich-Heine-Institut Düsseldorf, 1 October 2009 to 10 January 2010), pp. 61–69. The catalogue mentions rehearsals of the “Ave Maria” on 25 November and 2 December 1834 as well as on 23 June 1835. One can only speculate as to when exactly, in which church and in which scoring the piece was accordingly performed. 33 See letter to N. Simrock of 17 November 1833, location unknown, partial printing in: Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy. Sämtliche Briefe, Vol. 3, ed. and with comments by Uta Wald in association with Juliane Baumgart-Streibert, Kassel etc., 2010 (hereafter: Sämtliche Briefe, Vol. 3), p. 299. On an invoice of 26 September 1835 signed by Nicolaus Simrock there is mention of, among others, score and parts of the “sacred music” no. 2 for August 8th of that year, Stadtarchiv Düsseldorf, XX 99, document B.24a. Since Mendelssohn was no longer residing in Düsseldorf at that time, these orders must have been passed on by his successor Julius Rietz. 34 Letter to Lea Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 6 May 1834, Music Division, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, Astor, Lenox and Til- den Foundations (hereafter: US-NYp), *MNY++ Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Felix, Family Letters, No. 192, printed in: Sämtliche Briefe, Vol. 3 [note 33], pp. 415–418, quotation on p. 417. The tenor soloist is thus Ferdinand von Woringen. As emerges from this letter, performances of “Mitten wir im Leben sind” op. 23 no. 3 MWV B 21 and Der 115. Psalm “Non nobis Domine” op. 31 MWV A 9 were planned to take place at around this time. 35 Letter to Joseph von Fuchsius of 4 January 1834, Duisburg, Landesarchiv Nordrhein-Westfalen (hereafter: Landesarchiv NRW), BR 7 Nr. 27309, fol. 39, facsimile printed in: Oskar Gottlieb Blarr and Theodor Kersken,Orgelstadt Düsseldorf. Instrumente, Spieler, Komponisten, Düsseldorf, 1982, pp. 40–41. 36 Kosten-Anschlag über die erforderliche Reparatur der Orgel in der St. Lambertus-Pfarrkirche hieselbst, Landesarchiv NRW, BR 7 Nr. 27309, fols. 57–58, printed in excerpts in: Franz-Josef Vogt, Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy und die Orgel der Düsseldorfer St. Lambertuskirche, in: Der Niederrhein 49 (1982), Vol. 2 (April), pp. 50–55, the document on pp. 52–53. Accordingly, Mendelssohn had already commissioned this sketch just a short while after as- suming his new post, which testifies to the fact that in view of the condition of the instrument, haste truly was of the essence. Already since 1823, and according to the documents, there had been several fruitless attempts on the part of the church council to change something on the condition of the organ. 37 Landesarchiv NRW, BR 7 Nr. 27309, fols. 1–2, printed in excerpts in: Ibid., p. 54. 38 See the final expertise after the inspection by Julius Rietz, instrument builder Heynemann and surveyor G. Walger in the presence of the organ builder Weitz, Landesarchiv NRW, BR 7 Nr. 27309, fols. 89–90. The “supplementary invoice no. 1 of p. Weitz of 13 March” quotationd there in fol. 89v, is not found in the documents. XXIV

“Ave Maria” at the Lambertuskirche without organ can we as- most cordially for sending me the 3 pieces of sacred music and, sume that the composer prepared special instrumental parts for in particular, for the score of the instrumental accompaniment two clarinets, two bassoons and double bass, in the event that which you had so kindly written out for me. I have not found this had not already been carried out for the above-mentioned enough time yet to devote myself more deeply to this, but I shall performance at St. Maximilian’s on 4 May 1834. soon write you more extensively.”42 Finally, on 20 November After the “Ave Maria” had been printed by Simrock in Bonn of that year, Mendelssohn sent to Bonn the organ part and the in 1832 as part of his “Kirchenmusik für gemischten Chor” instrumental parts which were to serve “only as a surrogate for op. 23,39 the composer contacted the publisher on 25 April the organ when one is lacking.”43 About a month later, Simrock 1837 about a new printing: “At this occasion it occurred to answered: “Yesterday I also received the organ accompaniment me that you might perhaps be interested in publishing the to the Ave Maria which you were so kind as to send me on entire accompaniment to my ‘Ave Maria,’ which you have al- 20 November; I am most grateful for this and will use it along ready published, but solely with the accompaniment provided with the orchestral accompaniment, very meticulously, and ac- in figured-bass numbers; first the fully elaborated organ part, cording to the instruction you sent me; I would appreciate it if and then the parts for the choral singers, who have no organ you could, at your leisure, tell me what I owe you for this?”44 at their disposal – an orchestral accompaniment of the kind Mendelssohn turned down an honorarium: “I do not expect an we always had to perform in Düsseldorf since we couldn’t use honorarium for this trifle, and thank you for your kind offer.”45 the organ. I think that this is the case at most places, and if The autograph parts appear to have remained in Düsseldorf or a supplement should follow, this could be of great use in dis- to have been returned by Simrock from whence they came after seminating the work.”40 Simrock not only seemed to react very the engraver’s copy was produced. In any event, Mendelssohn favorably to Mendelssohn’s suggestion of a revised new edition, did not received them again before publication; only one copy but apparently also suggested supplying the other two num- was available for proofreading. There was no more talk about bers of opus 23 with a fully written-out organ accompaniment; arrangements of the two German-language sacred pieces from Mendelssohn replied on 27 May of that year: “I, in my turn, op. 23, which meant that the new edition of opus 23 no. 2 shall craft the organ part for the Ave Maria with pleasure; I don’t could finally be sent off to print by Simrock on 30 March 1838 know yet if I can do the same for the other two pieces, and I in the form of the choral score with organ and five enclosed even doubt it, since neither of them lend themself particularly leaves with the instrumental parts.46 well to this purpose, unlike the other piece. However, I would In a letter sent by Mendelssohn to Heinrich Conrad Schleinitz like to try it, and would be grateful if you could send me the on 31 May 1839, the composer confirms that a performance three short scores here to my attention, where I shall imme- of the “Ave Maria” under his direction took place in Frankfurt diately come to a decision about this. Concerning the orches- am Main on 7 June 1839, during a concert given by the local tral accompaniment of the Ave, I beg you to write to Herr von Theaterkapellmeister Karl Wilhelm Guhr (1787–1848): “On Woringen in Düsseldorf, and to request a copy of the orchestral Friday I shall be conducting half a concert here: my Hebrides, parts that I had arranged for use there (or a loan of these parts); my Ave and my 42nd Psalm […].”47 In view of the program, I would then kindly ask you to send me these parts at this ad- one can assume that it was the version with wind instruments. dress so that I can provide you with more information on the On 3 July of that year, Mendelssohn reported from Frankfurt edition and its form.”41 Simrock really does appear to have con- to his mother about a “celebration” given by Christian Franz tacted Ferdinand von Woringen and obtained the original parts Eberhard, member of the Frankfurt Cäcilien-Verein, at which or a copy of the instrumental parts, since on 9 June 1837 Men- various “tableaux” with music were presented to honor the delssohn acknowledged receipt of the contents: “I thank you composer: “[…] then began an 8-part Ave chorus and the ap-

39 Moreover, this was Mendelssohn’s very first publication in this publishing house. On the very close relations that ensued with Simrock see Salome Reiser, “Weiss Gott wie so mich der Veränderungsteufel nun gerade bei Ihnen zum zweitenmale packt”. Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy und der Verlag N. Simrock in Bonn, in: Mendelssohn und das Rheinland [note 28], pp. 115–132. 40 Letter to Simrock of 25 April 1837, location unknown, quoted from: Wilhelm Altmann, “Aus Mendelssohns Briefen an den Verlag N. Simrock in Bonn”, in: Die Musik XII (1912–1913), Fourth quarterly volume, Book XLVIII, No. 21 (1st book dated August 1913), pp. 131–149 and No. 22 (2nd book dated August 1913), pp. 195–212 (hereafter: Wilhelm Altmann, Briefe an Simrock), the letter on pp. 147–148, quotation on pp. 147–148. The print of op. 23 no. 2 (1832) contained no elaborated organ part for the accompaniment of the chorus, but a figured continuo part. 41 Letter to Simrock of 27 May 1837, Stockholm, Stiftelsen Musikkulturens främjande (hereafter: S-Smf), Nydahl Collection, 2569; printed in: Wilhelm Altmann, Briefe an Simrock [note 40], pp. 148–149, quotation on p. 148. 42 Letter to Simrock of 9 June 1837, S-Smf, Nydahl Collection, 2570, printed in excerpts in: Wilhelm Altmann, Briefe an Simrock [note 40], p. 149. 43 Letter to Simrock of 20 November 1837, location unknown, quoted from partial printing in: Leo Liepmannssohn, catalogue 60 Autographen von Musikern (21/22 November 1930), p. 26 (lot 180). 44 Letter from Simrock to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 18 December 1837, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 32, Green Books VI-159. 45 Letter to Simrock of 2 January 1838, New Haven, Yale University, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Frederick R. Koch Collection, Gen Mss 601, Box 42, folder 853, printed in: Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy. Sämtliche Briefe, Vol. 5, ed. and with comments by Uta Wald in association with Thomas Kauba, Kassel etc., 2012, pp. 447–448. 46 See letter from Simrock to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 30 March 1838, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 33, Green Books VII-107. The title of the edition ultimately read: Ave Maria | für achtstimmigen Chor | mit Begleitung der Orgel | von | Felix Mendelssohn- | Bartholdÿ | (In Ermangelung einer Orgel ist eine Begleitung für | 2 Clarinetten, 2 Fagotten und Bass beigefügt) | Op. 23 No II. 47 Letter to Heinrich Conrad Schleinitz of 31 May 1839, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Handschriftenabteilung, Nachlaß Fam. Mendelssohn, Pos. I/4, box 4, folder 3, fols. 51–52, printed in: Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy. Sämtliche Briefe, Vol. 6, ed. and with comments by Kadja Grönke and Alexander Staub, Kassel etc., 2012, pp. 394–396, quotation on p. 396. Mendelssohn informs his mother Lea Mendelssohn Bartholdy about this in similar words in his letter of 2 June 1839, see US-NYp, *MNY++ Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Felix, Family Letters, No. 405, printed in: Ibid., pp. 396–398. XXV pearance of the angel holding the lily stalk next to the kneeling of the Royal Irish Academy of Music and worked there from Mary.” 48 1856 to 1876 as professor and conductor of choral and orches- Mendelssohn was apparently hoping for a greater diffusion of tral classes.51 He is described by his contemporaries as being the piece with the separate new edition of the “Ave Maria” and highly cultivated, extraordinarily musical and a “modest man.”52 its alternative instrumental accompaniment, for in a letter of Indeed, notwithstanding his doctoral title and his many distin- February 1834 to his family, he had cautiously complained guished contributions to Dublin’s musical life, he insisted on in connection with the authentification of a performance in always being addressed as “Joe Robinson” in later years. St. Petersburg on 21 December 1833: “As far as the Ave Ma- The multi-talented Robinson had already undertaken his first ria is concerned, I thank you very much for the program notes attempt to contact Mendelssohn in 1842. In May of that year, as which I much enjoyed, as I most certainly have no personal the composer was traveling to London, Robinson invited Men- acquaintances in Petersburg, and because the piece has a limited delssohn to Dublin in order to conduct concerts there: “My circulation in any event […].”49 Both the separate print of the friend Mr. Novello – (Alfred) – has informed me that your stay Latin Marian work as well as the elaborated organ part and the in England is likeley to be for four or five weeks, if such such alternative instrumental accompaniment most likely contrib- [sic] is the case I hope you will allow me to induce you to extend uted to increasing the appeal of the piece and, consequently, to your travels as far as Dublin in order to further the progress of encouraging additional performances. Already in 1850 or 1851 classical music in this city. I may say that I am a stranger to you Simrock had the “Ave Maria” reprinted once again unchanged, although I had the very great pleasure of meeting you at both with identical plate numbers and an identical title page,50 which the Birmingham Festivals, […]. W. A. Novello and my friend suggests positive sales figures of the single print of op. 23 no. 2 W. Gauntlett will be able to inform you of my love for the mu- of 1838. sic of the great ancient masters as also for the great modern Meister! […] It was I who first made your Oratorio of t.S Paul known in Ireland. I have also had your 42nd and 115th Psalms “Hear my prayer” MWV B 49 performed at the Ancient Concerts as well as a large selection from your Hymn of Praise.”53 “May I beg of you therefore to be In early 1844, Mendelssohn had set to music a paraphrase of the so kind as to let me know if £50– would compensate you for 55th Psalm by William Bartholomew. The work – now called the trouble of coming to Dublin to conduct a concert which Hymn – was published shortly after the first performance one would consist almost entirely of your own compositions.”54 year later. And, finally, the orchestration of the organ part was The thusly invited composer not only felt honored, but also ac- commissioned by Joseph Robinson (1815–1898), a composer, cepted the invitation with exuberance and inquired about short conductor, singer and teacher, who lived and worked through- and economical ferry connections to Ireland: “Your very kind out his life in Dublin, and co-founded the Philharmonic Soci- a[nd] friendly letter has given me so much pleasure & I should ety there; he and his elder brothers who also sang with him in a feel so happy to visit your country & thank you in person for vocal quartet, were called in Dublin “the four wonderful broth- your highly flattering invitation, that I should have liked best ers” and performed mostly German choral songs. Robinson had at once to accept your kind offers, and indeed, if circumstances founded the Antient Concerts Society in 1834 and conducted do not prevent me, I certainly hope to do so. […] the best days them until 1862. Moreover, he belonged to the fellow founders for me would be between the 15th and 20th of June. […] And at

48 Letter to Lea Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 3 July 1839, US-NYp, *MNY++ Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Felix, Family Letters, No. 408, printed in: Ibid., pp. 421–427. 49 Letter to Abraham Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 3 February 1834, US-NYp, *MNY++ Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Felix, Family Letters, No. 181, printed in: Sämtliche Briefe, Vol. 3 [note 33], pp. 332–334, quotation on p. 333. 50 A copy of this reprint from the Simrock Archives has survived in: Leipziger Städtische Bibliotheken, Musikbibliothek, PM 8055. It differs solely accord- ing to the type and size of paper used, as well as a watermark that differs from the first edition. 51 For general biographical facts see Charles Villiers Stanford, Studies and Memories, London, 1908 (hereafter: Charles Villiers Stanford, Studies and Mem- ories), pp. 117–127; Ibid., Pages from an unwritten Diary, London, 1914, pp. 23–24; W. Harry Grindle, Irish Cathedral Music, Belfast, 1989; Barra Boydell, A History of Music at Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin, Woodbridge, 2004; Ita Beausang, article Robinson family, in: The Encyclopaedia of Music in Ireland, ed. by Harry White & Barra Boydell, Dublin, 2013, pp. 886–888; as well as Catherine Ferris, article Antient Concerts Society, in: Ibid., pp. 25–26. 52 Obituary: Joseph Robinson, in: The Musical Times 39 (1898), No. 667 (1 September), p. 609 (hereafter: Obituary: Robinson). The following characteriza- tion of his person can be found in Charles Villiers Stanford, Studies and Memories [note 51], p. 126: “His personality was unique. He had strong likes and dislikes. His heroes were ‘giants,’ and his enemies ‘impostors.’ His face, rather Jewish in type, was full of a kindly sardonic humour, which his rather jerky and nasal manner of speech exactly suited. He had […] the grip of a field-marshal. He never brooked contradiction in his own business, and he was a martinet, though a kindly one.” 53 Letter from Joseph Robinson to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 27 May 1842, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 41, Green Books XV-246. Printed copies and manuscripts of the aforementioned vocal-instrumental church works of Mendelssohn Der 115. Psalm “Non nobis Domine” op. 31 MWV A 9, Paulus / St. Paul op. 36 MWV A 14, Der 42. Psalm op. 42 MWV A 15 und Lobgesang / Hymn of Praise op. 52 MWV A 18 have been transmitted from the stocks of the Antient Concerts Society in the Royal Irish Academy of Music Library, Dublin, and stem in part from Robinson’s estate or were purchased by him, see in particular Catherine Mary Pia Kiely-Ferris, The music of three Dublin musical societies of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: The Anacreontic Society, The Antient Concerts Society and the Sons of Handel. A descriptive catalogue, Maynooth, 2005, Vol. III: The Sons of Handel Catalogue and The Antient Concerts Society Main Catalogue, pp. 220–224 (MWV A 18), pp. 234–238 (MWV A 15), pp. 229–230, 233 (MWV A 9), pp. 241–247 (MWV A 14), or Vol. IV: The Antient Concerts Society Bound Sets Catalogue and Appendices, pp. 129–136 (MWV A 18), p. 139 (MWV A 9) and p. 140 (MWV A 15). 54 Ibid. XXVI last could you let me know how long the shortest passage from to Birmingham with him, where, in the Woolpack Hotel, Rob- England to Dublin […] does usually last, and whether there inson, Stanford and William Sterndale Bennett (1816–1875) are good boats on that station? […] At any rate accept my best, dined with Mendelssohn after the rehearsal on the evening of best thanks for the very great kindness you show to myself & 25 August 1846. Stanford’s son, the composer Charles Villiers to my music & for which I shall always feel sincerely indebted Stanford (1852–1924) fondly recalled this relaxed get-together: to you.”55 It was only because a serious illness befell Robinson’s “They [Robinson and Stanford] have both frequently described brother John (1810–1844) that the men did not get together to me his [Mendelssohn’s] very boyish fun and his deleight in a in Dublin. In a letter dated 10 June, Joseph Robinson commu- good joke; how he extemporised a double fugue to a few friends nicated this with great regret – combined with the assurance on the subject of ‘the horse and his rider’ at the organ of the that he would continue to work towards making Mendelssohn’s Town Hall; how, after the final rehearsal of Elijah, he slid down works known in Ireland.56 On 26 December 1843 the publisher the banisters of the long staircase with his feet in the air, and Edward Buxton asked for “a B[oo]k of Songs for a bass voice to wound up the day by a supper with them at the Woolpack Inn, be dedicated to Mr Joseph Robinson of Dublin whom you may where my father rather shocked the serious Sterndale Bennett probably know[.] He has a splendid voice & is a great admirer by performing Punch and Judy over the door with his fingers of your music, but there are very few of your Songs, that will clothed in napkins, and introduced a Mozartian ghost to the suit him.”57 Mendelssohn replied succinctly and rather inciden- music of the Commendatore. On this occasion Mendelssohn tally: “I […] shall think of Bass Songs if I possibly can,”58 but promised Robinson to orchestrate ‘Hear my Prayer’ for the An- does not seem to have found the time for this at a later date. tient Concerts.”61 In any event, the two composers were not unknown to one Since the terms concerning the arrangement of the piece were another by the time they personally met in August 1846. As only agreed upon verbally; Mendelssohn produced a score – in emerges from Robinson’s first letter to Mendelssohn, Robinson the style of an orchestral short score – that contained only the attended the Birmingham Music Festival several times. In 1846 instrumental parts. On 17 February 1847 he sent it to Edward he was not only present at the concerts, but also traveled to Buxton along with parts of Elijah MWV A 25: “I send to-day London, where the orchestral rehearsal for Elijah took place at […] an Orchestra=Score of my Hymn which I hope will recon- the Hanover Square Rooms on 20 and 21 August, one week cile you to the trouble you had for my & my alterations sake before the world premiere.59 Robinson’s obituary in the Musi- […].”62 Buxton did not immediately pass on this orchestral cal Times reported about this event and the posthumous world score to Robinson, who had ordered it, but had another score premiere of the version of “Hear my prayer” MWV B 49 with put together from this one and from the printed version with an orchestral accompaniment on 21 December 1848: “It was at organ accompaniment; this score was with near certainty the the request of Mr. Robinson that Mendelssohn orchestrated his one intended to serve as the printer’s copy for the orchestral ver- ‘Hear my Prayer.’ Meeting the composer at the band rehearsals sion.63 It was only after Mendelssohn’s death that Buxton sent – held at the Hanover Square Rooms – for the production of the complete score to Robinson.64 The client was satisfied with ‘Elijah’ at Birmingham in 1846, Robinson asked Mendelssohn the results, which faithfully respected the agreements that had to score this favourite work. Mendelssohn was pleased with been laid down. Charles Villiers Stanford reported: “Shortly af- the suggestion, and in carrying it out it is understood that he ter his [Mendelssohn’s] death, […] Robinson received the score adapted himself to Mr. Robinson’s orchestra in Dublin – hence from his executors; it was written exactly for the band which the scoring for ‘small orchestra’ […] The first performance of Robinson had enumerated to him, and he had taken his hint to ‘Hear my Prayer,’ in its orchestral form, took place at the An- ‘be sure to use the kettledrums in the second movement:’ with tient Concert, Dublin, December 21, 1848.”60 Leaving from what effect anyone who glances at the score will appreciate.”65 Dublin, Robinson had set off for London with the barrister and The score most likely also served as the basis for the premiere singer John Stanford (1810–1880) and continued the journey performance at the Antient Concert of 21 December 1848 in

55 Letter to Joseph Robinson of 5 June 1842, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Musikabteilung mit Mendelssohn-Archiv, N. Mus. ep. 3405. 56 Letter from Joseph Robinson to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 10 June 1842, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 41, Green Books XV-267. 57 Letter from Edward Buxton to Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy of 26 December 1843, GB-Ob, MS. M. Deneke Mendelssohn d. 44, Green Books XVIII-277. 58 Letter to Edward Buxton of 4 January 1844, Washington, D.C., Library of Congress, Gertrude Clarke Whittall Foundation Collection / Mendelssohn Collection, ML 30.8j, Box 6, Folder 2. 59 See in particular F. G. Edwards, The History of Mendelssohn’s Oratorio‘ Elijah’, London, 1896, p. 77. 60 Obituary: Robinson [note 52]. 61 Charles Villiers Stanford, Studies and Memories [note 51], p. 122; on the context see also Jeremy Dibble, Charles Villiers Stanford. Man and Musician, Oxford, 2002, pp. 10–11. John Stanford sang under Robinson’s direction as bass solo especially at the Dublin performances of St. Paul MWV A 14 as well as the role of the prophet at the Irish first performance of Elijah MWV A 25 on 9 December 1847. As to the above-mentioned fugal subject “The Horse and his Rider,” this is no doubt a subject of the fugue in the second part of the closing chorus “The Lord shall reign for ever and ever” from George Frideric Handel’s Israel in Egypt HWV 54. 62 Letter to Edward Buxton of 17 February 1847, Washington, D.C., Library of Congress, Gertrude Clarke Whittall Foundation Collection / Mendels- sohn Collection, ML 30.8j, Box 8, Folder 6, this passage first printed in:Obituary: Robinson [note 52]. 63 Source H. 64 “The instrumental Score of ‘Hear My Prayer’ was written expressly for me by Mendelssohn in consequence of a request made by me the last time I had the great pleasure of meeting him in London in August 1846. The Score was forwarded to me by Mr Buxton a few months after Mendelssohns death.”, Robinson’s note on the fly-leaf of this score, see also Critical Report, SourceH , source description. 65 Charles Villiers Stanford, Studies and Memories [note 51], pp. 122–123. XXVII

Dublin. The engraver’s copy for the first edition of the orches- termined by the sound is characteristic, in particular through tral version, which was not published until 1880, was, in its a conspicuous coupling of solo part and clarinets. Moreover, turn, no doubt a score newly produced by Edmund Thomas the instruments are used both independently of the chorus as Chipp (1823–1886) in 1852 but no longer extant today. well as in connection with it, and thus serve to differentiate the It is difficult to judge whether, or to what extent, this version dynamics and create an instrumental balance. was disseminated in manuscript form prior to its publication in the English-speaking world; on its own, thus chiefly in the version with organ accompaniment, it enjoyed exceptional pop- *** ularity in Great Britain and Ireland. Owing to a great quantity of English prints in the Anglo-Saxon musical world, it contin- We wish to express our warmest thanks to the libraries that have ued to be performed in parts as well as in the form of various permitted the reproduction of pages from the original sources arrangements throughout the entire 19th century and beyond.66 in their collections: Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-Institut; As late as 1891 the Musical Times was still reporting: “‘Hear my Biblio­teka Jagiellońska, Kraków (Małgorzata Krzos and Krys- Prayer’ – ‘a trifle,’ as he modestly calls it – is one of Mendels- tyna Pytel); The British Library, London (Nicolas Bell); Bodle- sohn’s most popular and widely-known choral works.”67 Fried- ian Library, University of Oxford (Martin Holmes). Further helm Krummacher stated: “The work remained quite unknown thanks go out to the following libraries that allowed us to ex- in Germany, and one would hardly need attribute it much amine manuscript sources in their collections (printed music, weight – if it had not achieved such exceptional prominence correspondence and documents): Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – in England.”68 The discrepancy between the two major poles Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Handschriftenabteilung und Musik- of reception cannot be ignored and calls for an explanation. abteilung mit Mendelssohn-Archiv; Duisburg, Landesarchiv “If we consider the work’s form, scoring and writing, the work Nordrhein-Westfalen; Stadtarchiv Düsseldorf; University of makes no impossible demands on the performer. And as to its Leeds, Leeds University Library, Special Collection; Mendels- character, it represents a type of songful lyricism that was either sohn-Haus Leipzig, Felix-Mendelssohn-Bartholdy-Stiftung praised as intimate and sincere – or damned as overly sweet (Cornelia Thierbach and Juliane Baumgart-Streibert); Leipziger and sentimental. […] What ultimately remains incomprehensi- Städtische Bibliotheken, Musikbibliothek; New Haven, Yale ble is why it became so popular in England.”69 It would hardly University, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library; Mu- be possible to explain this with differing claims, preferences sic Division, New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, or musical developments; rather, the fact that “Mendelssohn’s Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations; New York, The Morgan music remained incontestably in England’s musical repertoire Library & Museum; Stockholm, Stiftelsen Musikkulturens need not evidence a reactionary taste – unless one would be so främjande; Washington, D.C., Library of Congress, Music Di- reactionary as to allow only the validity of German norms. In- vision; Vienna, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, Archiv – Biblio- stead, the situation is the following: music in England was not thek – Sammlungen. repressed by anti-Semitism, and thus remained in the context of Valuable help and a variety of suggestions that have consider- its reception, which made it possible to understand it without ably contributed to the success of the volume, were provided the burden of prejudices deriving from ignorance.”70 by the editorial head Christian Martin Schmidt and the staff Compared with the version for organ accompaniment, the or- of the Forschungsstelle “Leipziger Ausgabe der Werke von Felix chestrated version, derived from the music by Armin Koch,71 Mendelssohn Bartholdy” Ralf Wehner and Birgit Müller. My reveals hardly any notable changes, and even fewer structural warmest thanks to them all. ones, apart from a few notes in a lower octave position in the orchestral bass. Nevertheless, here too the woodwind entry de- Leipzig, 24 April 2015 Clemens Harasim

66 Up to this day one finds adaptations of melodic segments from the piece, just as from the Anthem “Why, o Lord, delay for ever”, supplied with new texts, in sacred and secular hymnals in the United Kingdom and the United States. 67 F. G. Edwards, Mendelssohn’s “Hear my Prayer”: A comparison of the original ms. with the published score, in: The Musical Times 32 (1891), No. 576 (1 Feb- ruary), pp. 79–82, here on p. 79. 68 Friedhelm Krummacher, Komponieren als Anpassung? Über Mendelssohns Musik im Verhältnis zu England, in: Deutsch-englische Musikbeziehungen. Referate des wissenschaftlichen Symposions im Rahmen der Internationalen Orgelwoche 1980 ‚Musica Britannica’, ed. by Wulf Konold, Munich/Salzburg, 1985, pp. 132–156, here on p. 148. 69 Ibid., p. 149. 70 Ibid., p. 151. 71 Armin Koch, Musik und Text [note 27], p. 45.