Completing Mozart’s Requiem Yu Austin Liu May 14, 2014 Abstract
Mozart’s unfinished Requiem presents some of the most compelling choral music of the 18th century century.. The traditional traditional S¨ ussmayr completion presents certain interesting ussmayr features that suggests that Mozart had a hand in the movements that S¨ ussmayr ussmayr claimed to have composed. I hope that this article will highlight some of the issues surrounding the completion of the Requiem and the possibilities that Mozart may have envisioned for the Requiem.
1
Introd Introduc uctio tion n and and Histo Historic rical al Con Contex textt
Mozart began work on the Requiem in the middle of September 1791, but an acute illness left him bedridden bedridden by 20 November November 1791. [2, p. 28] At the time of his death in December 1791, the Requiem was left unfinished.[2, p. 2] In the autograph, only the Introit is fully orchestr orchestrated. ated. The Kyrie, Sequence Sequence and Offertory Offertory have their part writing worked worked out, but the Sequence Sequence famously breaks off at the Lacrimosa. Lacrimosa. Throughout Throughout the fragment, fragment, we also see certain important orchestral figurations notated, allowing us a glimpse into Mozart’s compositional positional methods. The state of the music in the autograph autograph folio and autograph autograph sketch sketch is a window window into into Moza Mozart’s rt’s compositional compositional process at the time. Throughout Throughout the sketch, sketch, we see that Mozart first worked worked out the voice writing and bass line carefully carefully,, writing writing in important important orchestr orchestral al parts parts as necessary when the voices voices are not singing. Among Among the more memorable memorable instrumental sections are the frenzied string tremolo in the Dies Irae, the trombone solo of the Tuba Mirum, and the leaping violin figurations in the Quam Olim fugue.[9] Mozart was commissioned to write the Requiem, and therefore, Constanze, Mozart’s widow, wasted no time in finding someone to complete the work so that she could receive the payment and support her two young children. The burden of completing the work eventually fell to Franz Xaver S¨ussmayr, ussmayr, a pupil of Mozart, who claimed to have finished all of the parts which which were not notated in the Requiem fragment[2 fragment[2,, p. 16], i.e. the remainder remainder of the Lacrimosa, Lacrimosa, and the entirety entirety of the Sanctus, Sanctus, Benedictus Benedictus and Agnus Dei. Consequen Consequently tly,, it was believed believed that the remainder remainder of the work, i.e. the Sanctus, Sanctus, Benedictus Benedictus and Agnus Dei, were wholly composed by S¨ ussmayr. ussmayr. Because Because of the historical historical weight weight associated with this completion completion,, it is still generally the most performed performed realization realization of Moza Mozart’s rt’s Requiem today. today. The authorship authorship of the Requiem Requiem has always always been a source source of controver controversy sy.. Jacob Gottfried Gottfried Weber famously criticized criticized the authenti authenticity city of the Requiem in 1825[ 1825[2, 2, p. 7]. The autograph autograph score later surfaced, and Johannes Brahms, in his edition of the Mozart Requiem, labels explicitly the parts written by Mozart, and those by S¨ussmayr.[13, ussmayr.[13, p. 48-50] [12]
1
Though the autograph itself has been analysed to reveal the parts that Mozart actually wrote down, the question of whether there is any genuine Mozart in the sections that S¨ussmayr claimed to have completed all by himself remains controversial.[2, p. 42] Keefe in particular feels that “the question of authorship is fundamentally unanswerable”, and therefore efforts to separate Mozart’s ideas from S¨ussmayr’s ideas are futile. [3, p. 7] While definitive evidence on what is genuine Mozart in the portions that S¨ussmayr completed is lost to history unless more autograph sketches surface, even a relatively quick survey of the Requiem reveals much evidence that suggests that S¨ussmayr did have access to Mozart’s sketches for the remaining movements. This is not necessarily in contradiction with S¨ussmayr’s testimony to Breitkopf and H¨artel in 1800 in which he states that the Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei were ”wholly composed by me” is a translation of “ ganz neu von mir verfertigt ”. Wolff notes that the phrase “neu verfertigen ” means “putting elements together to make something new” and so does not imply whether the elements are original or borrowed. [2, p .42, 146] While it may be impossible to definitively say that any particular part of the S¨ussmayr completion is by Mozart, it is without question that there exist flaws in S¨ussmayr’s completion that distract both listener and performer from the intensity of the work. Consequently, various musicologists have attempted new completions of the work, with varying degrees of convincingness.
2
Form and Structure of the Requiem
Mozart’s Requiem, as set to music, is divided into five large sections, the Introit-Kyrie, the Sequence, the Offeratory, the Sanctus, and the Agnus Dei-Communion.[2, p.70] Mozart’s Requiem is similar in structure to those of his contemporaries, for example Bonno, Gassmann, Michael Haydn, etc. [4, p.5] [7, p. XIV] Keefe in particular makes a comparison between the specific movements of the Mozart’s Requiem with those of Mozart’s contemporaries to emphasize certain points about the structure of a typical Requiem mass for the Viennese audience. In particular, Mozart’s and Gassmann’s settings divide the text of the Sequence in a similar manner, and Mozart would likely have been well acquainted with Gassmann’s and Michael Haydn’s settings of the Requiem Mass. [4, p. 4-5] In a similar vein, Wolff notes that the selection of these movements, ignoring other movements that could be included in a Requiem, reflects the practice in Salzburg and Vienna at the time.[2, p. 70] The following schematic shows the layout of the Mozart Requiem, with information drawn from a much more detailed table by Christoph Wolff. [2, p.72]The final bracketed chord reflects the chord of the final cadence of the movement, which is significant in ensuring a smooth key transitions at many points, for instance, at the end of the Confutatis, where Mozart utilizes a modulatory sequence to descend chromatically from the key of a minor into F major, before a final A major chord prepares the listener for the d minor of the Lacrimosa.
2
I. Introit-Kyrie
(d (dV )) (d)
1. Requiem aeternam 2. Kyrie eleison (double fugue) II. Sequence
3. Dies Irae 4. Tuba Mirum 5. Rex Tremendae 6. Recordare 7. Confutatis 8a. Lacrimosa (bars 1-8 by Mozart) 8b. Amen (fugue sketch not realized by S¨ ussmayr)
(d) (B) (g → d) (F) V (a → F (d )) (d) (d)
III. Offeratory
9a. Domine Jesu 9b. Quam olim (fugue) 10b. Quam olim (fugue)
(g) 10a. Hostias
(g (gV )) (E → g(gV )) (g)
IV. Sanctus
11a. 11b. 12a. 12b.
Sanctus Osanna (fugue) Benedictus Osanna (fugue)
(D) (D) (B) (B)
V. Agnus Dei-Communion
13. Agnus Dei 14. Lux aeterna1 15. Cum sanctis tuis2
(d
→
B (B V ) (B (d V )) (d)
One important structural element is the conclusion of every large section with a fugue. This is not uncommon in Requiem settings of the time - Michael Haydn’s Requiem, which Mozart heard, also has fugal conclusions for each large section. Mozart likely used Michael Haydn’s Requiem as a model, as evidenced by his setting of the same sections of Also, we can already see a potential mistake in the key relationships in S¨ussmayr’s sections, though some clarification will be required to see this. First, we observe that the Offeratory is in the key of g minor and ends on g minor. Mozart modulates from E major into g minor at the end of the Hostias to allow a complete repeat of the Quam olim fugue in the same key. The move to D major in the Sanctus can be justified by the fact that the text of the Sanctus is in praise of a benevolent God, so a shift to the parallel major emphasizes that God is magnanimous. Maunder contends that the entirety of the Sanctus is spurious because of the lack of a clear key relationship between the G minor of the Offertory and the D major of the Sanctus, citing the fact that all the movements of the Sequence are connected by key by way of at least two shared notes between the tonic triad of a movement and the cadence of the previous movement. However, the Sanctus is specifically a movement in the Requiem Mass that is in common with Ordinary Mass, so the move to D major may be a deliberate choice to highlight the difference between the Sanctus movements from the rest of the movements of the Requiem. 1 2
reprise of Introit bars 19-48 reprise of Kyrie fugue in full
3
The Agnus Dei has an extensive quote from an earlier setting of the Mass by Mozart, KV 220, nicknamed the Sparrow Mass.[5, p. 59][11, p. 170] At bar 39 of the Gloria, the text Qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis 3 , is set to music in a manner very similar to the way these words are set in the Agnus Dei, in terms of rhythm and thematic material. Maunder, who analyzes the voice leading issues in the S¨ ussmayr movements very carefully in his book, notes that there are no contrapuntal errors in bars 2-9 of the Agnus Dei, which he analyzes as an almost direct quote from KV 220. He goes on to note that the differences in harmonization in the Agnus Dei of the Requiem and the Gloria of KV 220 suggest that Mozart likely reworked previous ideas because of the similarity of the bass of that particular part of the Gloria to the Requiem aeternam theme in the Introit, pointing to examples of Mozart’s harmonic preferences in 1791 to justify this. Further evidence that sections of the Agnus Dei likely are based of a Mozartean sketch can be found in S¨ ussmayr’s working method. We must bear in mind that S¨ ussmayr was often unaware of Mozart’s final musical plans, for instance, he inserts an awkward Lamentatio into Mozart’s sketches for a Horn concerto in D major,[2, p. 48] likely because the musical material just happened to be on the same page.4 This suggests that S¨ ussmayr did not actually draw inspiration for the completion of the Agnus Dei of KV 626 from KV 220, but instead had access to a sketch of the movement. Assuming then that Mozart intended for the Agnus Dei to be in d minor, S¨ ussmayr’s completion results in an awkward key relationship between the end of the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei. It is likely that instead of remaining in B-flat major after the Benedictus, Mozart would likely have modulated to D major towards the end of the Benedictus to allow a reprise of the Osanna in D major. A cadence on D major would then lead into the d minor of the Agnus Dei, from which the Communio, in d minor, then follows. In the following sections, I will cite evidence that suggests that Mozart had left sketches for the Sanctus, Benedictus, and Agnus Dei, that were ostensibly in S¨ ussmayr’s hand. This unusual choice of not modulating at the end of the Benedictus is but the first of many unsettling compositional errors in S¨ ussmayr completion of Mozart’s Requiem. As a result, many scholars have sought to produce their own completions, which they believe to be closer to what Mozart ultimately intended. Some scholars, feel that S¨ussmayr’s completion is fully legitimate and more convincing than modern completions.[4] A closer examination of how the flaws in S¨ ussmayr’s completion will show, conversely, that they mar the work and require correction. As a final remark, the reprise of the first two movements for the Communio may be Mozart’s intention according to a statement by Constanze, in which she states that Mozart wanted to end the Requiem with the Kyrie fugue [2, p. 43]. However, it should be borne in mind that Constanze had a strong incentive to promote the work as being wholly by Mozart and not by S¨ ussmayr in order to give the work an illusion of legitimacy and so we can only speculate as to whether Mozart would have composed new music to end the Requiem.
3
Thematic Relationships in Mozart’s Requiem
S¨ ussmayr’s completion draws its legitimacy from the fact that S¨ ussmayr did have contact with Mozart during his life. As such, the possibility that Mozart may have communicated some of his ideas to S¨ ussmayr, regardless of how well they were finally realized, cannot be ruled out. In fact, 3
who takest the sins of the world, have mercy on us An example of this is the Amen sketch, which is on the same page as a sketch for the Rex Tremendae and Die Zauberfl¨ ote. [2] As these passages were contrapunctally tricky, Mozart would have worked out the counterpoint before writing the finished music in a different folio. 4
4
circumstantial evidence suggests that much of the thematic material of the Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei likely originates with Mozart. An examination of the thematic relationships in the autograph fragment reveals how Mozart sought to link the movements of the Requiem cohesively. In the Preface to his completion, Robert Levin makes a number of observations.[7] Some of the more convincing relations that have potential significance are enumerated here. Figure 1 shows the opening theme of the Introitus.
Figure 1: Opening Theme of the Introitus
At bar 34, an version of this theme in diminution appears as countersubject in the fugato. This foreshadows the importance of this theme in the work
Figure 2: Alto countersubject
Mozart then links the Introitus, to the Dies Irae by using the theme of the Introitus as the bass line of the Dies Irae.
opening - bass part Figure 3: Dies Irae The Amen sketch, which Mozart likely intended to use after the Lacrimosa, marking the mid-point of the work, uses the thematic material of the Introit as well. The subject in the alto is a melodic inversion of the theme of the Introitus in augmentation[7, p. XVII]. In addition, Wolff observes that the Amen sketch comes before the Rex Tremendae sketch on the sketch leaf that was previously mentioned. Furthermore, the Rex Tremendae sketch begins on bar 7 of the movement when Mozart begins a fugato. Wolff b elieves this suggests that Mozart largely sketches contrapunctal working and ”thematically or formally significant expositions”[2, p. 32]
Figure 4: Amen subject
43 Finally, we see the Introit theme appear in the Agnus Dei, which S¨ ussmayr claimed as his own work. More convincing evidence that this is likely based on a sketch by Mozart is to be found by examining the violin accompaniment. The last four notes of the violin accompaniment contains a
5
quotation of the Introitus theme in retrograde diminution in the last five semiquavers. [7, p. XIX]
Figure 5: Agnus Dei bass line
3 4
Figure 6: Agnus Dei violin accompaniment bar 1
3 4
Another significant relationship is found between the theme of the Dies Irae and that of the Sanctus. As previously mentioned, the movement is in D major, which generates harmonic interest since most of the previous movements have been in the minor key. Furthermore, by recalling the theme of the Dies Irae so dramatically, S¨ ussmayr’s completion highlights how God is both destructive, yet holy and benevolent.
Figure 7: Dies Irae theme
Figure 8: Sanctus theme
Arguments for the strength of the S¨ ussmayr completion have been given by various authors, including Simon Keefe, who makes such an argument in his article in the Journal of the American Musicological Society[3], citing the praise of various critics on portions of the Requiem that were completed by S¨ ussmayr. However, this does not contradict Christoph Wolff’s observation that the portions of the Requiem completed by S¨ussmayr ”betray an especially high degree of technical unevenness and a large number of mistakes in the voice leading, as Mozart scholars recognized at an early date” [2, p. 38]. This lends credence to the argument that Mozart may have left some hints to S¨ ussmayr on the completion of the Requiem, perhaps in the form of sketches. The following section will explore some of these strange passages.
4
”Technical unevenness”
Before moving on to specific examples, it must be borne in mind that based on the autograph and the Amen sketch leaf, Mozart placed the four-part vocal writing as his highest priority, and would have sketched this before any other parts. Also, it is plausible to believe that Mozart would have required some sketches to work out contrapunctal textures before setting them down.
6
A passage from the end of the S¨ ussmayr Lacrimosa completion warrants special attention:
Figure 9: Lacrimosa bar 24
12 8 Do- na e- is, do- na
e- is re-
qui- em
The text Dona eis, requiem is important because it occurs at the Introitus, the end of the Sequence, and the end of the Agnus Dei. That Mozart may have wished to work out the thematic material at this juncture of the work, before the Amen fugue, is a definite possibility. Oddly enough, we see that the word requiem does not match up with the Introitus theme. Mozart’s intention was most likely to have the word Requiem coincide with the Introit theme at the end of the descending scale passage. This would reinforce the thematic unity of the work before the Amen fugue, which would have utilized the Introit theme in inversion. While it is impossible to prove that Mozart actually wanted to do this , the circumstantial evidence is fairly strong, even without arguments related to S¨ ussmayr’s technical ability to write counterpoint[2, p. 43]
Figure 10: Sanctus violin part - bar 4 of S¨ussmayr completion
A second particularly obvious error occurs at bar 4 of the Sanctus.[10, p. 150]. Bars 1-5 of the Sanctus are generally considered an excellent piece of vocal writing[2, p. 38] [7, p. XIX], error free and a dramatic restatement of the Dies Irae theme in the ma jor key. However, in bar 4 we see parallel fifths between the soprano and the first violins, which detracts from the vocal material of the Sanctus. The false relation of C-natural in bar 6 against C-sharp in bar 5 is also problematic. However, this sort of ”technical unevenness” is yet more evidence that S¨ ussmayr had access to Mozart’s sketches for this movement. This runs contrary to Maunder’s analysis that the Sanctus and Benedictus are wholly by S¨ ussmayr [2, p.40]. The Osanna fugue subject utilizes a thematic element of the Quam olim fugue subject. It is clear that the first four notes of the Osanna subject are a reference to the Quam olim subject[2, p. 93]. Levin claims further that the second half of the Osanna subject is related to the Amen subject[7, p. XIX], though this may just be a coincidence. Regardless, in the S¨ ussmayr version of the Osanna, we see hardly any contrapunctal development after the exposition, which would be highly uncharacteristic of Mozart considering the scale of the Kyrie fugue and Quam olim fugue. Again we see a gross incongruence, this time in the quality of the fugue subject and that of the fugal development. It is not unreasonable to hypothesize that Mozart may have sketched the subject and part of the exposition, not unlike the sketch for the Amen fugue, though the complexity of the counterpoint necessitated the need for technical details to be explored and finalized on paper.
Figure 11: Quam olim subject
7
Figure 12: Osanna subject
3 4 With regard to the Benedictus, it should be noted that the theme of the Benedictus is found in a book by Barbara Ployer in which her composition classes with Mozart were recorded [7, p. XIX], and that there are significantly fewer errors in the voice parts compared to the orchestral parts [7, p. XX] [2, p. 40]. This also suggests the existence of a Benedictus sketch that S¨ ussmayr used in completing the Requiem - if we assume that Mozart generally wrote down error free vocal parts as sketches.
5
Recent Completions
In the previous sections, I have outlined the evidence that sketches from Mozart likely provided the thematic material and inspiration for much of the contrapuntal passages in S¨ ussmayr’s completion of Mozart’s Requiem. The strength of the S¨ ussmayr completion lies in the thematic unity that is created through the utilization of these sketches. In addition, as a contemporary of Mozart, the scale of the movements that were composed is generally in accordance with the norms of the time. Wolff notes that the primary strength of the S¨ ussmayr completion is therefore ”structural” [2, p. 112]. Among the key issues identified are the lack of an Amen fugue to close the Sequence, an awkward repeat of the disproportionately short Osanna fugue in B-flat major and not in D major and various technical issues with regard to voice leading and counterpoint. While we can never reconstruct what Mozart conceived in his mind, completions of the Requiem help us frame the rest of the work and allow listeners insight into Mozart’s musical architecture and a deeper appreciation for the actually completed sections of the work. Various completions of differing scale have been attempted in the past decades. The less extreme versions by Franz Beyer and H.C. Robbins Landon deal with modifying the orchestration of various parts of the Requiem. In 1984, Duncan Druce published his own revision of the Requiem [14, p. 145], which included a new completion of the Lacrimosa with an Amen fugue, and revisions of the Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei using the existing thematic material. A new segue into the reprise of the Introit for the Communio section for also composed. The Benedictus strikes the listener as b eing somewhat too long, considering the brevity of Mozart’s Hostias. As a result, while the imitation of Mozart’s style is evident in the completed movements, the structural aspects of those movements are somewhat unconvincing because of their length. In 1988, Richard Maunder published his own revision of the Requiem using the Amen sketch to end the Lacrimosa. He analyzes the voice leading of the Sanctus and Benedictus harshly and argues that they cannot possibly originate with Mozart. He does observe that the Agnus Dei has the extensive quotation from KV 220, the Sparrow Mass, and revises it accordingly. As shown previously, the Sanctus and Osanna may well derive their thematic material from Mozart’s sketches. Even if they do not, their themes have been shown to be related to important themes that Mozart intended for the Requiem, and therefore their use in any completion is justified. Aside from this, the use of modulations in Maunder’s Amen fugue may be inappropriate as Mozart does not modulate in fugues that end a section of the Mass, partially for reasons of scale.[7, p. XX]. The completion by Robert Levin in 1993 is slightly less extreme. He states in an interview that he is
8
aiming to change “as little as possible” in order to “respect the weight of history” [8] 5 . The result is a completion that generally is in accordance with the guidelines of the S¨ ussmayr completion, and therefore roughly adhering to the length of the S¨ ussmayr completion, except with the addition of an Amen fugue and a fairly extended Osanna fugue. The Osanna fugue is criticized by David Black [6, p. 599] as being too long, the only other large scale Osanna fugue that Mozart wrote being in the c minor Mass KV 427. However, it should be noted that Mozart clearly had accorded the c minor Mass a great deal of attention as he intended for it to be dedicated to his wife. With this in mind, the scale of Mozart’s Osanna fugue need not necessary match up with those of other composers that Black cites. The length of this Osanna fugue is criticized similarly by Keefe, who argues that its scale would not be in accordance with Viennese tradition of the time.[6, p. 606] One could argue continuously about just how long the Osanna fugue should be, but the fact remains that S¨ ussmayr’s version, which ends fairly abruptly after the exposition, is far too short and lacks sufficient contrapuntal development. By mostly retaining the vocal writing of the S¨ ussmayr completion, most of Levin’s completion sounds familiar to those used to S¨ ussmayr’s version. This contributes significantly to the strength of Levin’s completion - part of the reason it sounds convincing is simply because it sounds like what we are used to, though most of the “errors” in orchestration and voice leading have been excised. It is impossible to quantify Mozarteaness, but by showing the striking thematic unity of Mozart’s musical material, we can at least find it plausible to imagine that Mozart likely intended for the unfinished movements to enhance the thematic unity of the work. Removing the distractions of bad voice leading and somewhat uninspired orchestration elucidates this aspect of the Requiem and helps listeners view the work in a more holistic fashion. It should be noted that a much more involved way of analysing a completion could involve looking at the internal harmonic progression of a completed movement. Wolff does this very carefully to show that the sections by S¨ ussmayr are somewhat lacking in modulations. His table of Mozart’s key movement shows that Mozart moves fluidly through different tonal centres to continuously generate harmonic interest.[2, p. 100] A very notable exception to the norm is the Quam olim fugue, which remains in g minor throughout even though many borrowed chords are utilized for dramatic effect. An interesting point that becomes clear is the fact that the Agnus Dei has the modulatory motion that is characteristic of the movements that are definitively in Mozart’s hand, which is more evidence that S¨ ussmayr used one of Mozart’s sketches for that movement. It is beyond the scope of this paper to analyse completions in such a thorough fashion, but even without a thorough analysis, this leads to a weakness in more conservative approaches. Levin’s completion does increase the harmonic movement of the Lacrimosa, Sanctus and Benedictus somewhat, but mostly retain S¨ ussmayr’s framework, so more modulations in those movements could make it more convincing by some standards. Another important consideration is that S¨ ussmayr’s orchestration in the Sequence and in other movements is often particularly uninteresting compared to Mozart’s, and is often awkward at times. For example, the trombone solo in the Tuba Mirum is supposed to accompany the stanza beginning with “Tuba mirum spargen sonum ”6 . S¨ ussmayr continues the trombone solo even after 7 the tenor enters with “Mors stupebit et natura ” . Had Mozart wanted this he would definitely have written it down, but it is clear that the colour of the trombone is not required for this stanza. Instead, a shift from B-flat major to f minor is used to highlight the new stanza. Again, a thorough examination of all the orchestration details of these completions is beyond the scope of this paper, but the above more radical completions are able to better effect the orchestration details such as the violin figurations at the Quam Olim fugue, the use of trumpets in the Dies Irae, etc. 5
roughly 18 minutes into the video footage The trumpet spreads a wondrous sound 7 Death and nature will marvel/ be struck 6
9
6
Conclusion
The Mozart Requiem, though unfinished, stands as one of the most significant settings of the Requiem Mass of the common practice period. Arguments for the strength of the S¨ ussmayr completion, such as those by Keefe, focus on its orchestration or the fact that S¨ ussmayr was a contemporary of Mozart. I have shown that Mozart viewed the vocal parts as the primary musical material for the Requiem, and that S u ¨ssmayr was often unable to execute Mozart’s intentions in a convincing manner. The S¨ ussmayr completion remains an important historical completion that roughly adheres to the proportions intended and likely contains many snippets of genuine Mozart. A brief survey of some of the thematic and structural relationships between the movements of the Requiem reveals to us a glimpse of the full structure of the work that Mozart would have written had he lived to complete it. Understanding and even listening to the work in its fragmentary form gives us a sense of its incompleteness, but ultimately, for the work to function as a whole for listener and performer, the completions that have been attempted at least provide a way for us to move from the beginning to the end of the Requiem mass. We will never know what Mozart actually would have written, but various new completions of the work help to complete the listener’s journey from the Introit to the Lux aeterna in a more satisfying manner, allowing us a glimpse of what the Requiem might have sounded like, as well as Mozart’s incredible sense of structure and unity in his music.
10
References [1] Leslie Lamport, LAT E X: A Document Preparation System . Addison Wesley, Massachusetts, 2nd Edition, 1994. [2] Christoph Wolff, Mozart’s Requiem: historical and analytical studies, documents, score . University of California Press, 1994. ussmayr and the Orchestration of Mozarts [3] Simon P. Keefe, Die Ochsen am Berge: Franz Xaver S¨ Requiem, K. 626 . Journal of the American Musicological Society, Vol. 61, Number 1, pp. 166, 2008.
[4] Simon P. Keefe, Mozart’s Requiem: Reception, Work, Completion . Cambridge University Press 2012. [5] Richard Maunder, Mozarts Requiem: On Preparing A New Edition.. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. [6] Robert D. Levin, Richard Maunder, Duncan Druce, David Black, Christoph Wolff, Simon P. ussmayr and the Orchestration of Mozarts Keefe Colloquy: Die Ochsen am Berge: Franz Xaver S¨ Requiem, K. 626 . Journal of the American Musicological Society, Vol. 61, Number 1, pp. 583608, 2008. [7] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, completed and edited by Robert D. Levin, Requiem KV626 . Stuttgarter Mozart-Ausgaben, Carus-Verlag, 2004 [8] Robert D. Levin, Interview with Arik Vardi,. Israel Educational Television, Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jER0dzMiUDo [9] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, ed. Leopold Nowak Requiem Fragment KV626 . Neue Mozart Ausgabe I/1/Abt. 2/1: Requiem: Fragment, Score 1965 [10] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Franz Xaver S¨ ussmayr ed. Leopold Nowak Requiem KV626 . Neue Mozart Ausgabe I/1/Abt. 2/2: Requiem: Completions, Score 1965 [11] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, ed. Walter Senn Sparrow Mass KV220 . Neue Mozart Ausgabe I/1/Abt. 1/2: Masses vol. 2, Score 1975 [12] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Franz Xaver S¨ ussmayr ed. Johannes Brahms Requiem KV626 . Leipzig: Breitkopf & H¨ artel, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozarts Werke, Serie XXIV: Supplemente 1877 [13] Imogen Fellinger Brahms: Biographical, Documentary and Analytical Studies , ed. Robert Pascall, pp.41-58 Cambridge University Press 1983 [14] Daniel N. Leeson Opus Ultimum: The Story of the Mozart Requiem Algora Publishing 2004
11
