Bartholomew 1 Christina Bartholomew

Dr. James W. Kosnik

Music 592

22 November 2015

Beethoven’s Mass in C Major

Ludwig Van Beethoven wrote his Mass in C Major in 1807. It was his first religious work,

and one of only two masses written by him. In the following pages, we will explore a brief

biographic sketch of his life and his surroundings leading up to the writing of this mass, an

overview of the mass itself and it’s relation to Haydn, and a detailed analysis of the first

movement of the mass, the Kyrie.

To capture the relationship of Beethoven and Haydn, we will begin in the year 1792.

This is the year that Franz Joseph Haydn took on Beethoven as a student of composition. Up

until that point Beethoven had been living in his birthplace of Bonn. He relocated to Vienna for

the purpose of studying with Haydn at the encouragement of his patron, the Elector in Bonn,

Max Franz. At the end of his initial year with Haydn when Beethoven was due to return to Bonn

in 1793, French troops had occupied the Electorate of Cologne so the court eroded.1

Beethoven remained in Vienna, never to return to Bonn.

In his first years in Vienna, Beethoven also studied with other renowned composers. He

studied with Johann Georg Albrechtsberger, who was, by all accounts, a master a writing

counterpoint. He also studied with Antonio Salieri who taught him the art of setting text to

Bartholomew 2

music.2 There is also evidence from a letter written by Johann Schenk that Beethoven took

lessons with him while he was also taking lessons with Haydn.3

There are many questions surrounding the relationship of Beethoven the

student and Haydn the instructor. To begin the discussion, we should remember that, in 1792,

Beethoven was 22, and Haydn was 60 years of age. As the letters of Beethoven are analyzed,

there seems to have been evidence of animosity towards Haydn. This perceived grudge may

have developed when Haydn made a negative comment about a trio Beethoven wrote, from

then on it appears that Beethoven assumed Haydn was jealous or threatened by him. There is

also evidence that the two regarded each other highly; indeed they performed together on

special occasions, wrote music for one another and there is an obvious high regard for one

another in Haydn’s last days.4 Trying to paint this relationship in one sweeping stroke is a

disservice to the complexity of Beethoven.

Beethoven’s writings are muddied by the events that took place after his death in

regards to the preservation and discarding of his letters and the biographies written by people

close to him after his death. Anton Schindler was one of these authors. He was Beethoven’s

secretary and began living with him in 1822 and remained there until Beethoven’s death. The

first edition of Schindler’s biography on Beethoven was published in 1840. He had in his

possession Beethoven’s papers/letters and, unfortunately, suppressed and/destroyed those

letters that he deemed disturbing episodes in Beethoven’s life. Alexander Wheelock Thayer

(1817-1897), collected Beethoven’s writings and sought to publish them. He died before the

five volumes were published and translated. Unfortunately the translations of these volumes

Bartholomew 3

are also suspect because as they were translated and copied the translators arranged, revised,

corrected and contributed to the original texts.5 Noli so eloquently states,

It is easy for the historian to prove that all great men were quite human; it is absolutely impossible for the hero worshipper to believe it. This is the reason why legends about a great man persist even after they have been killed and buried by the historian. They are seven-headed Hydras. When one head has been cut off, two new ones emerge immediately. The historian’s task is like that of Hercules: He must not only chop off those Hydra heads but also prevent the new ones from taking the place of the old ones.6

Schindler appears to be a ‘hero worshipper’, while the Thayer volumes may have failed

to stay true to the original text. These initial recorded inaccuracies that took place soon after

Beethoven’s death have managed to take root and still today create confusion as one tries to

learn of Beethoven’s character.

In Vienna, Beethoven was a sought after as a virtuoso pianist. Indeed he was

much more known, at that time, for his abilities at the keyboard, rather than as a composer.

Great pianist in Vienna were highly regarded at that time. It is estimated that over 6,000

pianists were seeking lessons in 1792.7 Beethoven was a “rock-star” by all accounts as a

performer. He regularly competed in performance settings against other virtuosic pianist in

Vienna. Because of his virtuosity and popularity, Beethoven had many monetary supporters.

He was supported by members of the aristocracy; it was important for these people to be

affiliated with important artist for their sense of social status. Often they lavished money and

gifts upon Beethoven.8 He was also sponsored by individual nobles. Prince Karl Lichnowsky

was his largest patron. For more than twelve years, Beethoven actually lived with the prince

and his wife. They treated Beethoven as if he were their own son. Lichnowsky also gave

Bartholomew 4

Beethoven a large annuity. Beethoven accepted all of these gifts, but was also careful to try

and maintain a certain amount of independence. For example, he would eat dinner at local

taverns in order to not to have to dress for dinner and eat with the Lichnowsky’s. Because

Lichnowsky was so concerned for Beethoven’s well-being, and knowing Beethoven did not want

to be completely indebted to him, he would sometimes find ways to get money to Beethoven

using secretive measures, so that Beethoven didn’t realize the money was from him.9

The years following the French Revolution (1789-99) found palaces and courts being

restricted financially in areas of music and the arts.10 Unfortunately, this meant loss of

patronage for Beethoven. He would now rely on his abilities as a freelance composer and

pianist. While Beethoven enjoyed his independence, he still longed for the security and stature

of a court position as stated by Maynard Solomon is his book entitled “Beethoven”,

The source of Beethoven’s patronage had been transferred from the Bonn electoral court to segments of the Viennese high nobility. He was now a ‘freelance’ semi feudal composer and virtuoso, moving toward relative independence from aristocratic sponsorship. But hand in hand with the growth of Beethoven’s personal freedom went the loss of much of the security that had sustained three generations of musicians in his family. Throughout his life Beethoven never abandoned the hope of obtaining a permanent court position that would relieve his ever-increasing – if often exaggerated- financial anxieties.”11

By 1795, Beethoven’s first major Viennese compositions began to appear. By 1795 his

music was being circulated by five publishers in Vienna alone.12 By 1801 his hearing had

already become weak, as evidenced by his letter to Franz Wegeler in Bonn, June 29, 1801:

For almost two years I have ceased to attend any social functions, just because I find it impossible to say to people: I am deaf. If I had any other profession I might be able to cope with my infirmity; but in my profession

Bartholomew 5

it is a terrible handicap. And if my enemies, of whom I have a fair number, were to hear about it, what would they say? In order to give you some idea of this strange deafness, let me tell you that in the theater I have to place myself quite close to the orchestra in order to understand what the actor is saying, and at that a distance I cannot hear the high notes of instruments or voices. As for the spoken voice, it is surprising that some people have never noticed my deafness; but since I have always been liable to fits of absentmindedness, they attribute my hardness of hearing to that. Sometimes, too, I can scarcely hear a person who speaks softly; I can hear sounds, it is true, but cannot make out the words. But if anyone shouts, I can’t bear it. Heaven alone knows what is to become of me.13

In the above quote we get a glimpse into some of Beethoven’s frustrations, and his character.

As with all of his writings, it is difficult to know the circumstances under which this letter was

written, and whether or not there was some particular motivation to write it, but it appears as

though Beethoven is a proud individual who has, for some reason, a number of enemies. It

would also appear that he greatly fears his future.

In the excerpt below we see the torment this degenerative condition played upon him

in what is now known as the famous Heiligenstadt Testament; a letter addressed to his

brothers on October 6 and 10, 1802.

Yet it was impossible for me to say to people, ‘Speak louder, shout, for I am deaf.’ Ah, how could I possibly admit an infirmity in the one sense which ought to be more perfect in me than in others, a sense which I once possessed in the highest perfection, a perfection such as few in my profession enjoy or ever have enjoyed. –Oh I cannot do it; therefore forgive me when you see me draw back when I would have gladly mingled with you. My misfortune is doubly painful to me because I am bound to be misunderstood; for me there can be no relaxation with my fellow men, no refined conversations, no mutual exchange of ideas, I must live almost alone, like one who has been banished; I can mix with society only as much as true necessity demands. If I approach near to

Bartholomew 6

people a hot terror seizes upon me, and I fear being exposed to the danger that my condition might be noticed.14

Five years after this letter was written, Beethoven was commissioned to compose a

Mass by Nikolaus Esterhazy II. The Mass was to be written in honor of his wife, Maria

Josephina, for her name day. Esterhazy was the patron of Haydn, who had previously written

the Mass for Maria Josephina on six occasions between 1796-1802 (Hob. XXII:9-14).15 They

were all well received; Haydn was immensely beloved by his patron. By 1807, Haydn was not

well, therefore, Beethoven was commissioned to write the mass. Beethoven, apparently

realizing expectations were high, wrote to the prince saying, “May I add that I shall hand you

the Mass with considerable apprehension since you, most excellent prince, are accustomed to

have the inimitable masterpieces of Haydn performed for you.”16 As with all of Beethoven’s

letters (and anyone’s letters for that matter!), it’s difficult to discern whether or not the

sentiments are genuine.

There is, however, not much question in regards to how Prince Esterhazy received the

Mass. His initial reaction to Beethoven after the performance was recorded as follows: “But

dear Beethoven, what have you gone and done now?”17 If one wasn’t sure of what the Prince

was trying to imply, his letter to the Countess Zielinska makes his feelings more clear:

“Beethoven’s Mass is unbearably ridiculous and detestable, and I am convinced that it can

never be performed. I am angry and mortified.”18 There was a bit of truth in his estimation, as

it was only performed three more times in Beethoven’s lifetime.19

Bartholomew 7

One might not be surprised at the Prince’s reaction upon further analysis of the work.

In the following pages we will discover the ways in which the work was not what would have

been expected by audiences in 1807. As stated by Michelle Fillion, “All in all, the Mass in C may

have been mystifyingly sedate for its first audience at Eisenstadt, expecting a festive Mass in

the Haydn tradition in keeping with the occasion, which was after all a high-society party.”20

Beethoven instituted a number of romantic tools in this composition; it is possible that

Estarhazy and subsequent audiences weren’t ready for it, especially in church music, where

conservation of stand forms and practices was alive and well.

In the following paragraphs we will be analyzing the first movement, the Kyrie, in detail.

In this movement, the timpani, flutes and trumpet are tacet, leaving the movement to feel a bit

more introspective than the rest of the work. The tempo marking for the entire movement is

Andante con moto assai vivace quasi Allegretto ma non troppo (“Walking leisurely, with much

motion, lively, as if somewhat fast, but not too much.”), which is very descriptive but somehow,

also very vague. Taking an inventory of modern performances of this work, it is evident that

conductors interpret this tempo marking very differently. The movement is in simple duple.

Below is an excerpt depicting the overall tonal areas of the first movement from Michelle

Fillion’s article “Beethoven’s Mass in C and the Search for Inner Peace”:21

Bartholomew 8

The Kyrie movement is in ternary form. The A section begins in C major with the text

“Kyrie eleison”. The step-wise melodic movement suggests spiritual confidence and

tranquility.22 In bar 22 he moves to E minor via a diminished chord at the end of bar 21, making

an unannounced seamless transition.23 The bridge (bars 33-36) transitions to E major by raising

the third from G to G# in the midst of a sequence with a bar of crescendo leading to a

sfortzando, showing momentary tension and quickly relaxing with a bar of decrescendo to piano

and only soloists singing “Christe eleison” a Capella to begin the B section.

M. 33 -37.24

The B section alternates between piano and forte, changing dynamics in most instances every

four bars. The B section moves briefly to E minor (bar 76) and moves back to C major via a IV

Bartholomew 9

chord (bar 78) and then sustaining the dominant from bar 80 until 84 where the recapitulation

of the A section begins. The repeated A section begins at a piano dynamic but, in bar 90,

crescendos to forte (bar 91) and lands on a surprising E major chord. A dominant chord (2nd half

of bar 92) moves firmly back to the home key and the home key is further seated in bar 97 with

another preparatory dominant 7th chord. In bar 106, Beethoven uses a B7 chord in 3rd inversion

giving the illusion of moving back to E major, but indeed, after two bars of this dominant 7th, he

lands on a fortissimo C major chord, the climax of the movement, a surprise although it is in the

appropriate key.25

M. 105-109.26

The movement closing, beginning in bar 123 with unison choir sustaining on the dominant until

the second to the last measure of the Kyrie. The last measures alternate between dominant

and tonic chords each measure, but the choir unison camouflages this movement, making the

ending less powerful and more thoughtful.

Bartholomew 10

M.123-end.27

To compare this Kyrie to any of the Kyrie’s from the six Haydn masses, one would

quickly realize the difference in the treatment of the B section. In the six Hadyn Masses for

Estarhazy, the B sections are all resplendent with melisma’s, stretto and contropuntal music;

indeed, three of them have fugues.28 Haydn precedes his B sections with obvious statements of

the dominant pulling to the tonic. Beethoven, to the contrary, introduced his B section side

stepping modes covertly. After movement to E minor in bar 22, there is sustained dominant

action in bridge (bars 33-36), but because he is using sequencing, it diminishes the feel of the V

– I pull. He completely avoids any contrapuntal “fireworks” in his B section. This is further

evidence of Beethoven’s goal of “deep felt sincerity”; he did not stay “true to form” and

composed a contrived contropuntal section. Instead, he maintained the same feeling

Bartholomew 11

throughout the movement and delivered emotion with drama via sfzandos, crescendos,

alterations of piano and forte, and modulations to surprising keys in lieu of following the norm

in his day.

Once you have heard Beethoven’s Kyrie, the settings that came before seem disjoint for

the text, “Lord, have mercy, Christ has Mercy”. It hardly seems fitting to set “Christ have

mercy” to a fugue. Beethoven stayed true to the feeling of “heartfelt resignation” that he

thought would best fit the text.29 This movement definitely contains many Romantic ideas,

very surprising even in 1807 – especially for a composition written for the church!

Furthermore, Beethoven’s treatment of the orchestra is unorthodox for 1807. The orchestra is

often independent of the singers.30

His attention to setting the text is displayed in the three instances in this work of

melismatic fugal sections. The first is for the text ending the Gloria, “cum sancto spiritu in

gloria Dei patris. Amen.” The second is for at the end of Credo, “et vitam venture saeculi.

Amen.” which translates, “and the life of the world to come (presumably heaven). Amen.” The

third instance is for the text “osanna in excelsis!” which translates “Hosanna in the highest!”

the final words of Benedictus. All three of these text seem fitting of a lively, joyous fugue.

Traditionally, these phrases had been treated with fugal material. It appears Beethoven didn’t

mind using traditional methods, as long as he felt these forms honored the text.

The road to the publishing of this work was long and required Beethoven’s persistence.

It was finally published in 1815 by Breitkopf and Hartel. Beethoven insisted that this work

Bartholomew 12

would be appropriate for the stage as well as the church. For this reason, he had the Mss

translated in to German; first by Christian Schriber and subsequently by Benedikt Scholz

because he felt the latter’s translation was more fitting to what he portrayed the text to be in

his mass.31 In a letter to Breitkopt and Hartel in 1808, Beethoven writes,

I am reluctant to say anything about my Mass . . .but I think that I have treated the text in a manner in which it has rarely been treated . . .You say that ‘there is no demand for church works.’ You are right if you are referring merely to works by composers of thorough-bass. But do have the Mass performed at a concert in Leipzig and see whether lovers of music will not immediately come forward desiring to possess it. Publish it . . . with German words . . . I guarantee its success.32

Having a second, more fitting German translation published is further evidence of Beethoven’s

effort to honor the text with his scoring.

Generally speaking, Beethoven’s Mass in C is more accessible, from a performance

perspective, than Haydn’s masses. Beethoven has traded Haydn’s high celebratory and heavy

contrapuntal mass for a mass filled with honest drama. The byproduct of this style is that it is

easier for a choir to prepare and perform. There is little coloratura work required of the soloist.

The choir has the three fugal sections noted above, but other than that, there is little difficulty

in preparing this work. While there are many surprising and colorful, non-traditional chords,

they are often approached with easy part writing using step-wise motion.

While Beethoven’s Mass was not performed many times in his lifetime, it is now a

regularly performed work for many choirs; aspiring and professional alike. It’s accessibility and

beautiful seamless phrases still generate with musicians and audience today. We may never

Bartholomew 13

know exactly who Beethoven was as a person; but we can certainly get a glimpse of his

character through his music.

Bartholomew 14

End Notes

1. Julia Ronge, “Beethoven’s Apprenticeship: Studies with Haydn, Albrechtsberger, and

Salieri” (Journal of Musicological Research, 2013) 74.

2. Ibid., 80

3. Maynard Solomon, Beethoven (New York: Schirmer Trade Books, 1988) 91.

4. Ibid., 99-102

5. Fan Noli, Beethoven and the French Revolution (New York: International Universities

Press, 1947) 19-24.

6. Ibid., 33

7. Solomon,78

8. Ibid., 80

9. Ibid., 82-84

10. Ibid., 87

11. Ibid., 87

12. Ibid., 80

13. Ibid., 147

14. Ibid., 152

15. Irving Kolodin, The Interior Beethoven (New York: Alfred A. Knofp, Inc., 1975) 247.

16. Fred Stolfzfus, “Beethoven’s Mass in C: Notes on history, Structure, and Performance

Practice.” (The Choral Journal, 1982) 26.

17. Ibid., 26

Bartholomew 15

18. Ibid., 26

19. Gene Paul Strayer, “The Theology of Beethoven’s Masses” (University of PA; 1991) 123.

20. Michelle Fillion, “Beethoven’s Mass in C and the Search for Inner Peace” (Beethoven

Forum, 1999) 2.

21. Ibid., 5

22. Strayer, 130

23. Fillion, 4

24. Ludwig Van Beethoven, Mass in C Major Opus 86, Vocal Score (New York: 2013) 3.

25. Fillion, 7

26. Beethoven, 5

27. Ibid., 6

28. Jeremiah McGrann, “Haydn, A Prince, and Beethoven’s Mass in C” (The Choral Journal,

2009) 19.

29. Stolfzfus, 26

30. Strayer, 124

31. Stoltzfus, 26

32. Ibid., 26

Bartholomew 16

Works Cited

Dahlhaus, Carl. Nineteenth Century Music. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. Print.

Fillion, Michelle. “Beethoven's Mass in C and the Search for Inner Peace.” Beethoven Forum

7.1 (1999): 1-15. EBSCO.

Kolodin, Irving. The Interior Beethoven. New York: Alfred A. Knofp, Inc., 1975. Print.

McGrann, Jeremiah. “Haydn, A Prince, and Beethoven's Mass in C.” The Choral Journal 50.2

(2009): 8-23. EBSCO.

Noli, Fan. Beethoven and the French Revolution. New York: International Universities Press,

1947. Print.

Ronge, Julia. “Beethoven’s Apprenticeship: Studies with Haydn, Albrechtsberger, and Salieri.”

Journal of Musicological Research 32.2/3 (2013): 73-82. EBSCO.

Solomon, Maynard. Beethoven. 1977. New York: Schirmer Trade Books, 1988. Print.

Stoltzfus, Fred. “Beethoven's Mass in C: Notes on history, Structure, and Performance

Practice.” The Choral Journal 23.3 (1982): 26-30. EBSCO.

Strayer, Gene Paul. “The Theology of Beethoven’s Masses.” ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

University of Pennsylvania, 1991.

Suchet, John. Beethoven: The Man Revealed. New York: Grove Press, 2013. Print.