A Croatian composer
Date: 2025-05-05T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Haydn; Joseph; 1732-1809; Composers -- Biography; Names; Personal -- Croatia

The Project Gutenberg eBook of A Croatian composer

This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: A Croatian composer
notes toward the study of Joseph Haydn

Author: W. H. Hadow

Release date: May 5, 2025 [eBook #76017]

Language: English

Original publication: London: Seeley and Co. Limited, 1897

Credits: Markus Brenner and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. Music transcribed by Jude Eylander and Linda Cantoni. (This book was produced from scanned images of public domain material from the Google Books project.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A CROATIAN COMPOSER ***

Joseph Haydn
From an Engraving by W. Daniell
after G. Dance, R.A.

A CROATIAN COMPOSER

NOTES TOWARD THE STUDY
OF
JOSEPH HAYDN

BY
W. H. HADOW, M.A.

Fellow of Worcester College, Oxford
Author of “Studies in Modern Music”

LONDON
SEELEY AND CO. LIMITED
38 Great Russell Street
1897

TO
W. R. MORFILL

A small return for much assistance and encouragement

PREFACE.

The materials for this essay have been almost entirely gathered from two works by Dr. František Š. Kuhač, the one his collection of South Slavonic Folksongs, the other a pamphlet upon Joseph Haydn. Indeed, so greatly am I indebted to them that the essay would not have been written had it been possible to present them to the reader more directly. All that has been added is a certain rearrangement of the data, a certain amount of commentary and exposition, and a few supplementary facts which happen to have come within my reach. I should state that during a recent visit to Croatia, I saw Dr. Kuhač, who most kindly gave me full permission to make use of his results, and augmented the gift with much valuable information.

It is not for me to determine how far the subject will be of interest to English readers. We have somewhat forgotten Haydn: we do not always attach great importance to abstract problems. But I venture to think that the practical issue is not insignificant, and that in any case the question of historical truth is one which demands some consideration and regard. There is little need to say that I am myself convinced of the point which I have endeavoured to make: if the facts have been misinterpreted, at least the endeavour may invite discussion.

No doubt it will have to take its chance with those critics who would censure it at the outset for prying too curiously behind the veil. From such antagonists I beg, for two reasons, courteously to differ. In the first place, this is not a question of irrelevant detail, but an inquiry into the methods of a great artist, and into the character of his work. Grant that it deals with a single aspect alone, it does not therefore disregard or undervalue the others. And to suppose that Haydn is depreciated by the acknowledgment of his debt to his age and country is, I think, somewhat to misunderstand the conditions under which all true “creative” art is produced. In the second place, if we accept the historical statement as true, we do something to rescue a musical nation from undeserved neglect. The race which has given to a master not only birth but inspiration may surely claim from us something better than the oblivion into which we have allowed its name to fall.

I wish to offer all due acknowledgment to Mr. L. Finkenstein for his translation of Dr. Kuhač’s pamphlet.

Oxford, October 12, 1897.

A CROATIAN COMPOSER.

The study of Human Nature contains few problems more difficult or more important than those which deal with distinctions of national character. In most countries the original race, itself not always pure, has been affected and modified by a hundred causes; by conquest, by immigration, by intermarriage with neighbours, by all the circumstances and conditions of historical development; and the result is commonly a web of many diverse threads; in which we are fortunate if we can explain the prevailing colour and the prevailing pattern. Sometimes, as in our Indian Empire, the threads lie comparatively free, and puzzle us more by their number and variety than by actual closeness of texture. Sometimes, as in the Kingdom of Hungary, the interplay is so thorough and so complex as almost to baffle analysis at the outset. And when to this is added the influence of climate, of government, of religion, of all that is implied in past record and traditional usage, it will be seen that the question of causality is one which may well tax to their utmost limit the skill and patience of the ethnologist.

But if the reasons are hard to trace, the fact is no longer open to intelligible doubt. Physiology tells us that it manifests itself at birth; history, that it has formed a channel for the whole course and current of events. There is no crisis so great, there is no occurrence so trivial, as not to exhibit in some degree its presence and efficacy in the life of man. Nations at peace do not follow the same policy; nations in conflict do not fight with the same weapons; the contrast of laws and customs is so vivid that it has led some impatient philosophers to consider all morality relative. And what is true of the life as a whole is equally true of its specialisation in art and literature. For these are pre-eminently the expression of the national voice, as intimate as its language, as vital as the breath that it draws, and every artist who has compelled the attention of the world at large has done so by addressing it as the spokesman of his own people.

No doubt there are other factors in the case, the personal idiosyncrasy that separates a man from his fellows, and again the general principles, fewer perhaps than is commonly supposed, that underlie all sense of rhythm and all appreciation of style. But to say this is only to say that the artist is himself, and that he belongs to our common humanity. In everything, from the conception of a poem to the structure of a sentence, the national element bears its part with the other two; it colours the personal temperament, it gives a standpoint from which principles of style are approached, and wherever its influence is faint or inconsiderable the work of the artist will be found to suffer in proportion. It is hardly necessary to add that the law holds equally good whether the race in question be pure or mixed. If the former, it will move along a single line: if the latter, it will mark the converging point of many; but in either case its operation is a sure test of genuineness both in feeling and expression. Occasionally, it may be, a careless public has been deceived by some trick of imitation—by the Spanish comedies of Clara Gazul or the Persian Lyrics of Mirza Schaffy; but such instances of deception no more traverse the law than the Ireland forgeries or the pictures of Cariani. Some men are born with a talent of mimicry: none have ever by its means attained to greatness.

It may at once be admitted that this rule of national influence is at present less firmly established in music than in poetry or painting. In the two latter arts we have certain obvious externals to aid investigation—broad and salient contrasts of language, wide differences of scene and subject—with which music as such has little or nothing to do. Her subject is usually vague and indeterminate, her vocabulary is made up of a few scales, and for the rest we are told that her genius is limited to the common emotions of mankind and the common inheritance of pure form. But it is wholly false to infer that music is independent of nationality. The composer bears the mark of his race not less surely than the poet or the painter, and there is no music with true blood in its veins and true passion in its heart that has not drawn inspiration from the breast of the mother country.

Two main causes have retarded the acceptance of this truth. First, the belief that national melody is entirely an affair of artifices and mannerisms, that it is constituted by special turns of phrase and figure—as though you could make a rose tree by tying roses to a Scotch fir, or turn “Rule Britannia” into a Hungarian tune by ending it with a Hungarian cadence. This, it may be said, simply misunderstands the nature of the law which it criticises. No doubt a certain range of expression belongs to each type of folksong. No doubt these accidents of figure and phrase appear upon the surface, and are often useful as indications, but it makes all the difference whether they grow naturally in their place or lie there as mere lifeless appendages. Even the foreign idioms which a great composer may occasionally employ are only a graft let into the parent stock; the new growth is at once modified by the influence of the old, and alters its character to match its change of condition. And apart from these rare grafts the phrase of a true master will always be found conformable to the spirit that animates it, not because it constitutes the spirit, but because it emanates as property from essence. The second error springs from our loose and inaccurate methods of classification. That Mozart was an Italian composer seems now to be taken as an accredited jest; but it is more serious when we show our gratitude for the splendid work that Germany has done by scoring to her account all that has been accomplished by her neighbours. Schumann claims Chopin as a fellow-countryman; we are so far from protesting that we add Liszt, for whom “the great German master” was long a newspaper synonym, and even hesitate about Smetana and Dvořák. It is true that classification is often extremely difficult—records are imperfect, names are misleading, histories are marred by want of ethnological knowledge; but the admission of ignorance is not a very strong basis for dogmatic denial. Critics who traverse a law, because they cannot see its applicability to the facts, would do well to make sure at the outset that the facts have been correctly observed.

The subject of the present essay is one of the most remarkable instances of such misattribution. From the time of Carpani to that of Dr. Nohl, Haydn’s biographers have been unanimous in describing him as a German, born, as everybody knows, in Lower Austria, speaking German as his native language, Teutonic in race, in character, in surroundings. Yet the more we study him the more impossible it becomes to regard his music as the work of a Teuton. It is undoubtedly affected by his education and circumstances, by the early study of Emanuel Bach, and the subsequent intercourse with Mozart, but when we penetrate to the essential spirit of the man himself we find that its inherent characteristics are no more German than they are Italian or French. Haydn’s sentiment is of a kind without analogue among German Composers—mobile, nervous, sensitive, a little shallow it may be, but as pure and transparent as a mountain stream. His humour is a quality in which he stands almost alone; it differs totally from the wit of Mozart, or the grim jesting of Beethoven; it is quaint and playful, rippling over the whole surface of the page, and equally removed from satire and epigram. Again, he has less breadth and stateliness than belong to the German temper, but he has far more versatility. He was the most daring of pioneers, the most hazardous of experimentalists, and, what is more noticeable, his experiments are rather the natural outcome of a restless and vivid imagination than the efforts of a deliberate and conscious reform. From the external side, too, the same contrast is apparent. The shapes of his melodic phrases are not those of the German folksong; his rhythms are far more numerous and varied; his metres are often strange and unfamiliar. Throughout Western Europe the four-bar line has almost uniformly been taken as the unit of measurement, carrying with it the corresponding stanza of eight or sixteen or thirty-two. In a hundred German or English folksongs it will be strange if a single exception can be found: in a hundred melodies from Haydn’s quartets it will be strange if the exceptions are not as frequent as the instances. In a word, his range of stanza is far wider than that known to the Germany of his day, and many of his most characteristic tunes belong to another language and another scheme of versification.

The evidence here briefly epitomised can only point to one of two conclusions: either that the law of nationality is inapplicable to Haydn, or that his assignment to the German race is an ethnological error. The former alternative is unsatisfactory enough; the latter was for many years put out of court by our inability to sustain the onus probandi. But in 1878 Dr. Kuhač began to publish his great collection of South Slavonic melodies,[1] and in 1880 he supplemented it by a special pamphlet on Haydn’s relation to them.[2] The main points of the thesis are three in number: first, that the Croatian folk-tunes possess all the characteristics which have been noted as distinctive in the melodies of Haydn; second, that many of them are actually employed by him; and third, that the facts of his birth and parentage afford strong presumptive proof that he was a Croatian by race.[3] If this contention can be established it strengthens an important law with valuable and unexpected support, and it remains therefore that we should bring forward a critical statement of the case, beginning, for clearness’ sake, with the historical and biographical testimony, and so bringing into prominence the special character of the compositions themselves.

First, then, we must consider whether the character of the Croatian people is such as to render its claim to Haydn reasonable and intelligible. It would be poor logic to illustrate our law by deriving a great artist from an inartistic nation. And the question becomes more pressing when we remember that Haydn’s whole family was musical, that he learned his first lessons from his father and mother, that his brother Michael long enjoyed a repute little inferior to his own. But to answer it in the affirmative is to run counter to an established belief. From Mrs. Western in “Tom Jones” to Barto Rizzo in “Vittoria” everybody has had a fling at the Croats. We have come to regard them at best as savages, and at worst as mercenary assassins. The associations that we connect with their name are those of war and pillage, of fierce onslaught and misused victory, of lives bartered for gain or spilled in mere wantonness. Their art is a matter into which we have never dreamed of inquiring, and we should as soon think of learning their language as of accrediting them with a literature. To dispel this superstition it is only needful that we should study the country. Few towns are more charming than Agram, few regions more delightful than the long fertile valley of the Save in which it lies. In the remoter districts there is still much ignorance and much poverty, but civilisation is spreading from the centre, and eliciting, not creating, the signs of progress. The strongest impulse of the national life is loyalty to race and Church. Recent events have shown us that outbreaks may readily be provoked in religious and patriotic causes, but the temper that will fight for them is not ignoble, and is not infrequently conjoined with the inspiration that will make songs in their honour. And throughout the country the love of music prevails.[4] The men sing at their plough, the girls sing as they fill their water-pots at the fountain; by every village inn you may hear the jingle of the tambura, and watch the dancers footing it on the green. Grant that the music is not always of a high order, that the tunes are often primitive and the voices rude and uncouth, still the impetus is there, and it only needs guidance and direction. Certainly the present condition of the race does not disqualify it to be the parent of a great composer.

It will be objected that this is only a present impression, and that it tells us nothing of those days when, apparently, the whole raison d’être of the population was to furnish fighting-men for the army of Maria Theresa. In answer to this, two points must be made clear: first, the state of Croatia proper during the past two centuries; second, the position occupied at the same period by other members of the Croatian race.[5] The argument “e nihilo nihil” need hardly be stated here, though it will be seen later that nothing has been added to the Croats except opportunity.

Throughout the eighteenth century the policy of the Austrian Government was to repress as far as possible the Slavonic peoples that lay under its rule. Bohemia, which had lost its independence at the Thirty Years’ War, was intellectually the “desert” which the Emperor Ferdinand had wished to make it; and the same drastic measures, though for somewhat different reasons, were applied to the subject races that fringed the southern border. Croatia in particular was used merely as an outpost against Turkish invasion: “purchased,” as Dr. Kuhač says, “with a few empty political concessions,” but kept in reality under the close discipline of a barrack-state. “We were not allowed,” he continues, “to provide for our people the advantages of a real city, we had no centre of intellectual life and progress, and it was considered a sufficient privilege if the name of capital was bestowed upon one or other of our towns.”[6]

Naturally, the Croatian nobles spent as little time as possible in their own country. It was much more amusing to stay at Pressburg or Vienna, where there were balls and theatres and pageants, and a man could see life. And so it happened that even the chance of patronage was denied, and the people sank to a state of apathy, their gifts forgotten, their voice starved into silence. But about 1835, the poet Ljudevit Gaj began, as Tyl was doing in Bohemia, to restore from its suspended animation the intellectual life of his countrymen. He settled their alphabet. He made their grammar. He collected the folksongs from every village and hamlet, and enriched them with lyrics of his own. He sowed dragon’s teeth over the length and breadth of the country, and there sprang up as if by magic a crop of artists. Of course they were not of any great European importance. Lisinski and Franz von Suppé are the most famous among their musicians—but the whole lesson had to be learned anew, and these men were the first pupils.[7] And when the revolutions of 1848 gave fresh impulse to national life, a second chapter opened in the Croatian renascence, and, under the patronage of Bishop Strossmayer, there rose into being a new artistic generation.[8] Here, again, the musicians rather lag behind the poets and the men of letters; there was no conservatorium, there was no satisfactory method of training, and the young talent was generally too poor to embrace the opportunities which foreign lands afforded. But, if as yet the quality of the work is slight and trivial, something at least should be said about its extraordinary volume and facility. And it should be added that the leaders of the present generation—Zajc, Vilhar, Faller, Dr. Kuhač himself—are all making large use of the national melodies as material.

Meantime, while the fortunes of Croatia were at their lowest, an event of earlier occurrence was producing important consequences. The Southern Slavs had always been a migratory people. As early as 595 they occupied the Tyrolean Pusterthal, where they have left their mark, not only in the character of the inhabitants but in a large number of local names[9]; later, under stress of Turkish invasion, they colonised Montenegro; and in the fifteenth or sixteenth century a body of Eastern Croats—Bosnen or Wasser-Kroaten, as the Germans called them—settled in the district of Central Austria which extends from Lake Balaton north-west to the Danube. The new home was eminently suited to the development of the race. It was rich and fertile, with vine-clad hills and broad stretches of alluvial plain, it was well wooded and well watered, it extended to Pressburg, the second city in the empire, and contained at least one other town of considerable note; it was within easy reach of the great intellectual and artistic movements. There is little wonder that this region soon came to be regarded as the focus of Croatian life, and that the wealth which sought it for entertainment attracted in due course the talent which sought it for livelihood.

The number of the original immigrants is unknown, but by the eighteenth century they unquestionably formed the larger part of the population. In 1780 Pressburg contained rather less than 28,000 inhabitants, of whom about half are noted in the official census as Croats or Slavonians; while the smaller towns and villages in the neighbourhood were mainly occupied by the newcomers, and are still, despite German and Magyar influence, largely affected by Slavonic traditions. One curious and rather bewildering consequence is that almost every place in the region has possessed two names, one the German, used for official purposes; the other, Slavonic, for the benefit of the population. And when we add that east of the Leitha the Slavonic name is being ousted by the Hungarian, it will be seen that the unsophisticated traveller may now and again be at some difficulty to ascertain his route. An amusing instance fell under my own experience during the summer of 1897. Wishing to make pilgrimages to Eisenstadt, where Haydn was Kapellmeister, and to Željez, where Schubert taught music to Countess Esterházy, I took a ticket at Vienna for the first of these places, only to find, when my watch informed me of my destination, that Eisenstadt and Željez were the same place, and that the name upon the railway-station was Kis Martom.[10]

It is something more than a coincidence that among all districts of Austria this area of Croatian settlement has been the most fruitful in great musicians. Veit Bach, the grandfather of John Sebastian, was born at Pressburg; so was Chopin’s great hero, Johann Nepomuk Hummel. The Haydns came from a neighbouring village, the proper name of which—Trstnik—was despairingly translated by the Germans into Rohrau. Joseph Weigl was a native of Eisenstadt, so was Ivan Fuchs, who succeeded Hummel as Prince Esterházy’s Kapellmeister. Liszt was born at Rustnik, near Oedenburg, Joachim at Kitsee, Ludwig Strauss at Pressburg, Carl Goldmark at Keszthely. And round this constellation there gathers a whole nebula of lesser stars[11] names unfamiliar, it may be, to English readers, but in their own country accepted and recognised. Of course it is not claimed that all these artists are of Croatian blood. Some unquestionably are not; but there is at least an a priori likelihood that some of them belonged to the race which was numerically dominant, especially as that race was Slavonic and therefore musical, and on this general point a word may perhaps be said before we proceed to particularise in the case of Haydn.

Now, apart from his, it should be noted that none of the names given above are distinctively Slavonic in character. For this fact a simple reason suffices. There had long been spreading through the world of music a practice, originated in Europe by scholars and divines, of taking a nom de guerre which should either represent the sound or translate the meaning of the family name. Erasmus, Melanchthon, Stephanus are familiar instances in the world of letters, and following these august models Grobstimm became Baryphonus; Schneider, Sartorius; Glareau, Loritius; and the like. Musicians for the most part seem to have avoided Latin and taken in its place whatever language lay ready to hand for display or convenience. Thus two famous Bohemians called themselves Dussek and Gyrowetz; Beethoven’s father occasionally appeared as Bethoff; and the list may be extended even to such grotesques as Gionesi and Coperario. This device was specially necessary to the Croatian who was aiming at a career. We know with what diligence poor Abel, fresh from the German vowel sounds, endeavoured to adapt his name to the requirements of a British public.[12] The need of adaptation is still greater when the language is one which hardly any foreigner can hope to pronounce. Thus it was that the Croatian words tended to drop out altogether, and to be replaced by some rough German or Italian equivalent; and so complete was the transformation that we have to look twice before recognising Beethoven’s first violin in Župančić, or finding in Trtić the composer of the “Trillo del diavolo.”[13] In like manner the words “Bach” and “Hummel” may very possibly have been translations of Croatian names, names which are known to have existed in Pressburg and which bear the same meaning; while the family of Liszt, also claimed by Dr. Kuhač,[14] may have been Slavonic in origin, though by the time of the great pianist the Magyar element had predominated for about a century. At any rate there can be no reasonable doubt as to the Slavonic origin of Tartini, Dragonetti, Giornovichi, Zingarelli, and many other of Haydn’s contemporaries. There may have been in them some intermixture of race, but the parent stock was Croatian.

We cannot, then, assert that there is any antecedent improbability in assigning Haydn to the Croats. They are a musical people, they formed the chief population of the district where he was born, they have a fair claim to other great musicians of his time. It follows that we should discuss the biographical evidence, and see what is to be made out of the record of Haydn’s family.

And here attention should be called to three points. First, that the name Hajden or Hajdin (with its derivative Hajdenić, Hajdinović, &c.) is of common occurrence throughout Croatia, and, in days when spelling was roughly phonetic, may easily have appeared in Austrian official documents as Haiden or Hayden, forms by which its pronunciation is exactly represented. Now among all the variants assumed by the name of the composer’s family,[15] these two are the most frequent and the most authoritative. His great-grandfather—the first member of the house who can be traced—appears in the Hainburg register as Caspar Haiden; his grandfather, once by obvious error called Thomas Hayrn, is usually Hayden elsewhere, the contemporary monuments at Rohrau give Mathias Haiden as the name of his father and Josephus Hayden as his own. He himself seems to have used the dissyllabic form up to January, 1762, when he signs for salary at Eisenstadt “Giuseppe Hayden”; in the February of the same year he changes to the signature “Joseph Haydn” which he afterwards habitually adopted. Even then the majority of documents relating to him are conservative enough to retain the earlier orthography, and the monument in Count Harrach’s park, which bears the name Josephus Hayden, was erected as late as 1794. Indeed, there can be little doubt that Haiden or Hayden was the family name, shortened to suit the Viennese convention, as for the same reason Händel used to be shortened to Händl.[16] Secondly, the name, in one or other of its variants, is widely spread over the whole district from Wiener-Neustadt to Oedenburg. Dr. Pohl found it in some ten or a dozen villages, many of which are claimed by Dr. Kuhač as Croatian, and in the country towns like Hainburg or Eisenstadt it is of course more frequent still. There is no need to remind the reader that this is precisely the region occupied, since the sixteenth century, by the Slavonic immigrants. Thirdly, the home of the entire Haydn family is situated at the centre of the district in question. Caspar was born within sight of the Hainburg walls, Thomas lived and died as a burgher of that town, Mathias, after a brief period of travel, settled at Rohrau some ten miles away, and the most adventurous of his brothers wandered no further afield than Frankenmarkt or Ungarisch-Altenburg. It fits well enough with this home-keeping temper that Joseph Haydn should have spent more than threescore and ten years of his life inside a thirty mile radius from his native place.

On the father’s side, then, Haydn would seem to belong to the Slavonic race among whom he lived and worked.[17] Again, his mother was a native of Rohrau, in her day a distinctively Croatian village,[18] and her maiden name of Koller—a vox nihili in German—is plausibly regarded by Dr. Kuhač as a phonetic variant of the Croatian Kolar “wheelwright.”[19] Everything that we know about his look and character favour the supposition of Slavonic descent. The lean ugly kindly face with high cheek-bones, long nose, and broad prominent under lip, the keen grey eyes softened by a twinkle of humour, the thin wiry figure, the strong nervous hands; all these and their analogues may be seen to-day in any village where Slavonic blood is still pure; and though of course they afford no argument in themselves, they add a touch of corroborative evidence which is worth noting. To the same cause may be traced that intense love of sport which has left his name as a proverb at Eisenstadt[20]; and something, too, of the conviviality which made him say that his best evenings were those spent with his comrades at the “Engel.” His talk, like his music, was full of that obvious fun which raises a laugh by a sudden touch of the unexpected; so are hundreds of Croatian ballads and aphorisms.[21] The humour is sometimes primitive, as when a Croat will tell you, “It is as true as that two and two make seven”; sometimes it reaches a more respectable level, as the gibe at the Bosnian Brethren, “who were ordered to abstain from something in Lent, and therefore took no water in their wine.” But good, bad, or indifferent, it marks a distinctive type of peasant character; and in remembering that Haydn was a genius we need not forget that he was a peasant. The same holds good, too, of his religious feeling. It is not without significance that we may turn from one of his scores, with its “In Nomine Domini” at the beginning, and its “Laus Deo” at the end, to read in our newspaper that another Croatian village has risen in revolt upon the bare report of an ecclesiastical change. His temper, it may be, had grown more equable than that of his uneducated countrymen; it had not lost anything of their loyalty.

The reasons which have led to this indication of detail may easily be misunderstood. It is not, of course, contended that any race has the monopoly of these characteristics, or that it differs ethically from its neighbours except by the very important fact of the proportion in which they are blended. But when it appears that the more we study Haydn, and the more we study the Slavonic character, the closer becomes the accord between them, when every feature of the one finds its parallel in the prevailing qualities of the other, then we may surely infer that to the antecedent probability some weight is added by this estimate of internal evidence. And probability will strengthen to certitude if we realise that Haydn’s music is saturated with Croatian melody, that the resemblances are beyond question, beyond attribution of coincidence, beyond any explanation but that of natural growth. Some of his tunes are folksongs in their simplest form, some are folksongs altered and improved, the vast majority are original, but display the same general characteristics. He would stand wholly outside the practice of the great composers if he wrote, by habitual preference, in an idiom that was not his own.

His acquaintance with these folk-tunes must have begun from his earliest years. His father, we know, was a good musician who used, of an evening, to sit by the cottage door at Rohrau, singing to the children until they plucked up their courage and joined in. And when Frankh carried off the boy for his first experience of schooling, it was only to Hainburg, the earlier home of the family, where he may well have heard the same ballads breaking the quiet of the market-place, or echoing under the great arch of the Wiener Thor. Then, no doubt, came a change; the splendid apparition of George Reutter, the halo of Imperial patronage, the ten years in the choir at St. Stephen’s, the sharp struggle for existence when the boy’s voice broke, and he was turned into the streets of Vienna to shift for himself. It is in every way natural that his first composition should show little direct trace of national influence. He was in his student period; like all students he was dominated by the authority of his models, and for a time his chief ambition was to master the form of Emanuel Bach, and emulate the counterpoint of the Gradus ad Parnassum. But from the days when he began to speak in his own voice the Slavonic qualities unmistakably appear. There is the same general shape of melody, the same repetition of phrases, the same oddity of rhythm and metre, the same fineness and sensitiveness of feeling; and that not once or twice in a composition, but throughout its entire length. The common employment of folksongs dates from the Symphony in D major (1762) to the Salomon Symphonies of 1795; they find their way into everything—hymns, quartets, divertimenti; not, of course, because Haydn had any need to take them, but because he loved them too well to leave them out. It will be remembered that for thirty years, from 1761 to 1790, he worked as Prince Esterházy’s Kapellmeister in the very centre of the Croatian colony. He must have heard these songs every day, he must have set his life to their lilt and cadence; they were the melodies of his own people, the echoes of his own thought. No one is surprised that Burns should have gathered the Ayrshire peasant songs and transmuted them into gold by the fire of his genius; it is not more wonderful that Haydn should have enriched the treasures of Eisenstadt with metal from his native mines, and as Heine pertinently puts it, the Temple is built by the Architect, not by the stone-cutters who supply him with his materials.

Among the numerous illustrations collected by Dr. Kuhač, the following deserve special attention.

(1) The Cassation in G major (1765)[22] begins as follows:—

a melody noticeable for the breaking of the four-quaver rhythm by alternate bars of six. It can hardly be doubted that when Haydn wrote this he had in his mind the old Slavonic drinking song, “Nikaj na svetu”—

variants of which may still be heard in Croatia, and in the Carinthian Zillerthal. Similar instances of slight adaptation may be traced from the spring song, “Proljeće”—

which appears at the beginning of the D major Quartet (Op. 17, No. 6) as—

and from the dance-song “Hajde malo dere”—

which is thus altered by Haydn—

(2) The curious and characteristic finale of the D major Symphony (Salomon, No. 7) is founded on the following theme:—

This is simply an amended version of the popular ballad, “Oj Jelena,” which belongs to the district of Kolnov, near Oedenburg, and is specially noted by Dr. Kuhač as being commonly sung in Eisenstadt. Its tune, essentially Slavonic in rhythm and cadence, runs thus:—

Variants of this melody are found in Croatia proper, Servia, and Carniola.[23]

It is probable that the other movements of this symphony are equally influenced by folksongs; in any case, no doubt can exist as to the Symphony in E♭, “Mit dem Paukenwirbel.” The opening theme of the Allegro—

is noted by Dr. Kuhač as Croatian.[24] The Andante is founded on two themes, the first minor—

the second major—

both of which are taken, and considerably improved, from two folksongs of the Oedenburg district, (a) “Na Travniku”—

and (b) “Jur Postaje”—

while the principal tune of the Finale—

is that of the song “Divojčica potok gazi”—

which is common among the Croats, especially those of Haydn’s district.[25] Again, the Trio of the A major Symphony (No. 11 in Haydn’s Catalogue) contains a Slavonic melody—

and the first movement of its successor (D major, No. 12) suggests another—

(3) There are several cases in which, without direct adaptation, Haydn has shown the same tendency of thought or phrase as the Slavonic folksongs. A favourite “curve” of his may be illustrated by the opening of the B♭ Symphony (Salomon, No. 9)—

as well as by the Dalmatian Overture of Franz von Suppé and the tunes (from Zara and Borištov) on which it was founded—e.g., the ballad “Na placi sem stal”—

Another, even more beautiful, ends the opening strain in the Adagio of the G major Quartet (Op. 77, No. 1)—

and appears also in the Croatian “Čuješ doro dobro moje”—

while the use of the unprepared dominant ninth, constructed out of a dominant seventh by shifting the melody a third higher, was not so common in Haydn’s day that we can afford to neglect the resemblance of—

quoted by Dr. Kuhač from a Quartet in B♭,[26] to—

from a popular folksong of Carniola.

(4) These latter examples do not imply reminiscences, but at most a general sympathy of temper. A good deal more, however, is involved in the treatment of Slavonic dance tunes. It is hardly too much to say that what the Csardas was to Liszt the Kolo was to Haydn; with this difference—that the earlier and greater musician has throughout made a finer use of his materials. The Kolo is a Slavonic measure, which I have seen the children dance at Agram and the men at Sarajevo, bright and cheery of movement, its tune in two-four time ingeniously varied by patterns of quaver and semiquaver figures. Here, for instance, is an example well known in Bosnia and Dalmatia:—

and used with an amended cadence in the Finale of the C major Quartet (Op. 33, No. 3):—

Here, again, is a similar dance-tune from Servia, which opens the Symphony in D major (Haydn’s Catalogue, No. 4):—

and here another in the Finale of the G major Quartet (Op. 77, No. 1):—

in which so wonderful an effect is produced by the alternation of cold unison and glowing harmonies.

Many of Haydn’s characteristic melodies follow one or other of these types: e.g., this from the Finale of the F major Quartet (Op. 74, No. 2)—

or this from the “Bear” Symphony:—

or this from the Finale of the Quartet in D (Op. 76, No. 5):—

while the metrical peculiarities of the Eastern or Servian Slav may be illustrated by the following, from the Symphony in F major (No. 1 in the Viennese edition):—

as they may, apart from the Kolo measure, in a hundred of his minuets and finales. Again, the early Pianoforte Concerto in D major ends with an oddly named “Rondo à l’Hongrie”, the principal subject of which is as follows:—

This melody, which contains no Magyar characteristics, either of figure, scale, or stanza, is compressed from that of the Siri Kolo, as commonly danced in Bosnia and Dalmatia. The complete tune runs:—

a typical rustic dance, which in Haydn’s hands has gained not only by compression, but by a more artistic accompaniment.

(5) In addition to the dance measure, Haydn has adopted other instrumental forms, e.g., marches, bag-pipe melodies, and the like. Here is one, with a strange rhythm, from the Pianoforte Scherzando in F major:—

and here, from the Finale of the B♭ Symphony (Salomon, No. 9), is the march which is commonly played in Turopol at rustic weddings:—

Another Croatian march beginning—

has been identified by Dr. Kuhač from an unpublished Symphony in A major, and there is a further example from the Allegro of the B♭ Quartet (Op. 71, No. 1)—

(6) The two most remarkable instances are yet to come. According to a well-known story, Prince Esterházy once discussed with his Kapellmeister the question whether Church music could not be made “at the same time religious and popular.” It is hard to realise that Haydn’s Masses were ever regarded as too severe; in any case, the Prince felt dissatisfied, and wanted a change. He had recently returned from his annual pilgrimage to Maria Zell. He had heard there music which pleased him, and he seems to have suggested that in the Eisenstadt chapel there was too much counterpoint and too little melody. Haydn listened, sent to Maria Zell for information, bided his time, and, when next year the day of the pilgrimage was approaching, wrote a “Mass” or Service to German words,[27] despatched it to the famous church, had it secretly practised, and finally found an excuse for slipping off on a holiday. The Prince came back more dissatisfied than ever. “I have heard,” he said, “a service of Church music composed and played in a style which you will never equal.” “Your Highness,” answered Haydn, “the composition was mine, and I was the organist.”

From this “Mass,” of which at present no other trace seems to be discoverable, Dr. Kuhač quotes seven melodies on the authority of the Dominican Alois Russwurm, who was a personal friend of Haydn, and by whom the story was originally recorded.

The first, “Hier liegt vor Deiner Majestät,” is the opening theme of the first number—

and comes from the Croatian tune—

The second, “Gott soll gepriesen werden”—

is the song “Ti jabuka,” as sung in Velik-Borištov—

The third, “Allmächtiger, vor Dir im Staube,”—

begins remarkably like the Slavonian drinking song, “Draga moja gospodo.”[28]

The fourth, “O Vater, sieh vor Deinem Throne”—

may fairly be regarded as a variant of the Dalmatian song, “Jedna Ciganka”—

The fifth, “Betrachtet ihn in Schmerzen”—

is almost identical in both parts with the following Croatian melody:—

The sixth—“Nun ist das Lamm geschlachtet”—

is derived partly from two separate strains in the Croatian and Slavonian versions of a convivial chorus—“Vivla compagnija”—

partly from a Croatian sacred song—“Stani gori gospodar.”

The seventh—“Dich wahres Oesterlamm”—which is the concluding phrase of the canticle for the Celebration,—

borrows its exact sequence and its curious halting rhythm from the Croatian “Miši prave svatove”—

Clearly, in Haydn’s vocabulary “popular” meant Slavonic.

It may be objected that this example proves nothing. Grant that Haydn was living in a certain district, and that he was asked for once to write in a popular style; what more natural than that he should adapt himself to his surroundings, and use the idioms that he found in common currency? A man readily drops into dialect when he is addressing a rural audience, and does not become a countryman by seasoning his discourse with a few country proverbs and metaphors. This rejoinder would be of more effect if the “Mass” were an isolated phenomenon: it somewhat loses weight when we remember that the music only turns to Church use the tendencies that have already been noted in symphony and quartet. Still, our case would undoubtedly be stronger if we could find Haydn appealing, in the same tongue, to the Austrian Empire at large, and using the native Slavonic for some great political or ceremonial occasion. Here, at any rate, is a test which we may reasonably regard as crucial, and which, if successfully applied, should go some way towards settling the question.

Unfortunately, the Croatian melodies are not, as a rule, well suited for such a purpose. They are bright, sensitive, piquant, but they seldom rise to any high level of dignity or earnestness. They belong to a temper which is marked rather by feeling and imagination than by any sustained breadth of thought, and hence, while they enrich their own field of art with great beauty, there are certain frontiers which they rarely cross, and from which, if once crossed, they soon return. One limitation in particular will have been observed by every student. It frequently happens that a Croatian or Servian tune will begin with a fine phrase, and then fall to an anti-climax—either losing sight of its tonality, or wavering in its rhythm, or ending with a weak or commonplace cadence. In almost all the examples quoted above, it is the opening of the tune which Haydn has borrowed; its conclusion he has nearly always improved or re-written.[29] And the reasons that impelled him to this practice may be illustrated by the following variants, in all of which are apparent the same touch of inspiration, and the same weakness of development.

(a) The song “Stal se jesem,” as sung in Marija Bistric[30]—

(b) The same song as it appears in the district of S. Ivan Zeline—

(c) The same as it appears at Medjumur (Murinsel)—

In these versions the last four bars appear to have been loosely attached to the rest of tune; at any rate, they are often found, apart from the first phrase, in Croatian carols and drinking songs. Again, among other districts there has been some rearrangement of the words, with corresponding changes in the music. Either the opening line is not repeated, which leads to the excision of the third bar, and a consequent alteration of cadence; e.g.—

(d) Variant from Kolnov (near Oedenburg)—

or it is inserted again after the second, so as to give the stanza an alternation of masculine and feminine endings; e.g.—

(e) Variant from Čembe—

The rest is easily divined. When in 1797 Haydn was commissioned to set the National Anthem, he must have had this tune before his eye, and have determined to use it as the pedestal of the monumentum ære perennius which his loyalty erected.[31] And here a word may be said as to the manner in which the great tune appears to have been written. It was no momentary inspiration, no sudden impromptu that should come into existence at full growth; like most of Beethoven’s music, it was made carefully, and by deliberate weighing of alternatives. By a piece of singular good fortune, we are for once admitted to the master’s workshop, and allowed to take our lesson in melody by the observation of his practice.

Now the second strain of the folk-tune is too short to fit the second line of the poem; accordingly, Haydn began by extending its cadence, and instead of—

wrote—

following it with repeat-marks, after the common method of primary form. Two other changes explain themselves. The measure is dignified by the broader time-signature, and the accent shifted from arsis to thesis by the rearrangement of the bars. Otherwise, in the first half of the stanza the folk-tune remains unaltered.

But for the second half it was manifestly insufficient. Both the possible variants are too trivial, and one too brief, to afford the requisite climax. As a natural consequence, Haydn discarded both, and proceeded to supply their place with two original strains, which in the Autograph sketch[32] run as follows:—

Still, he was dissatisfied with the result, and it is easy to suggest the reason. In the former of these two strains there is a passage which carries tonic harmony—out of place at this stage of the tune—and its cadence, moreover, rhymes awkwardly with that of the half-stanza. The latter of the two comes down from its point of stress with a fine sweeping movement, but, three bars from the end, breaks its melodic curve into two distinct pieces, and so loses continuity of line. Both were accordingly corrected, one on the same page, the bottom stave of which bears, in hasty manuscript, the amended form—

the other, with a few more minute alterations, at a later period of the work. And thus, of such diverse metal as Cellini cast his “Perseus,” did Haydn beat out the melody by which he has given voice to a nation’s patriotism.

It is to be hoped that these examples will not encourage any reader to pursue Haydn with the cry of plagiarist. No accusation could be more unfounded or more unreasonable. He poached upon no man’s preserve, he robbed no brother-artist, he simply ennobled those peasant-tunes with the thought and expression of which he was most nearly in accord. The whole extent of his indebtedness is at most an occasional melody, and is often but a single phrase; the treatment, the setting, the workmanship belong as truly to him as Faust to Goethe, or Cymbeline to Shakespeare. The master who has written a hundred and twenty first-rate symphonies, and eighty-three first-rate quartets, may surely claim the right to take his wealth where he finds it; and if we are churlish enough to deny this, at least we may allow him the privilege of speaking in his native tongue. To Haydn, the folk-tunes were little more than the words of his accustomed speech, hardly obscured when the Church asserted her contrapuntal dignity, and reappearing in full significance when he returned to the untrammelled orchestra and the freedom of the four magic strings. It is more important to note how closely his special melodic gift is in sympathy with that of his people. Many of the tunes quoted above are among those which a critic would select as especially characteristic: there are literally hundreds of his invention by which, in a more or less degree, the same qualities are exhibited. No doubt he was not only the child of his nation, he had his own personality, his own imaginative force, his own message to deliver in the ears of the world. But through all these the national element runs as a determining thread. That “les grands artistes n’ont pas de patrie” is a sentence abundantly refuted by its very author; it assuredly finds no support in the life of the Croatian peasant who has made immortal the melodies of his race.

A new aspect of the question has been brought into prominence by recent history. The course of policy pursued in our own day by the Austrian Government is tending to reverse the relative importance of the Croatian colony and of the mother country from which it sprang. On the one hand, the central provinces are being steadily Germanised, the Slavonic language is beginning to die out, the Slavonic blood to be crossed by intermixture, and though yet the change is only in process, there is no lack of indication that it is operative. Along the western bank of the Leitha, German is now the prevailing speech, along the eastern bank it is disputing the palm with Hungarian, and between them the Slav, for all his tenacity, will some day be dislodged or absorbed. Hardly any inhabitant speaks of Požun now; the name is either Pozsony or Pressburg; Liesing has almost forgotten that it was once Lešnik, and though Oedenburg[33] still remains as a fortress, it is becoming more and more isolated as the years advance. But, on the other hand, a wider range of opportunity is being opened in Croatia proper. The impulse towards national life, started as we have already seen by Ljudevit Gaj, is being wisely fostered and encouraged by Imperial patronage; and Agram, which a century ago was a little country town, is now assuming the state and dignity of a capital. The University, founded in 1874, has already done much for the study of art and letters; the old market-place has become a fine square, with an opera-house in the centre; the waste ground to the south has been laid out in public gardens, and enclosed with galleries and museums. It is natural that the present race should follow these changes with keen enthusiasm; and should look forward eagerly and confidently to the days of coming greatness. Nor even to a stranger are the evidences lacking. The tone may be somewhat Chauvinist, the self-gratulation somewhat indiscriminate, the record of present achievement a little wanting in distinction; but as yet the movement is new, the resources are new, the whole field has to be contested step by step. It would be idle to expect another Haydn at present; the line has been broken, and must rally before it can advance. Enough for the moment that there are force and impetus and courage, that there is active and restless ability, that there is an unswerving determination to win the day. Who knows in what recruit’s knapsack the bâton of the field-marshal may be lying hidden?

For in all the music of this century there is no phenomenon more remarkable than the steady progress of the Slavonic race. As early as 1818 an English critic was far-sighted enough to predict the advent of Russia,[34] and though his readers never lived to see the presage fulfilled, though in his generation there appeared no greater name than that of Glinka, yet our own day has verified his words beyond the possibility of cavil. There may be some difference of opinion about Rubinstein, there can be none about Borodin or Tschaikowsky, and the traditions which they set are being ably followed by a whole school of younger composers. Toward the middle of the century came Chopin, whose chief ambition, as he himself said, was “to be the Uhland of his country,” and whose chief work was to stamp with the impress of a classic his national strains of polonaise and mazurka. Some thirty years ago Smetana’s brilliant comedy laid the foundation on which Dvořák has built, and rescued from disuse and oblivion the folksongs of Bohemia. It is not without interest that we see another Slavonic nation re-entering the field. In one sense it was the leader of them all, in another it is the latest accession to their ranks, and its fortunes, as it tries to regain a lost position, should be watched by us not only with encouragement, but with close and intimate sympathy.

For, de nobis fabula narratur. Western Europe also knows of a land which was once a leader in musical art, which forewent its trust, which suffered its voice to be silenced, which allowed its musicians to bid for popularity by adopting foreign names and foreign methods, which is now striving, with better opportunities than any Slavonic nation can possess, to recover the old ground, and recall the forgotten message. If we disdain the comparison we may learn humility by reading the estimate in which we have long been held by our neighbours. “English music,” says a recent German historian, “may be said to end with Purcell”; “English art,” say our French critics, “has long degenerated into imitation”; and though our present leaders are nobly refuting the charge, there is still with us too much of that cosmopolitan temper which is among the most insidious of our enemies. No doubt times are improving. In Leeds, in Birmingham, in Bristol, even in London, the Englishman may get a hearing, though unless he write Royalty ballads he will hardly find a publisher. But his audience is not yet attuned into proper sympathy with his work. We still judge too much by reference to alien ideals, we are still too indifferent to our own natural language, and our own natural cast of thought. And, until we shake off this indifference and learn to extend our patriotism to our art, we shall never resume our place as a great musical nation.

There is no need that we should offer a less cordial welcome to our foreign visitors, or a less cordial recognition of the immense service that they have done. “Was macht dieser Fremde hier?” is not patriotism, but discourtesy, a mark of the weakness which fears to meet the world frankly upon equal terms. At the same time we have no right either to neglect or to depreciate our own. A great artistic school is not built in a single moment or in a single generation; the work is long, heavy, difficult; it is easily discouraged, it is easily retarded, it needs all the care and diligence that it can command. And there is one way, and one only, in which we can bring it to a successful issue. Let us cut our timber from our own forests, let us quarry our stone from the bed-rock of our own nation, and then let our master-builders deal with the matter as their genius shall determine.

A most hopeful sign is the revival of interest in our national melodies. To the artists who have collected them, to the artists who are making them familiar, our cordial gratitude is due. But it is not enough to have them, we must use them; and it is not enough to use them, we must learn how to catch their spirit. Haydn had a far slighter material than ours, yet he could use it to a purpose which will be remembered when all our exotic romances are forgotten. And now that more than one English master is showing us the way, we have no excuse, we have no pretext for withholding our allegiance any longer.

It is now some years since a few English writers began to advocate the return to nationalism. Since then, much, no doubt, has been done, but much still remains to do, and to us hearers a great part of the reform is entrusted. We have listened to foreign tongues until our own sounds odd and unfamiliar. We have sat so long at Trimalchio’s banquet that we have no appetite left for our native fare. Extremes of passion, extremes of languor, inordinate appeals to sense, all these are alien from our national temper, and we are growing surfeited with them until our taste is spoiled and our palate vitiated. It is just the same in the world of letters. “No one reads Scott,” says one critic; “No one wants Shakespeare,” says another; “give us d’Annunzio and Sudermann and the Immoral Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche.” Fortunately English ethics and English literature may be left to look after themselves; they have both a continuity of tradition which will prevent them from falling very far askew. But our art of music is being restored from the heaps of ruin into which it was laid two centuries ago, and it is the business of all who care for art or country to lend a hand. At least we might try to discover what English music has to say, and estimate our composers according to their capacity for saying it.

This position is strengthened by all evidence of musical history. The same hand which made Germany a people enriched her with the “Marseillaise of the Reformation,” and so founded the long dynasty of her great composers. Art in France was at its lowest, when the chief occupation of Paris was to dispute between the claims of the Bavarian Gluck and the Italian Piccinni. Italy herself declined as she lost her national character, the Slavonic peoples have advanced as they have reasserted theirs. And what is true of nations is equally true of their leaders. “The greatest genius,” says Emerson, “is the most indebted man”; the man, that is, who can turn to the most noble and enduring use the traditions of his age and country. So it was with Haydn. Nothing can be more false than to regard him as merely a Court musician, writing with ready and facile talent the pièces d’occasion that were needed for the theatre or the reception-room. His life at Eisenstadt gave him opportunity such as no composer had ever before enjoyed, but the patronage was too enlightened and the character too strong to be satisfied with work that was mannered or artificial. Under the famous “livery of blue and silver” there beat the heart of a rustic poet, full of kindliness, of drollery, of good-fellowship, of the love of children and animals. His genius, trained by years of assiduous labour, gave him a complete mastery over the inherited resources of his art, his imagination extended them with fresh discoveries and inventions. But throughout the whole his favourite themes are pastoral, songs of the shepherd and the harvester, songs of country courtship, songs of the vintage feast and the jovial holiday. It is little wonder that he should speak in the language of his people, or recall the phrases that had been familiar from his childhood.

Yet it is no patois that he uses, but the speech of a whole nation; a living force that spreads wide and reaches to distant boundaries. Nor is he great because he has chosen this or that topic, this or that form of utterance; it is because he is great that there was no choice in the matter. He could not have written of set habit in the German idiom; he was Slav by race and Slav by temper, and his music is too genuine to present itself in foreign guise. It is from this point of view that we should understand him; not by loosely classifying him among a people with whom he had little in common, but by regarding him as the true embodiment of his own national spirit. The Greek proverb condemns a man of two tongues: through the world of art the condemnation is still in force, and at least some measure of it should fall on the ingenious critics who call patriotism parochial, and justify their epithet by obliterating frontiers.

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX A.

Croatian Musicians, 1835-1848.

(1) Composers:— | Lisinski. | Čačković.
Livadić. | Štoos.
Wiesner. | Mašek.
Rusan. | Baron Prandau.
Pintavić. | F. von Suppé.
Jaić. |
(2) Singers:— | Countess Rubido. | Stazić.
Štriga. | Ledenig.
(3) Virtuosi, &c.:— | Ivan Padovec. | L. A. Zellner.

N.B.—The following rules of pronunciation should be observed.

r (as a semi-vowel) carries a very short vowel sound before the consonant. Brlog = Berlog made as near a monosyllable as possible.

c = tz. Zajc is pronounced Zaitz.

č = ch soft (like ch in Church).

ć = ty in which the y is a consonant (as it is for instance in the word “you”). The sound is half-way between the “te” in “righteous” and the “tch” in “wretched.”

š = sch or sh. Pušovec (see Appendix C) is pronounced Pushovetz.

ž = the French j, as in jour.

lj and nj are like the gli and gn in figlio, campagna.

The other letters are, roughly speaking, pronounced as in German, except z, which = s in sehr; and s, which = ss in Strasse.

APPENDIX B.

Croatian Musicians, 1848-1880.

(1) Composers:— | Rihar.‡ | G. Eisenhut.
Vilhar.‡ | A. Mihalović .
Fleišman.‡ | Kociančić ‡
Köck. | Leban.‡
Epstein. | Valenta.‡
Zajc. | Slava Atanasijevic.
Strmic. | Faller.
Just. | Kuhač.
(2) Singers:— | Ema Murska. | Grbić.
Matilda Marlov. | Kašman.
Matilda Mallinger. | Nolli‡
Ema Vizjak. | Maria Kotas.
Irma Terputec | Maria Pikril.
Mazoleni. | Maca Matačić.
Sofia Kramberger.
‡ Slovenian.
(3) Virtuosi:— | Šteiner. | Petrié.
Hummel. | Ivan Mihalović.
Ludmilla Veizer. | F. Krežma.
Josif Eisenhut. | Anka Krežma.
Ciol. | Kolander.
(4) Conductors, Professors, &c.:—
| Kukulević. | Antun Švarc[35].
B. Ipavec. | Martin Jenko.
G. Ipavec. | Adolf Schwartz
Ida Wimberger.

APPENDIX C.

Croatian Names in the Pusterthal
and Neighbourhood

Germanised form:— | Croatian form:—
| Aegrathal. | | Ograda.
Arvig (?). | Oranik.
Berlogaz. | Brlog.
Bschwoitz. | Pušovec.
Dolnitz. | Dolina.
Frutscherthal. | Vručidol.
Garnitza. | Krnica.
Glanz. | Klanjec.
Glinz (Linz). | Glinica.
Gollisel. | Goloselo.
Gruschgize. | Kruškica.
Kollnig. | Kolnik.
Kräll. | Kralj.
Libisel. | Ljubisel.
Lasser. | Lesar.
Lessing. | Lešnik.
Motschenboden. | Mocva.
Pedoll. | Podolje.
Petsch. | Peč (Pešti).
Plötsch. | Ploca.
Polliz. | Polica.
Pusterthal. | Pustodol.
Rudenek. | Rudnik.
Stoanitzbrunn. | Studenac.
Stollizen. | Stolica.
Tragen. | Draga.
Tristach. | Trstje.
Villgraten. | Velegrad.
Zabemig. | Zavrhnik.
Zelzach. | Selca.
Zuchepoll. | Suhopolje.

Note.—For similar examples in other parts of Austria, see Kämmel’s “Die Anfänge deutschen Lebens in Oesterreich.”

APPENDIX D.

Traces of Croat Population in the District near Pressburg.

The following towns and villages have possessed a Croat population, either predominant or at least considerable:—

Maiersdorf. | | Wildungsmauer.
Zverndorf. | Kaglor.
Pangort. | Pišelsdorf.
Marchegg. | Mannersdorf.
Bratisey. | Au (Cindrov).
Senfeld. | Hof (Cimov).
Hlohovac. | Landeck.
Siebenbrunn. | Kroatisch Wagram
Horisey. | (Ogran hrvatski).
Štrandorf. | Frama.
Poturno. | Fuchspichl
Limisdorf. | (Fukšpil).
Andlersdorf | Ort.
(Razvitnjak). | Bratštatin.
Guštatin. | Lower Siebenbrunn.
Petronel. | Kroatisch Haslern
Rohrau (Trstnik). | (Hazlor hrvatski).
Besides the whole district round Eisenstadt,
Oedenburg, and the Neusiedler See.

APPENDIX E.

Musicians born in Pressburg and
its Neighbourhood.

- ‡Hans Neusiedler, Lutenist, born 1563 near the Neusiedler See.

- ‡Veit Bach, grandfather of J. S. Bach, born about 1580 at Pressburg.

- ‡Andreas Rauch, organist and composer, born about 1590 at Pottendorf.

- ‡Samuel Bockshorn (Capricornus), conductor, born in 1629 at Pressburg.

- ‡J. S. Kusser (Couser), composer, born in 1657 at Pressburg.

- ‡Joseph Haydn, born in 1732 at Rohrau.

- ‡Michael Haydn, born in 1737 at Rohrau.

- ‡Johann Evangelist Haydn, born in 1743 at Rohrau.

- ‡Matthias Kamiensky (Kamenar), composer, born in 1734 at Oedenburg.

- Theodor Lotz, musical instrument maker, born about 1740 at Pressburg.

- ‡Anton Zimmermann, composer, born in 1741 at Pressburg.

- ‡N. Hadrava, Lutenist, born in 1750 near Pressburg.

- ‡G. Druschetzky (Druzechi), composer, born about 1760 at Pressburg. (?)

- Jacob Hyrtl, oboe-player in the Esterházy orchestra, born about 1760 at Eisenstadt.

- Joseph Weigel (Weigl), composer, born in 1766 at Eisenstadt.

- ‡Ivan Bihari, violinist and composer, born in 1769 at Great Abony.

- ‡Stephan Koch, musical instrument maker, born in 1772 at Vesprim.

- ‡Ivan Fuss, composer, born in 1777 at Tolnau.

- ‡Johann Nepomuk Hummel, born in 1778 at Pressburg.

- ‡Joseph Blahak, composer, born in 1779 at Raggersdorf.

- ‡Ivan Fuchs, Kapellmeister to Prince Esterházy, born in 1780 at Eisenstadt.

- Peter Lichtenthal, composer, born in 1780 at Pressburg.

- Count Thadeus Amadé, pianist, born in 1783 at Pressburg.

- ‡Adolf Müller, composer, born in 1802 at Tolnau.

- ‡Joseph Wurda, singer, born in 1807 at Gjur (Raab).

- ‡Friedrich Fischer, singer, born in 1809 at Pressburg.

- [36]Franz Liszt, born in 1811 at Raiding (Rudnik).

- Michael Hauser, violinist, born in 1822 at Pressburg.

- ‡Ferdinand Kletzer, violoncellist, born in 1830 at Oedenburg. (?)

- Joseph Joachim, born in 1831 at Kitsee.

- Carl Goldmark, born in 1832 at Keszthelyn.

- Ludwig Straus, born in 1845 at Pressburg.

- Leopold Auer, violinist, born in 1845 at Vesprim.

- Charlotte Debner, violinist, born in 1846 at Kitsee.

- ‡ Probably Croatian.

APPENDIX F.

Names of Croatian Musicians
Translated or Corrupted.

(a) | Translated (equivalent of meaning: conjectural).
Current Name. | Croatian Name.
Neusiedler. | Novosel.
Bockshorn. | Ročić.
Bach. | Potočić or Potočniak.
Rauch. | Dimić or Dimović.
Zimmermann. | Tesar, or Tesarević.
Koch. | Kuhač, Kuhačević, or Kuharević.
Fuss. | Nogić, or Nogavac.
Hummel. | Bumbarević or Ćmeliak.[37]
Fuchs. | Lissa, Lisica, or Lisinski.
Müller. | Mlinar or Mlinarić.
Fischer. | Ribar or Ribarić.
(b) | Corrupted (adaptation of sound: reasonably certain).
Bulgarelli. | Bugarin.
Bona. | Bunić.
Brusa. | Brusić.
Draghi. | Dragi.
Dragonetti. | Draganić.
Ferrich. | Ferić.
Gerlo. | Grlo.
Giornovichi. | Jarnović.
Jelich or Jael. | Jelić.
Kresnik. | Gresnik.
Henkel. | Kengelović.
Calinde. | Kalin.
Kannabich. | Kanabić.
Cola. | Kola.
Muzin. | Mužina.
Mazoleni. | Mazolić.
Mazzuranna. | Mašuranić.
Nachich or Nanchini. | Nakić.
Pollini. | Polić.
Desplanes. | Polinar.
Pisaroni. | Pisar.
Zappa. | Sapa.
Scalichius. | Skalić.
Smetenich. | Smetenić.
Tamparizza. | Tamparica.
Thern. | Trn.
Tartini. | Trtić.
Tuscan. | Tuskan.
Visochi. | Visoki.
Zingarelli. | Ciganin.
Zagitz. | Zaic.
Zuchetto. | Zuketić.
Schuppanzigh. | Zupančić.

APPENDIX G.

Variants of the Name “Haydn” within
the Limits of the Composer’s Family.

- (a) Haiden:

- Register of Caspar Haiden’s marriage, Hainburg, 1657.

- Register of Joseph Haiden’s death, Hainburg, April 19, 1715.

- Register of the composer’s baptism, Rohrau, April 1, 1732

- (the father’s name is given as Mathias Haiden).

- Register of his mother’s death, Rohrau, February 25, 1754.

- (b) Hayden:

- Register of Thomas Hayden’s death, Hainburg, September 4,

- 1701, and of his widow’s re-marriage, Hainburg, January 8, 1702.

- Register of the composer’s marriage, (St. Stephen’s, Vienna,

- November 26, 1760).

- The composer’s signature (quittance for salary) Eisenstadt,

- January, 1762.

- Register of Mathias Hayden’s death, Rohrau, September 14,

- 1763, and the monument to him now in Rohrau Churchyard.

- Frequent concert notices, both of the composer and his brother

- Michael, the latter at Salzburg.

- Habitual signature for many years of Michael Hayden.

- The composer’s monument in Count Harrach’s Park at Rohrau.

- (c) Haidin:

- The name of the composer’s mother is so given on the monument

- in Rohrau Churchyard.

- (d) Heyden:

- The composer’s name is so written throughout the “Convention und

- Verhaltungs-Norma” under which he held his appointment

- at Eisenstadt.

- (e) Heiden:

- Register of Thomas Heiden’s baptism, Hainburg, 1655.

- (f) Hayd’n: Occasionally, though rarely,

- (g) Haydtn:in concert programmes.

- (h) Haydn:

- Register of Mathias Haydn’s baptism, Hainburg, January 31, 1699.

- The composer’s habitual signature after February, 1762.

- Register of his wife’s death, Baden, March 20, 1800.

- Diploma of the Freedom of Vienna, April 1, 1804.

- Many notices and concert programmes.

- Monument to the composer in the Einsiedeln Church at Eisenstadt.

- (i) Haidn:

- Register of Barbara Haidn’s baptism, Hainburg, January 2, 1658.

- Frequent notices and concert programmes.

- Letter of Beethoven, 1822.

- (k) Hayrn:

- Register of Thomas Hayrn’s marriage, Hainburg, November 23,

- 1687—his father’s name is also given as Caspar Hayrn;

- see letters (a), (b), and (c).

- (l) Hein:

- Register of Mathias Hein’s marriage, Rohrau, November 24, 1728.

- (m) Haden:

- (n) Hädn:Occasional variants in registers and

- (o) Hayn:documents at Hainburg, Rohrau, &c.,

- (p) Hain:noted by Dr. Pohl.

- (q) Heim:

Large crown 8vo., with Portraits on Copper.
Price 7s. 6d.

Studies in Modern Music.

HECTOR BERLIOZ, ROBERT SCHUMANN, RICHARD WAGNER.
THIRD EDITION.

By W. H. HADOW, M.A.,
Fellow of Worcester College, Oxon.

“We have seldom read a book on musical subjects which has given us so much pleasure as this one, and we can sincerely recommend it to all who are interested in the art.”—Saturday Review.

“It is a real relief, amid the rambling and slipshod effusions which constitute the bulk of musical belles lettres, to encounter such a volume as these ‘Studies in Modern Music,’ by Mr. W. H. Hadow. Mr. Hadow is himself a musician of no mean attainments; but there is no parade of technical knowledge in his book. He writes like a scholar and a gentleman, his style is felicitous and his critical attitude at once sane and generous.”—Graphic.

“He writes with striking thoughtfulness and breadth of view, so that his essays may be read with much interest by musicians. It is a remarkable book, because, unlike the majority of musical treatises by amateurs, it is full of truth and common sense.”—Athenæum.

“The essay on musical criticism is well worth anybody’s reading; its general tendency is to extend the basis of modern criticism, commensurably with the larger and wider scope of modern music, to establish standards of musical value by which modern works can be more justly measured than by the pedantic misapplication of once valid rules. In his whole discourse on the subject Mr. Hadow gives evidence of immense common sense, backed up by innate and cultivated artistic perception.”—Atlantic Monthly.

BY THE SAME AUTHOR. With Portraits. Price 7s. 6d.

Studies in Modern Music.

SECOND SERIES.

FREDERICK CHOPIN, ANTONIN DVORÁK, JOHANNES BRAHMS.
PRECEDED BY AN ESSAY ON MUSICAL FORM.
SECOND EDITION.

“The three biographies are charming; and in each case the author has something both true and new to say.”—National Observer.

“The development of form is described with many brilliant touches and with complete grasp of the subject, and the book, which will probably be considered to be even better than the former work, is most heartily to be recommended to all who wish to attain the highest kind of enjoyment of the best music.”—Times.

“Highly finished portraits are presented of the three modern masters named, and the articles are distinguished by the same musicianly knowledge and felicity of expression as those in the earlier book.”—Athenæum.

“The amount of labour and research condensed into these pages is really remarkable.”—Musical Times.

“There is not a word either in the historical or exegetical portions of Mr. Hadow’s work which will not furnish agreeable suggestion to the casual reader, and satisfaction to the student.”—St. James’s Gazette.

London: SEELEY AND CO., Limited,
38, Great Russell Street, W.C.

Published in Two Editions,
price Sixpence and One Shilling; sewed;
also in cloth, at Eightpence and Eighteenpence.

THE
Choral Service Book

FOR PARISH CHURCHES,

CONTAINING

THE FERIAL AND FESTAL RESPONSES, THE LITANY,
CHANTS ARRANGED FOR THE CANTICLES AND PSALTER,
AND MUSIC FOR THE COMMUNION SERVICE.

Compiled and Edited by J. W. ELLIOTT,
Organist and Choirmaster of S. Mark’s, Hamilton Terrace, London.

- The Book contains the following music for the Services of the Church:—

- THE FERIAL RESPONSES AND THE LITANY.

- With the Ancient Melody by John Marbeck.

- Harmonised by J. W. Elliott.

- THE FESTIVAL RESPONSES.

- With the Harmonies by T. Tallis.

- THIRTY CHANTS FOR THE VENITE.

- TWELVE SETS OF CHANTS FOR EACH OF THE

- OTHER CANTICLES.

- TWELVE SETTINGS OF THE KYRIE ELEISON.

- A SETTING OF THE COMMUNION SERVICE.

- By Dr. J. Naylor.

- TWO COMPLETE SETS OF CHANTS FOR THE PSALTER

- SPECIAL SETTINGS OF THE PROPER PSALMS,

- AND OF PSALMS FOR A FLOWER SERVICE

- AND HARVEST FESTIVAL.

OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.

“It was a happy thought to combine in one book all the music required for an ordinary choral service. Most of our living Church musicians have been laid under contribution to this most excellent collection.”—Musical Standard.

“In the selection of chants the compiler has been guided by an excellent taste. The organist or choirmaster who uses this book will find here not merely the familiar chants we should all be sorry to miss, but many others but little known, and yet both beautiful and well adapted to congregational use. The book is very skilfully arranged and is clearly printed.”—Record.

“A very useful book. The intention of the editor is to promote congregational singing, and therefore all music which is too elaborate in character, or too high in pitch, has been rigorously excluded.”—Church Bells.

“An abundant supply of chants, single and double. Mr. Elliott’s work will assist organists in the choice of suitable chants.”—Church Times.

“A great variety of chants, old and new, will also commend the book, a set for the proper Psalms being especially useful. Altogether this is a book safely to be recommended.”—Saturday Review.

London:
SEELEY AND CO.,
Limited, 38, Great Russell Street, W.C.

Footnotes:

[1] Južno-slovjenske Narodne Popievke: Zagreb, 1878-1881.

[2] Josip Haydn i Hrvatske Narodne Popievke; reprinted from the Vienac, Zagreb, 1880.

[3] As early as 1862 the Lumír put in a claim for Bohemia. This was a step in the right direction, since it represented Haydn as a Slav, but the evidence preponderates in favour of a more Southern origin.

[4] Dr. Kuhač (Josip Haydn, p. 5) declares that one in every three of the population “either sings, plays, or composes.” And there is a significant Croatian proverb to the effect that “an age is known by its music.”

[5] For the sake of clearness, it may be well to say that Croatia proper means that district across the Save of which Agram (i.e. Zagreb) is the capital; and that the same race occupies the entire territory from the Drave to the Lake of Scutari; and from the Roumanian frontier to the Adriatic. There is some Italian population in the extreme west, e.g., at Zara; but most of this region is exclusively Slavonic, and the Servo-Croatian language prevails with certain modifications over the whole of it. There is also a considerable Croat population in Istria, Carniola, Lower Austria, and the adjoining parts of Hungary.

[6] Josip Haydn, p. 3.

[7] See Appendix A.

[8] See Appendix B.

[9] See Appendix C and compare Dr. Mitterrutzer’s “Slavisches aus dem Oestlichen Pusterthal in Tirol,” quoted by Dr. Kuhač, Josip Haydn, p. 12.

[10] For other instances of Slavonic occupation and nomenclature see Appendix D.

[11] See Appendix E.

[12] He called himself successively Abel, Ebel, Ibel, and Eibel. But his patrons always moved a stage in advance, even completing the circle by pronouncing the diphthong as it is pronounced in the word “eight.”

[13] For a list of such adaptations see Appendix F.

[14] Josip Haydn, p. 16. See note to Appendix E.

[15] Dr. Pohl gives fourteen variants, and even his list is not exhaustive. There are at least six in documents relating to the composer himself. See Appendix G.

[16] See the announcement of “Alexander’s Feast” (Vienna, 1812) preserved in the Gesellschaft library. Carpani spells the name Hendl.

[17] It is fair to state that some etymologists derive the name Haiden from the district “Auf der Haid” near Hainburg. But this is very unlikely. The district is a narrow stretch of moorland, and could not account for the prevalence of the name through the whole country-side, to say nothing of the frequent occurrence in Croatia proper.

[18] Its second title, “Trstnik,” is significant enough. And at the present day it contain a good many Croats, especially among the poorer inhabitants.

[19] In like manner Pìlar has been Germanised into Piller, Solar into Soller, Kresar into Kresser, and so on. See a list of such changes in Kuhač’s Josip Haydn, pp. 17, 18.

[20] To je lovac i ribar kao Haydn; i.e., as good a shot and fisherman as Haydn.

[21] See instances quoted by Dr. Kuhač, Josip Haydn, pp. 27-29.

[22] Dr. Kuhač gives 1754 as the date of this work. If so, it is the earliest known instance. The above date, which is more probably correct, is that given by Dr. Pohl.

[23] See Kuhač, “South Slavonic Popular Songs,” vol. iii. pp. 98-100.

[24] See Kuhač, “South Slavonic Popular Songs,” vol. iii. p. 92.

[25] See Kuhač, “South Slavonic Popular Songs,” vol. iii. p. 82.

[26] Dr. Kuhač calls it the Sixth Quartet (“u Allegru šestoga četverogudja”), but it is not the sixth in the Paris and London edition, or in the Dresden, or in that of Peters.

[27] This story is sometimes told of the Mariazeller Mass in C major (Novello, No. 15). But first, the Mariazeller Mass was written by commission for Anton Liebe von Kreutzner; second, it is set to the usual Latin text; and third, it does not contain any of the popular melodies in question.

[28] The three-bar phrase is a common feature of early Slavonic melodies, especially when conjoined with a second phrase of four bars in irregular balance.

[29] See in particular the song “Na travniku” (p. 46), and the first Kolo tune (p. 50).

[30] The musical stanza, in this song, goes to a half-stanza of the words. The first is—

Stal se jesem rano jutro | i.e., | In the early morning stood I
malo pred zorjum. | | Close upon the dawn.

[31] There is no need to discuss here the question of Telemann’s Rondo. If its resemblance to Haydn’s tune be anything more than fortuitous, it is probably referable to the same source. See Josip Haydn, p. 81.

[32] Preserved in the Museum of the Gesellschaft Library at Vienna. It is a small oblong sheet, similar to those on which Haydn wrote his “Canons,” and contains, first, the complete sketch of the melody—

and below it the third strain amended—

The improved version of the fourth strain is not there, but, curiously enough, Pohl notes an anticipation of it in the Mariazeller Mass. See Pohl’s Haydn, vol. ii. p. 333.

[33] Its Croatian name, “Sopron,” is still in current use, and it contains enough Slavonic inhabitants to employ their language in many of its official notices.

[34] The passage is worth quoting entire for more than one reason. “Nor can we imagine the art is on the decline while so great a genius as Beethoven lives. This author, though less perfect in other respects than Haydn, exceeds him in power of imagination; and from recent specimens of his unbounded fancy it is to be expected that he will extend the art in a way never contemplated even by Haydn or Mozart. If we were inclined to push our speculations further upon this point we might refer to the very extraordinary discoveries that are now making in Russia in the department of instrumental music. In the course of twenty years it is probable that such effects will be produced in that country as will lead to the most important results in the science of sounds.”—W. Gardiner, in the translation of Stendhal’s “Letters on Haydn,” 2nd edition (London, 1818), page 3.

[35] Possibly German, see “Schwartz” below.

[36] The case of Liszt is somewhat apart from the others. The earliest form of his name appears to be Listhius, which Dr. Kuhač claims with some plausibility as Slavonic (naše gore list). But as early as 1747 the Magyarised form appears in the person of Canon Johann Liszt; and there can be little doubt that by the time of the great pianist’s birth the family had become thoroughly Hungarian. There are, of course, many Hungarian families in which Magyar and Slavonic strains are united, and in the music of Liszt the Magyar element unquestionably predominates.

[37] According to the two meanings of the word Hummel.

Transcriber’s Notes:

- The cover image was created by the transcriber, and is in the public domain.

- New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.

- Deprecated spellings or ancient words were not corrected.

- The illustrations and footnotes have been moved so that they do not break up paragraphs and so that they are next to the text they illustrate.

- Typographical and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.

- Music Transcriber Notes

- Tempo, dynamics, and instruments have been added by the transcribers where not indicated in the scores.

- The third score on p. 60, "Betrachtet ihn in Schmerzen," is incorrect. The correct melody has been taken from a public domain score of Michael (not Joseph) Haydn's Deutches Hochamt.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A CROATIAN COMPOSER ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

Table of Contents

- A CROATIAN COMPOSER

- PREFACE.

- APPENDICES.

- APPENDIX A.

- APPENDIX B.

- APPENDIX C.

- APPENDIX D.

- APPENDIX E.

- APPENDIX F.

- APPENDIX G.

- THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE