REMEMBERING HER MAJESTY, QUEEN ELIZABETH II: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE / MERCI POUR VOTRE SERVICE

Below: A dedication from Unraveling Musical Myths to the reader of a performance of Music for the Funeral of Queen Mary, set by English composer Henry Purcell for the funeral of his then-Sovereign, Queen Mary II, who succumbed to smallpox in late December of 1694.

It was through the death of Her Majesty that Westminster-born Purcell quite suddenly found himself in charge of music for a royal funeral that had never originally been planned - the late Queen having stipulated that there be no such ceremony of state following her demise. Purcell had been serving as organist at Westminster Abbey at the time of Queen Mary's death.

It was due to the will and wish of the public, who so loved their Monarch, (a feeling shared by modern-day loyalists to our own late Sovereign lady, Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II), that a state funeral was scheduled for 5 March, 1695, some three months following Mary's demise.

For the occasion, Purcell composed his Music for the Funeral of Queen Mary and the funeral sentence, Thou knowest, Lord, the secrets of our hearts, which were performed during the occasion alongside works by Thomas Morley and other English composers. 

Purcell had twice previously set music to Thou knowest (from the The Book of Common Prayer, 1549): first in 1672 to complete sentences by fellow English composer Henry Cooke for the latters' funeral, and later, with revisions occurring around 1680). These earlier versions were polyphonic, as was custom at the time. The composers' third version of Thou knowest, as well as his March and Canzona were performed during the funeral service of Queen Mary II. Today, the March, Canzona and the funeral sentence (along with two other sentences set by Purcell, Man that is born of a woman, and In the midst of life we are in death) are often performed together as the composer's Music for the Funeral of Queen Mary (Z. 860).

Recent scholarship suggests that this latest setting may have been an homage by Purcell not only to his late Sovereign, but possibly to the composer Thomas Morley, whose own setting of this particular sentence would later be discovered. It is speculated by some musicologists that Purcell donned an older style to mimic Morley's music, and that this setting was possibly used to complete sentences by the latter composer. The words for this particular version are set mostly in homophony.

With the question of attribution aside, it would be this third version of Thou knowest, which would be performed at subsequent royal funerals, including that of the Queen Mum, and that of her daughter, our late Majesty (and the Queen Mum's namesake), Elizabeth II, which could be heard echoing resoundingly through the walls of the royal church as the former Monarch and Head of State's coffin entered Westminster Abbey on this most sombre day of 19 September 2022. 

Purcell's setting of Thou Knowest would later go on to be performed at the composers' own funeral following his death (believed to be caused by tuberculosis) in November 1695, just a mere eight months since the piece was first performed. He was only 35 at the time of his passing.

Jump to 1:27:53 to hear Purcell's funeral sentence Thou knowest, Lord, the secrets of our hearts (Jean Tubéry conducts La Fenice):

- Rose.

BACK TO HOME PAGE

REGINA MORTUA EST, VIVAT REX CAROLUS! KING CHARLES III's LOVE AFFAIR WITH PARRY

In honor of King Charles III's proclamation as Monarch of the United Kingdom and of the Commonwealth, I dedicate below to his countrymen and women and to the citizens of the Territories a piece of special historical significance - not only to the British Crown but to King Charles himself - the setting of the choral introit "I was Glad" set by Sir Hubert Hastings Parry. 

The new sovereign has long been vocal of his deep admiration for the choral piece and for its composer - whom he often refers to as his favorite, and as somewhat of an 'unsung hero' of sorts in the realm of British classical music. His Majesty first heard Parry's anthem performed at the tender age of four whilst the then-Prince bore witness to the coronation of his late mother, the former Queen and Head of State, Elizabeth II in 1953. 

Parry's musical setting of Psalm 122 (verses 1–3, 6 and 7)^[1] has long been embedded in history of the House of Windsor (fr. Saxe-Coburg and Gotha): Parry originally wrote his version of the anthem for the coronation of Charles' great-great-grandfather, Edward VII in 1902, and it has been used in every coronation since, even making an appearance at the wedding of Prince William and Catherine 'Kate' Middleton at Westminster Abbey in 2011. 

Speaking of the occasion in the documentary The Prince and the Composer: A Film about Hubert Parry by HRH The Prince of Wales (presented by Charles himself) the royal remarked:

 "If you're coming into the abbey and you have to walk up the aisle, and there are an awful lot of people peering at you, some pieces of music literally do waft you up the aisle and it's so marvellous that you're sort of carried along on this wave of music. And that's what I think is so brilliant about this piece, giving you all those tingles up the spine and tears in the eyes...It has an extraordinary capacity to lift the spirits, this particular piece of music. It's timeless, really, isn't it?" 

Because of its association with the coronations of British monarchs, the "vivat(s)" section of the score (Latin for "Long live..." (the King/Queen)) was/is forbidden to be sung by the Queen's/King's scholars of Westminster School if the anthem is not performed during a coronation. Instead, the choir is simply instructed to bypass this section (the redacted version of Parry's anthem was famously heard at the aforementioned nuptials of Prince William and Catherine Middleton). 

In 1902, Parry wrote vivats for both King Edward and Queen Alexandria: "Vivat Regina Alexandra, vivat Regina...vivat Rex Eduardus.." ("Long live King Edward...Long live Queen Alexandra.") 

For Elizabeth II's coronation, there was only one vivat, in custom with British tradition, in which the husband of a Queen may not be styled as King as he has not inherited the throne (while the wife of a King, however, may be styled Queen Consort). It is this truncated version that a young Charles heard during the coronation of his "darling mama" from his seat in the gallery alongside the Queen Mum and his Auntie (Princess Margaret). Cries of "Vivat Regina! Vivat Regina Elizabetha!" (Long live the Queen! Long Live Queen Elizabeth!) would have echoed throughout Westminster Abbey and into the future King's ears.

Above: Vivat for Queen Elizabeth II, performed during Her Majesty's coronation in 1953 (begins at 3:08)

This custom means that King Charles' Queen Consort, Camilla, could be included in a new vivat, in addition to the King's (which will likely be sung as "Vivat Rex Carolus"). 

As Camilla is already the female equivalent of the Roman Camillus, she may be referred to as Regina Camilla, however this - and her inclusion in the revised anthem - remains to be seen, should His Majesty opt to carry on in the tradition of his royal predecessors by selecting the anthem of his favorite composer for his own coronation.

Below: Vivat for Queen Elizabeth II, with score, performed during Her Majesty's coronation in 1953 (Vivat begins at 3:40)

Footnotes:  

^[1]from the psalter found in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.

 -Rose.

BACK TO HOME PAGE

IN MEMORIAM: QUEEN ELIZABETH II (APRIL 21, 1926 - SEPTEMBER 8, 2022)

 

Above: a touching tribute to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II by Sky News 

As millions of Britons, citizens of the Commonwealth, and others around the globe mourn the loss of Elizabeth II, I have come to reflect upon my former Head of State with a sense of bittersweet splendour - pained that Her Majesty is no longer with us, yet, altogether marveled by the memories of her glorious reign, stamina, and poise. 

For as long as I have lived, Queen Elizabeth II has been somewhat omnipresent in my life. I fancied myself quite the numismatist and philatelist in my most tender years - I am a citizen born into the commonwealth twice over: as a Canadian by birth, and as the daughter of an immigrant from the then-commonwealth state of Hong Kong. 

It was during these formative years that my young mind became fascinated by the striking portraits of our Head of State, ever evolving throughout those very impressionable phases of my own life: from youth, to teenagehood, to womanhood. I saw her increasingly aging visage everywhere throughout the years as my past times seamlessly moulded themselves into a deep passion for history - both Canadian, and British. 

It was the profile, and the face of Elizabeth, embossed on the faces of coins and printed on the surfaces of stamps from all over the world, that piqued my curiosity. I wanted to know more about this woman who seemed to dominate swathes of nations of varying tongues: who she was, and what she meant to my country and to our British cousins. That curiosity led me down the path of studying Canadian and European history, and later - and perhaps most naturally - to the music that helped pave the path toward our shared freedoms, as our ancestors fought in battle to create, in my humble opinion, one of - if not the - greatest nation in the world. As I became more embedded in my studies, I both marveled over and embraced the legacies of the composers who performed in battle long before Elizabeth's conception. I learned of the propagandists and musically inclined courtiers who so crucially and cleverly manipulated, supported, and volleyed their way through the upper echelons of the British state. In many ways, it was an early lesson in psychology and an invaluable teaching of the cunning use (and misuse) of music for purposes of political persuasion and domination.

Though Great Britain's distant past may be marred by undeniable bloodshed, where kings were made kings on the battlefield, and men became men through daring and chivalric conquests, the reign and life of Elizabeth was different. Having both served in, and survived the Second World War and having acceded to the throne whilst arguably still a child herself - at the tender age of 25 - her role was that of a peaceful monarch: a consistently present and poised ruler who never appeared to take for granted the rich (albeit often gritty) historical past which would end up making her unprecedented 70-year long reign possible. 

Her Majesty shunned the methods of her royal predecessors, opting instead to shy away from public conflict by holding close to her breast matters of both personal and political affairs. She put forward a mask of neutrality in an ever changing, not always friendly world. 

Music and musicians of (and associated with) the court became less thought of as mere political pawns but rather allowed to triumph in their own right: during her reign, the so-called 'Land without Music' - England's status as a musical mecca having waned in popularity since the triumphant days of the English Renaissance - once more became resplendent as the likes of Ralph Vaughan Williams, Arnold Bax, William Walton, and Edward Elgar introduced to a new generation a majestic, and regal shift from the ever embellished icons of English composers past (men like Thomas Tallis, William Byrd, Orlando Gibbons, Henry Purcell, and German-turned-naturalised citizen, George Frederic Handel). 

Full of fanfare, stateliness, pomp and circumstance, swathes of musicians (and even non-musicians) the world over would soon recognize the sound of British royalty in the new Elizabethan age, and envision in their minds images of the resplendent Queen in her chariot, as regal and dignified as the compositions which flourished throughout her reign.

Above: Vaughan Williams' grand ceremonial arrangement of the sixteenth-century hymn "The Old Hundredth", performed at the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, 2 June 1953 Westminster Abbey, London (preceded by fanfare)

To the very end, Her Majesty remained poised even throughout the dishonours inflicted upon her by those who attempted to corrupt a legacy of leadership - one in which our beloved Sovereign had managed to rule for some seven decades with a refined reticence. It was this sense of stoic disposition which had so notably garnered the admiration and awe of all those who met her, from world leaders to subjects alike. 

There is something to be said for this level of personal conviction. Throughout the numerous traumas Elizabeth faced, particularly over the course of the past several years, her stamina and resolve proved to all of those who supported her that silence speaks volumes, that privacy is a virtue, and that dignity over historical savagery and present day insolence will always triumph in the end. 

Her Majesty vowed to work until the end of her days, and she has honored her oath. Having seldom wavered from her steely-faced, yet gentle resolve, she will be remembered as a ruler of sound mind, a connoisseur of political adroitness, and as a woman of extraordinary courage, strength, and heart. 

With condolences to all those who mourn the loss of Her Majesty, including the working members of the Royal family. 

God Save the Queen. 

Long Live King Charles III.

See more: St Paul's Service of Thanksgiving to Honour the Queen

-Rose.

BACK TO HOME PAGE

A LITTLE MUSIC, A LITTLE HISTORY AND A LITTLE MYTH-BUSTING TO COMMEMORATE THE INDUCTION OF LADY JANE GREY INTO THE ANNALS OF THE BRITISH MONARCHY

The Execution of Lady Jane Grey, Paul Delaroche, 1833, National Gallery London

As the 465th anniversary of the brief reign of England’s “9 Days Queene” reaches it’s apex today (Queen Jane ruled from the 10th of July to the 19th, 1553, until she was infamously overthrown by Mary I of the House of Tudor), much speculation continues to abound as to whether the young royal can be – or ever was – recognized as a legitimate "Queen."

Nearly half a millennium has passed since the execution of Grey, yet it seems the very same theocratic and social divides which so infamously undermined Jane’s blink-of-an-eye reign remain today the chief and aggregate source of groups both denying, and validating the legitimacy of her rule.

Compounding the issue is the careful attribution of “Lady” to Jane Grey – not “Queen” on the Official website of the British Monarchy - a title of peerage granted the former monarch via her marriage to Lord Guildford Dudley, son of the Duke of Northumberland in May of 1553. Although the same site references Jane’s “reign” and acknowledges that the young royal was deposed, the choice of assigning her to a lesser title has only served to further confuse the issue of legitimacy.

The reality of Jane’s reign, as de-facto Queen of England and Ireland, and the legitimacy of her claim to the British throne can be traced through the Tudor family tree, and the various Acts of Succession, including the “Devise for the Succession” written, and amended by King Edward VI in 1553.

King Henry VIII would inadvertently continue to make
heads roll well after his death thanks to his various Acts of
Successions. His only legitimate son, sired by Jane Seymour,
Edward VI, would pick up where his indecisive father left off
with the creation, and later amendment, of his own "Device"

Jane was of re-instituted royal stock: as Great-granddaughter to Henry VII, founder of the House of Tudor, and Great-grand niece of King Henry VIII, the former monarch had blue blood coursing through her veins. She famously made an appearance in the Third Succession Act of Henry VIII (which I will discuss in detail below), which granted the King license to bequeath the Crown of England in his Will. 

Forgoing his children to death or sterility, the throne would by legitimate default fall to the heirs of Mary Tudor (note: not the same person as "Bloody Mary"),  the younger sister to Henry VIII and present Queen of France. Out was the line of sister Margaret (which would have (eventually) favored Mary, Queen of Scots), who defiantly wed Scotch king James IV, much to her brother’s disapproval – Scotland being a historical enemy of England.

Jane was the granddaughter of Mary Tudor, through Mary’s daughter Frances, Duchess of Suffolk. Henry’s Third Act of Succession, which directly included Jane as a default to the throne (she would even bypass her mother, who, for reasons unspecified by the king, was omitted from inheriting the Crown), would prove to be the young girl’s undoing.

Legitimacy often proved to be a fleeting construct of the Tudor court: Henry VIII’s second Act of Succession, passed in 1536, would infamously declare both of the king’s daughters, Elizabeth and Mary, as bastards of invalid unions, thus prohibiting either from inheriting the Crown.

It was only at the persistent prodding of Henry’s final consort, Catherine Parr, that a third Act of Succession would be passed some 7 years later, which would restore both Princesses to the line of succession, and which was further supported by Henry’s Will. Quite problematically, however, both were still declared as illegitimate spawn.

*CLICK TO ENLARGE* Edward VI's edited "Devise for the Succession"

Edward, the King’s only legitimate son, did issue a “Devise for the Succession,” which he revised shortly before his death – which initially listed the “heirs masles [males]” of Lady Frances as heirs apparent. However, as the sickly king grew ever more ill, and as it became increasingly apparent that he may not live to see Lady Frances conceive a son, he was inclined to favor the sons of Lady Jane. 

This too was an issue, as young Jane also had not yet sired any children – let alone a son. Again, the Devise was adjusted accordingly: “L Jane and[*] her heires masles [male heirs]” would be hastily scrawled on the document. 

Legally, Edward’s Devise fell into a grey area of validity. It was issued under Letters Patent, which by law could not overturn an Act of Parliament. Thus, Henry’s Third Succession Act, which was passed by the Parliament of England in 1543, remained the de-facto Act of Succession.

The Tudor era was fraught with religious turmoil – Edward was of staunch Protestant faith, as was Lady Jane Grey, and an ever-increasing segment of the English population, who frequently engaged in violent quarrels with old school Catholics. Edward’s duplicitous Uncle, Thomas Seymour (the very same who would later slice at the skirts of a young Elizabeth) married Catherine Parr after Henry’s death and took Jane under his wing and raised her in the faith. Jane would likewise be wedded to a devout Protestant in Lord Guildford Dudley, whose father, John, 1st Duke of Northumberland, was as eager to install himself or his heirs to the throne of England as was Seymour. He was also adamant on a wholly Protestant England – having Mary restored to the line of succession simply would not do.

Boy-king Edward VI was only 9 years old when he
inherited the throne from his father, Henry VIII. The Duke
of Northumberland, John Dudley would effectively rule
in the young monarch's stead during his brief minority.
Dudley's leadership would come to an abrupt end by the
early death of the King. His execution would soon follow.

Northumberland would strong arm Edward into adhering to the principles set forth by Henry VIII's second Act of Succession, which had previously made Mary illegitimate, and thus ineligible for the throne - taking full advantage of Edward’s shared conviction in the Protestant faith by further unleashing a campaign of fear in the mind of the king over Mary’s intense devotion to Catholicism. Of course, this was but a clever ploy by Northumberland to segue into talks of issuing a Devise of Succession, installing his daughter in law, Lady Jane, in Mary’s place. Northumberland certainly held influence over the young and impressionable king – he was the second most powerful person in the realm next to the Monarch – he served as de facto Regent during the minority of Edward.

There is much evidence to support Mary’s desire to keep Jane imprisoned for an indefinite period – but as civil war threatened to erupt and as Dudley’s underhanded machinations to strengthen his claim to a dynastic line of his own became known to the greater public, the pressure was on Mary to order for Jane’s execution. In fact, a sentence of death for both Jane and Dudley was ordered in 1553 – in Renaissance times, one did not typically linger for long periods of time after a warrant of execution was issued, yet Mary chose to allow both to languish in prison until 1554.

It was a tragic time for all involved – fighting crises of faith and with each party struggling to uphold the same, whilst simultaneously taking measures to preserve their own life. It was a fate that did not discriminate: even Mary had to make the call that meant life or death for Jane, versus life or death for herself and the followers of her faith – the very subjects a future Queen was duty bound to protect. Mary was left with little choice: Jane’s own father was a member of the recently formed Wyatt rebellion – an insurgent sect dead set on preventing Mary’s marriage to the Catholic Philip II of Spain by any means necessary. The rage was palpable: not only was Philip a devout Catholic, but a foreigner, from a historically rivalrous nation to England. This made Mary’s life, as much as Jane’s (if not more so) disposable.

Villain or victim? In an age not far removed from Kings
earning crowns on the battlefield, Mary Tudor was left
with little choice but to eliminate the competition.
Unfortunately, this meant sending a reigning Queen and
her young husband to their violent deaths. The fallout
for Mary was great - she may have gained the Crown,
but in death, Lady Jane Grey earned the distinction of
a martyr. Her execution was not one Protestant England
would forget. Mary's reign was infamously marked by
an onslaught of terror against members of the faith: bloody
scenes of protestants burned at the stake became her calling
card, and history has henceforth assigned her the pejorative
moniker "Bloody Mary."

In the end, Mary chose to save herself and her country by eliminating the very real threat posed by Jane’s continuing existence. The age of kingship through battle was still very much a recent reality for sixteenth century Britons - it was not unheard of for a contender to the throne to kill off the competition: the Tudor line of Monarchs was established by this very method in 1485, at the infamous Battle at Bosworth Field, which saw the forces of Henry Tudor (future Henry VII, grandfather to Edward) outnumber and assassinate the “usurper” to the throne, Richard III, Duke of York. That battle not only established the Tudor royal line – it effectively brought about the culmination of the 3 decades long war between the houses of York and Lancaster, the so-called “Wars of the Roses.”

In the same vein, the unfortunate Jane was little more than a pawn in the political and power hungry aspirations of the men sworn to honor and protect her – it didn’t start with Dudley, although he would be the one to effectively end her life. Thomas Seymour himself also envisaged a Protestant England, and did everything in his power – from visiting the private bedchamber of a pubescent heiress in Elizabeth (while scantily clad to boot) to marrying Henry’s widow, and ‘adopting’ Jane, conditioning her from an early age to follow the Protestant agenda (in the blind hope that he could achieve untold power through her, as it appeared all of his previous, lofty efforts for regal status amounted to naught.)

Seymour would later be executed for his treason.

Then there is the issue of Jane’s own father, the newly minted Duke of Suffolk, who was presently riding high on the power extolled by his recently acquired status, and who sought to add to his fortune though the wedded unions of his daughters. It was he who agreed to the arranged marriage of Jane to Dudley (the aforementioned son of the powerful Duke of Northumberland – who, incidentally, had aspirations of his own: should his offspring (Dudley) impregnate Jane with a son of her own, Northumberland would become grandfather to a future King). By allowing Jane’s marriage to Northumberland’s son, the Duke of Suffolk was, in effect, arranging a union for his own daughter with the young man who, thanks to a parent who cared less for the life of his child than his own prosperity, would become instrumental in securing her untimely death.

Jane was surrounded by duplicitous, ruthless men from every corner and though every stage of her young life. Her fate was sealed long before her guilty sentence was passed.

She was, however – and will forever remain, a former de-facto Queen of England.

Afterword:

Queen Jane’s tragic life would prove to be a rich source of inspiration in the artistic realm: Delaroche famously captured her likeness (and execution) in an imagined portrait (seen at the header of this article). In the stunning piece, the angelically clad 17 year old deposed monarch stumbles before the execution block, her arms outstretched, searching in vain for what is to become the final place where she will rest her head. The Delaroche portrait draws on contemporary eye witness accounts to the execution, which depict the teenager as having so pitiably uttered “where is it?” as she fell to her knees before the wooden block. Her eyes bound by a kerchief, the last gentle touch she would feel in her all too short life was by a deputy of the frigid, damp prison which had been her home for over a year, who guided her to her death.

In music, Jane would be the subject of the English balladeer. Her legacy would permeate the realm of muses, becoming fodder for poets and composers well into the 20th century, branching out of the Scepter'd Isle and into Western Europe. Arnold Schoenberg would borrow from the text of poet Heinrich Ammann (1864-1950), in the latter’s "Jane Grey" for his 12th opus, "Zwei Balladen" (two ballads). Jane Grey is the first of the two balladen. It was composed by Schoenberg very early in his career, falling in line with the famous Austrian’s oeuvre of lieder, which would come to symbolize his pre-atonal period (although Schoenberg described the balladen as "direct forerunners of the Second String Quartet" [op.10]). He would compose Zwei Balladen between March and April of 1907 for entrance into a ballad competition (he did not win).

Ammann's moving prose takes much poetic license – it favors displaying the grief of both executioner and Lord Dudley (in contrast to Jane, who walks to her death bravely, her head held high) as the young, equally condemned former consort king bids farewell to his wife, who is watching the progression of his death march from behind the window of her prison cell. It is this tender moment – when Dudley greets Jane for the final time, that Schoenberg’s ballad reveals it’s climax.

Listen below to “Jane Grey” by Arnold Schoenberg, from “Zwei Balladen" (Glenn Gould accompanies mezzo-soprano Helen Vanni:)


text (in English - click on "Continue Reading Here" for the German text):

They led him out through the courtyard, grim
The price of death to pay
Behind the casement stood his young wife,
The lovely Princess, Jane Grey.

Her fair young head
From the lattice leaned out,
Her throat gleamed white by my fay,
He raised his clanking fetters high,
And greeted his wife Jane Grey.

And as they returned with his headless form
She saw them bear it away,
Then she with joy trod the self-same path,
This fair young princess Jane Grey.

The headsman quailed at her comely grace
And wept for his gentle prey;
To join her Lord in eternity then went
The Princess Jane Grey.

The world has seem blooms young and fair
Unnumbered passed away
Yet none was more lovely, more pure and fair
Than Dudley’s wife Jane Grey.

And still the wind as it sighs
And moans through the leafy branches that sway,
Doth whisper low how untimely died
The fair young Princess Jane Grey.

English translation by Claude Averling.

JOSEPH LANNER UND DER WALZER: THE KEY THAT UNLOCKED PENT-UP SEXUALITY

Two dancing figures, thought to be Queen Elizabeth I of Tudor fame, and the Queen's favorite Sir
Robert Dudley scandalized (and excited) her invited guests to an impromptu semi-erotic dance
derived from the lowly peasants of Italy. In many countries in Europe, the touching of one's
dance partner was strictly verboten amongst "decent" society. La Volta. however, was a
documented favorite of the Queen.

Before we delve deep into the contributions of Herren Lanner and Strauß II, we must first begin in the centuries that immediately preceded the dance/music craze, by exploring the basis from which Der Walzer (the Waltz) flourished.

We begin with a festive scene in London England, and with it's present ruler, Queen Elizabeth I. In the video below, we see a modern depiction of a dance known as La Volta (from the 1998 British biopic Elizabeth), as performed by Queen Elizabeth I and her alleged paramour, Robert Dudley. Whilst la Volta was seen by many as a dance most untoward a fine lady due to it's semi-intimate nature, the true scandal here is that Dudley was suspected of throwing his wife, Amy Robsart down a flight of stairs to get closer to Elizabeth.

The fall would kill Robsart, breaking her neck at some point during the tumble. To this day, many believe Dudley is considered the main suspect in the alleged murder, which was immortalized in paper by the coroner who cited the manner of death as a "broken neck," and the cause as “Death under mysterious circumstances.”

There is no denying it: he certainly had all the duds: 
 strikingly handsome, the son of a English General,
highly decorated - and certainly most important of
all, Sir Robert Dudley (allegedly) had stolen the
Queen of England's heart.

Whilst Dudley was merely a minor nobleman, (son of the late English General John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland) at the time he met Elizabeth, it seemed the notorious "virgin" Queen was smitten with the handsome noble, even creating for him a position at Court as Master of the Horse in order to be closer to her much besotten forbidden fruit without arousing any suspicion of a Royal cavorting with a mere noble: a huge no-no according to English customs of the era. Elizabeth would later bestow upon his head the Knight of the Garter a mere two years into her tenure on the English throne - a systematic pattern of raising the status of the nobleman which would continue well through the 16th century: in 1562, just two short years after Robsart's untimely death, Sir Dudley would permeate internal governing affairs, becoming Privy Councillor, in 1587, appointed Lord Steward of the Royal Household, and a mere four years after Robsart's alleged murder, allegedly orchestrated by Dudley himself, Elizabeth would promote her Master of Horse to the 1st Earl of Leicester - no meager a gift by any means - being the first to own an Earldom significantly raises the status of it's proprietor.

Prior to Robsart’s death, the obviousness of Elizabeth’s favoritism to the handsome Earl (who was said to have free reign over the Queen's sacred and private chambers - sometimes entering at nightfall and not re-emerging until dawn!) allowed much room for rumor to spread: “She will marry him!,”  became the hot gossip both within and outside of Royal circles - of course, only, they concluded, "...in the case his wife should die.” Dudley, who desperately wanted Elizabeth and a royal seat, had overheard these rumors. It was not long after he became aware of them that Amy Robsart 's corpse was found mangled at the foot of a tall set of stairs. Could Dudley have been so power-hungry and lustful as to murder his wife? Or could it be that someone, who had overheard the rumor that the frustratingly "celibate" Queen might wed the Earl, expedited the potential “marriage” (which would have never happened anyway, Dudley being too "low-born") in order to create an heir to the English throne? Perhaps it was suicide?

No one really knows for sure – what is known is that Elizabeth openly flaunted her lust for the newly minted Earl of Leicester, often engaging him in dance, as we can see by the contemporary illustration at the beginning of this post (above left) of the duo performing Elizabeth’s favorite dance, "la Volta" (Italian for ‘the turn(ing)”: (It should be noted that after a brief 'banning' from court (merely for show), Dudley would return to Elizabeth's palace, it was at this time, after Robsart's alleged murder, that Dudley was knighted 1st Earl of Leicester - a mere four years after his spouse's untimely death!)



As one can clearly see, this 16-17th century dance involved some moments of intimacy formerly considered inappropriate and lewd during it’s time. The style originated in Italy and would soon find fame in the royal Courts of France and Germany. It was considered a tad risqué for the man to place his arms about the waist of the woman, lifting her in to the air, as close body contact was, for the most part, strictly verboten during this era. Once Elizabeth chose the dance for her ball with a lowly Dudley as her partner – a noble touching a Royal – it became less than dignified – just shy off a full-blown scandal.

Such rules of limited engagement weren't country-specific: here is a clip from the excellent film The Countess, also depicted in the 17th century, which showcases the alleged serial murderess/bloodthirsty Hungarian noble and warlord Erzebet Báthory engaged in a similar dance sometime during the 16th and 17th century:

Herr Joseph Lanner, the TRUE master of the
Waltz

But, things weren’t always so chaste – at least they soon wouldn’t be. Enter one Joseph Lanner, composer of Austria, and his likeminded musical ‘rival’ Johann Strauß II (aka 'the younger) of Germany, who composed music especially for dance, and in Lanner’s case, transformed the simple peasant’s dance, known as the waltz, into an incredibly intimate dance dignified enough for the higher middle and upper classes. Der Walzer – German for “the turn(ing)" is often likened as a more intense version of La Volta - originating from the impoverished streets of Italy - that seemingly broke all the rules of decorum. That it was founded and celebrated in Austria and Germany is no small surprise: if the reader will recall, it was in Germany that the Royal Courts celebrated the 16th century Italian dance la Volta, popularizing it during the 17th century. As you can see from the videos of the popular dances of the era above, rules - however minor the may be - were often broken in terms of just how intimate or close the dancing couples could be from one another without getting caught.

By the 18th century, Lanner had seen enough ‘law-breaking’ to become both frustrated and profiteering. He would single-handedly exploit the frustrations of the dancers and the demeaning class distinctions which decided who could or couldn’t perform the couples dance, and transformed it into the waltz. He would now compose, specifically for the newfound 18th century dance (Der Walzer) – which was incredibly intimate – allowing couples to hold each other so close as to be breast to breast, and with a much relieved sigh of long awaited delirium at finally being able to hold their lover and display a little PDA in public, the lusty couples would twirl: maniacally, dizzily – about the ballroom floor.

Der Walzer had it’s critics, to be sure – but those who wanted to dance, danced - with nary a second thought as to outdated religious and discriminatory disciplines that separated the “peasants” or lowborn nobles from the entertainments of the Royals.

Listen: Lanner's Die Schönbrunner Walzer,  so named and dedicated by the composer for the beautiful Schönbrunner Palace, performed  here by the Wiener Philharmoniker under maestro Lorin Maazel for the 1994 annual Neujahrskonzert (New Year's concert) at Vienna, was all the rage in Europe prior to Strauß' The Blue Danube penned in the late 19th century. It was also one of the last works written by Lanner, and was so beloved by the masses, it is said the maestro was forced into performing it a whopping 21 more times before he could step down from the podium in 1842. Sometime later, avant-garde composer Igor Stravinsky would return to the six-decades old waltz, and borrow parts of the score for his ballet Petrushka


So popular (and I daresay, so long awaited and relieving) a dance was the waltz, that by 1760, Teresa Cornelys, a popular Venetian (imagine!) opera singer created the first ever public dance hall in Europe. A new establishment born unto the world, thanks to Lanner’s bravery, his music, and the music of his sometime running mate Joseph Strauß II - who quickly caught onto the sexy trend, and whose fame would outshine Lanner’s due to his ability to travel and perform across Europe.

Cornelys’ public dance hall was dubbed the “Carlisle house.” Although it was an exclusive club, it would be Cornelys who would assist Lanner in gradually breaking out of subjective stereotypes without inciting a riot by those opposed to the new musical tradition. She did this by allowing the ‘sinful’ acts of playing cards, and opting to either listen and watch the couples dance the waltz or join in if they so chose – in total contrast to when it was mandatory for all couples in a royal setting to dance in a display of reverence and servitude.

The dance hall idea proved so successful, by the early 1800’s five of them had already popped up in Vienna. Younger generations formerly unable to mingle with upper classes, flooded the ballrooms to get their sexy groove on. It is said that by 1832, over half of the population of Vienna had joined a dance hall and remained members for decades to come. It would mark an ingenious and highly profitable move for Lanner.

Emperor Franz Josef I, Emperor of Austria and King of
Hungary, is seen here performing the waltz at
the Hoffburg Palace in in 1906 Vienna.

Johann Strauß the Elder, and the younger would create music for the waltz themselves, the most famous of which is the younger’s “The Blue Danube” (1866, seen in the video below), which remains a favorite piece of work to this very day.

Herr Strauß II's The Blue Danube. One with a keen eye will notice the ever escalating erotic nature of the improved la volta - der walzer - as centuries passed and the religious public came to accept the new trend sweeping across the globe.

The freeing dance proved so popular, it became a craze in the Far West: American soldiers were known to have embraced it during the hardships of the Civil War, and even added their own spin on the dance itself, two of the most famous being the Boston Waltz and the Boston dip.

It also enchanted the Far East: Russian composer Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky famously included the waltz in his most popular ballets: Swan Lake, Sleeping Beauty, and the Nutcracker.

Today, we recognize Johann Strauß the younger as the "King of the Waltz," largely due to his ability to travel over Lanner, and, undeniably, due to the catchiness of his music – but, according the author of this blog, neither Der Walzer, nor public dance halls, nor Strauß himself would have been - and remain in - such high reverence were it not for Lanner’s early innovations and for his daring tenacity to turn a simple peasants-only dance from the streets of Italy into a sensation that continues to dominate ballrooms across the globe to this very day.

Joseph Lanner, I salute you.

-Rose.

BACK TO HOME PAGE

TRIVIA & HUMOR XI: STDS, FLAYING, BEHEADING, HITLER'S MOST PRIZED COMPOSERS; "FATHER OF PSYCHOLOGY" PROVES USELESS / UNTAMABLE PLAYBOYS & THEIR MURDEROUS HAREMS OF HOOKERS REVEALED

Here at Unraveling Musical Myths, we have, on more than one occasion, “visited the dead” via horrific, gruesome – and, occasionally, even amusing – tales of grisly lore and gore, passed down to us through the musical ages; describing (in often macabre detail) the lengths some people will go to preserve, profit on – or even destroy – the legacy of some of Western Classical Music’s most iconic and beloved masters.

From bodies uprooted from their tombs and callously tossed in the corner of a funeral vault, to grave robbing and skull-heisting (we’ve even “bore witness” to tales of mob-like guard posts at the grave, to composers themselves engaging in bizarre episodes non-sexual necrophilia).

In this edition of TRIVIA & HUMOR, we begin our downward spiral into the seventh circle of hell with both the savagely barbaric and the surprisingly tender: two tales of post-mortem action by the living – in one instance, the tender: in 19th century late classical/early romantic composers Franz Schubert and Ludwig van Beethoven:

I LOVE YOU TO DEATH…AND BEYOND (OR SO IT WOULD SEEM)

Franz Schubert idolized Ludwig van Beethoven. The
pair ran in different circles and rarely met - however
this didn't stop Franz from wanting to be close to his
idol in life - and, so it would appear, in death.

As 31 year old Schubert lapsed in and out of consciousness in the final throes of what would, in posterity, be considered an early and agonizing death, the young Austrian master of the Art of the Lied grew delirious – a likely result of both neurosyphilis and mercury poisoning (the only tonic then available to treat the deadly disease which had run rampant throughout Napoleonic Europe). It would be during one of these moments of semi-consciousness (heavily marked by delirium) that the composer, believing himself already six feet under and buried alive, audibly posed the question “Am I resting next to Beethoven?” (Ludwig being both Franz’ muse and devotee during both icon’s lifetimes – with the younger Schubert even dedicating his Variations on a French Song - Op. 10, D.624 - to his idol). Those who witnessed the outburst took the bizarre moment of quasi-lucidity as a declaration of intent to be laid to rest alongside the composer’s musical hero. This wish was thrice granted, first by burying Franz as close as possible (a mere two plots away) to his beloved at Vienna's Währing Cemetery.

Beethoven, who had died only one year previous, had perished in Schubert’s hometown of Vienna in Austria. His funeral was both a grandiose and somber spectacle, with tens of thousands of mourners lining the streets of Vienna to witness the procession, and bid farewell to their maestro, each clamoring over one another to gain a closer view as the casket dolefully made it’s way to the cemetery, with Schubert himself at the helm, first as pallbearer helping to hoist the coffin, and, at graveside, acting as a torchbearer. By the time the Währing was shuttered in June 1888, a decision was made to move and re-bury both composers – this time side by side, with nary a plot between them to separate their vessels into eternity - at the recently opened Zentralfriedhof on the city‘s South side.

The now permanently gated Währing Cemetery became known as Schubert Park, and atop the vacant plots (forever preserved for their former inhabitants) stands a memorial dedicated to the two musical giants. 


8 Variations on a French song in E Minor, Op. 10, D. 624 - Schubert's dedication to his idol, Ludwig van Beethoven.

FLAYING A FORMER FRIEND

As for the barbaric, regular readers of Unraveling Musical Myths with be familiar with the ‘practice’ and cult of phrenology – a pseudo-“science” funded and operated by resurrectionists, shady surgeons and so-called scientists (in fact, keeping on the subject of both Beethoven and Schubert, the exhumation of the corpses of the composers for reburial in 1888 at the Zentralfriedhof was but the second time the graves of the musical giants were disturbed. In October of 1863, whilst still interred at Wahring, both composers’ coffins were exhumed for ‘scientific’ purposes – chiefly, for the study of phrenology – in which both musician’s skulls were examined, their skeletons analyzed, coffins refurbished, and re-buried (this time adjacent one another), with the exception of Beethoven – who was re-buried sans cranium. (You can read more about Beethoven’s well traveled and heavily dissected skull here at Unraveling Musical Myths. Shockingly, ‘testing’ on the relic has continued through the ages - well into the 21st century!) In today’s entry of TRIVIA… however, we re-visit the heisted skull of Herr Joseph Haydn, infamously looted from his grave by the cover of night (and by bribing the gravedigger, who had recently been robbed of all of his earthly possessions by French soldiers – or by men hired to dress as French soldiers) by Haydn’s friend, one Joseph Carl Rosenbaum, certified accountant and music devotee, and Rosenbaum’s quack of a friend, the self-styled ‘phrenologist’ Johann Nepomuk Peter, governor of the lower Austria provincial prison.

Haydn's skull.

The sick pair were said to have performed a “test-run” on de-fleshing human skin, muscle and tissue from a fresh corpse (as the heist of Haydn’s skull was to be acted upon with impending haste due to the popularity of phrenology and prolific nature of ‘resurrectionists’ then making the rounds at local cemeteries. The more famous the subject, the greater the profit for the heartless looter). The diabolic duo "practiced" on recently deceased Viennese theatre actress Elizabeth Roose, who had succumbed to complications during the process of childbirth in 1808.

Rosenbaum, being a confidante of the composer Haydn, of course knew well ahead (ahem) of time compared to other potential looters as to when his friend became terminally ill, and feigned sympathy for his close mate whilst all the while concocting a devious plan to not only steal his compadre’s skull, but to later hold it as ransom from Haydn fan and former employer Nikolaus I, Prince Esterházy (“The Magnificent”) of Eisenstadt (whose family happened to be one of the most wealthy and influential families within the Austro-Hungarian empire).

To perform the "test run," Rosenbaum had to first secure the corpse of Roose, then proceed to decapitate her, and, finally, to soak her skull in a mixture of quicklime in order to eat away at the flesh. She would prove to be his first successful relic. With Haydn, however, it was different: perhaps succumbing to a soupçon of guilt for prizing his former close mate’s head, the friend-turned-foe set the skull down atop the table and proceeded to vomit at the very sight of the still life-like skull. Oddly, instead of doing the dirty deed himself, as he had de-fleshed Roose, Rosenbaum instead turned the cranium over to his personal physician (who he likely also bribed), who in turn sent it off to a Viennese Hospital for ‘cleaning.’ The chalky white skull, now unrecognizable as his one-time running mate, would be returned to the accountant Rosenbaum, who had already constructed an ornate black case for stowing the skull, adorned with golden lyre.

SCHUMANN MAY HAVE DOCUMENTED THE MOMENT HE CAUGHT SYPHILIS

Most fans of Western classical music know Robert Schumann, and his wife Clara, as composers of the romantic era. Fewer may be aware that the married duo were habitual diarists. At the behest of Robert, the young Clara (née Wieck, born 9 years after her spouse) would take turns with her more famous husband, documenting the joys, triumphs and tragedies of their martial union, in an effort to consult the diary in times of romantic strife and to reflect on the couple’s growth through better or worse.

One salacious subject concerning the musical couple - that of a double life shared on the part of the groom - was seemingly ‘proven’ by music historians who, upon inspecting the documents, found substantial evidence that would seem to show, without refute, that Clara knew exactly what she was getting into when she vowed to love her husband for "better or worse”. 

Robert’s early entries in the diary include an unabashed, very explicit blow-by-blow (pun intended) of his very salacious carnal relationship with a woman named Christel (Schumann would later refer to her as "Charitas"), whom the composer met through none other than fiancée Clara Wieck’s father! (Christel is believed to have been a member of staff  - a maid - at the Wieck household). 

During the same period as his romantic escapade with “Charitas,” Robert makes frequent reference to his declining health, making note of symptoms which, according to scholars of both music and medicine, are notorious markers for early stage syphilis.

Robert Schumann, you naughty boy. Pictured here
alongside his wife, Clara.

In one entry in particular penned by Robert after May 1831, the composer references his “John Thomas” – a hardly inconspicuous moniker for his genitals – and the immensely painful, persistent wound upon it. It was a gift that would keep on giving, awarded the wounded composer by one ‘Christel,’ whom Schumann would later adorn with what he referred to as "a more beautiful and appropriate name" –  the aforementioned moniker “Charitas” –  which, interestingly, is Latin for “Charity” (alternatively spelled "Caritas" after the Greek "Agape," or the practice of self-sacrificing love.)

The true full name of this seductive siren of Schumann's self sacrifice, according to recent research, was actually Christiane Apitzsch, and she was more than just a former maid to the Wieck household; more than just a lover to the gifted genius that she may very well have wound up killing through the composer’s later attempts at mercury treatment for advanced stage syphilis – but quite possibly the mother of the adulterous composer’s illegitimate daughter, Ernestine, born January 5th 1837! Schumann is believed to have attempted to pay off Charitas for her silence, and is alleged to have never met his daughter.

Clara was also not the only member of the Wieck clan who knew of her future husband's improprieties - upon discovering Robert was wooing his daughter, Friedrich Wieck, head of the Wieck household, threatened to shoot Schumann on sight if he continued courting his daughter!

It seems Robert paid Clara's father no mind - in lieu of the father Wieck's "permission" for Robert to "take his daughters hand" (which seems to have been legally required at the time), the betrothed sued Friedrich, winning a judgement on behalf of the court, which granted permission for the lovebirds to wed.
  
The couple married - warts and all - on September 12, 1840.

HITLER’S ADORATION FOR “MODERN” CLASSICAL PHENOM

VICTORIA'S CANADIAN PURSUIT: THE STORY OF EMMA ALBANI AND THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND feat. Did You Know?

Royal Standard of Canada (flag)

As Canadians look to the long weekend to celebrate the ‘birth’ of the nation’s former Head of State, celebrated annually in the country on the last Monday preceding the 25th (the ‘actual’ date of birth of the 19th century British monarch Queen Victoria), I - a Canadian-born citizen - am reminded of our much beloved former ruler’s penchant for beautiful music, and her role as patroness to the celebrated French-Canadian operatic soprano, Emma Albani.

Of course, Victoria’s association with the musical arts goes far beyond the mere stewardship of this national idol. The Queen famously patronized an up-and-coming Edward Elgar, who would go onto serve as Master of the King’s Musik under Victoria’s grandson, King George V, and helped a struggling Johann Strauss (the elder) resurface from the depths of a dismal abyss that threatened to erase the composer from the pages of London's historical almanac before his career in the English capital could even get started. 

The musically literate monarch famously wed German Prince Albert of Saxe-Gotha – a royal consort who openly admitted he’d rather have spent a life solely in the pursuit of music than as a slave to the monarchy. Together, they would host private soirées with the composer Felix Mendelssohn, of whom Victoria in particular found herself enamored (a feeling that was more than mutual). Together, the threesome would engage in song - perhaps now singing a lied penned by Albert, and then, on another occasion, improvising on the piano - each taking turns performing on the instrument (a favorite piece being an arrangement of Felix Mendelssohn’s Lieder ohne Worte, or, Songs Without Words, Op. 85, No. 6), ^[1] which both husband and wife could play together whilst the composer of the work looked on in amusement.

Victoria’s contributions to realm and stage weren’t solely relegated to Great Britain. She also extended much generosity and gratitude to Canada and the Commonwealth:

Canada both revered and honored their Queen – many times over: her name would become permanently fixed on provincial city titles and on both major and minor roadways and streets; and her wishes to permanently designate and name the nation’s Capital as "Ottawa" was granted without discourse. Her very namesake would become affectionised: following the country’s Confederation in July of 1867,  during which the monarch still occupied the throne, our “Queen Victoria” became known colloquially as the “Mother of Confederation.”

Emma Albani

There is one Canadian in particular who owed much of her success and livelihood to the Queen. She was Marie-Louise-Emma-Cécile Lajeunesse of Chambly (in present day Quebec) – later Dame Emma Albani following a name change (to sound more English) and an entrance into knighthood under King George V (grandson to Victoria and Albert) in 1925.

An undisputed favorite of the Queen, Albani would make herself available for her royal patron's beck and call – and, it seems, Victoria ‘called’ often: after a brief, yet successful run in Messina (Sicily), Emma would turn her sights to London. 

Following her debut as Amina in Vincenzo Bellini’s La Sonnambula in 1872 and a brief stint in St. Petersburg, the blossoming chanteuse came to the attention of Queen Victoria, who had undoubtedly heard of the singer’s recent success in Russia (it is said the Tsar Alexander II was present in the audience during one of her performances) and wished to hear for herself this crown jewel of French Canada. The Queen would invite Albani to her royal lodgings at Windsor castle to perform before her in a private setting. To visit the monarch meant that Emma would have to forgo the upcoming season at Covent Garden where she was currently riding the wave of newfound success in the English capital. She decided the trade-off was worth it: throwing caution to the wind, she traveled west to Windsor to serenade the Queen. On the musical menu were arias, both sacred and secular (and folk) song, and local popular music: "Caro nome" from Verdi’s Rigoletto, the folk ballad "Robin Adair," Bach/Gounod’s arrangement of "Ave Maria," and the popular song "Home! Sweet Home!"

Victoria was sufficiently pleased by the starlet – enough to invite her back to Windsor Castle to perform a repertoire especially chosen by the monarch herself: works by Johannes Brahms, Edvard Grieg, George Frederic Handel and Felix Mendelssohn – to be peppered with traditional French and Scottish compositions – in essence, whatever best suited her royal fancy.

Final portrait of Queen Victoria

Albani's appearances at the Windsor court would help solidify her status as Canada’s first international vocal performer, and secure her place at the very top of the hierarchical pyramid which represented the elite soprani of 19th and 20th century Western Classical music.

Victoria’s favoritism of the Canadian vocalist would prove most unyielding: together the two would greet their golden years, with a fifty-something Albani privately serenading an octogenarian Victoria – again at Windsor - always at Windsor – in 1898 with Wagner (as Elsa from Lohengrin). This performance in particular, would in fact reveal the true depths of the ladies’ mutual adulation: it would be one of the last – if not the last – vocal performances received by the Queen whilst she was still living, and the appearance at the side of her most loyal employer would cement Albani’s place card at the monarch’s royal funeral 3 years later in 1901, when the celebrated singer performed solo – an endearing tribute to the patron and friend of both Canada and chanteuse.

Listen below to an early wax cylinder recording (c. 1903) of Emma Albani (56) performing Handel’s famous aria Ombra Mai Fu from the composers’ 1738 opera Xerxes. It is a distinct possibility the whimsical aria was one of the works by Handel performed by the singer before the Queen during her first arrival at Windsor Castle in 1874:



Did You Know?

Queen Victoria laying the foundation stone at Royal Albert Hall in London

On this 20th day of May in the year of our Confederation, Canada’s Queen Victoria was busy on her own home turf at Kensington in London, laying down the foundation stone on a site that would grow to become that most prestigious of concert halls, the Royal Albert Hall.

Victoria, who had ceremoniously arrived to much fanfare (before a crowd of some 7,000 monarchists who had gathered under a massive marquee especially erected for her arrival), is said to have employed a golden trowel to lay the stone. As a thoughtful gesture to future generations, Her Royal Highness slipped underneath the stone a ‘time capsule’ made of glass, in which she had inserted a private inscription, and, for good measure, a quantity of both gold and silver coins.

The ceremony itself was a much fêted event for both monarch and civilian: just prior to laying the stone, Queen Victoria had been greeted not only by a very vocal and adoring crowd, but also a 21-gun salute at Hyde Park (which, along with the trumpet fanfare - performed by HM guards - that immediately followed, echoed through the crowd). A performance of her husband’s (Prince Albert) composition “Invocation to Harmony,” led by the esteemed conductor and Italian émigré Michael Costa and a Benediction delivered by the Archbishop of Canterbury were also performed for the monarch at the ceremony.

Addressing the crowd, the much admired Queen of Great Britain and the Commonwealth proclaimed the site “Royal Albert Hall of Arts and Sciences:”

“It is my wish that this Hall should bear his name to whom it will have owed its existence and be called The Royal Albert Hall of Arts and Sciences”

-Queen Victoria, South Kensington, London, May 20, 1867

Learn more about the laying of the stone and Victoria (and find out where in the venue you can take a peek at the stone itself) at royalalberthall.com.

Footnotes:

^[1]The solo version of Lieder Ohne Worte, Op. 85, no. VI comes from the collection's 7th book. The manuscript for the "duet" version, arranged for Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, titled "Lied ohne Worte für das Piano vierhändig" (Song Without Words as a Piano Duet), is currently in the collection of the Royal Trust under Queen Elizabeth II. View it here.

Further reading:

To learn more about Queen Victoria, her relationships with 19th century composers, Canada, and the Victoria Day holiday, visit "PATRON PROFILE: QUEEN VICTORIA - ROYAL PATRON, FAN & MUSICIAN" here on Unraveling Musical Myths.

-Rose.

BACK TO HOME PAGE