The Alan Krueck Archive



Alan Krueck
Dr Alan Krueck (1939-2010)























Robert Volkmann
Robert Volkmann
































Arnold Becker Arnold Becker

Identity Crisis - The Vienna Competition of 1862

Part of The Alan Krueck Archive                                    (Download a PDF version)

This article was intended to be delivered to the Fall 1993 meeting of the Allegheny Chapter of the American Musicological Society but, although finished, was not presented. Dr Krueck felt that further research might lead to the identification of more of the composers of the 32 symphonies submitted for the prize. His finished paper was left with penciled amendments and the significant ones have been noted here. A list of potential composer candidates for future research was also attached to the paper, and it has been added as an appendix.     
In the spring of 1861 members of the governing board of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in Vienna met and passed a resolution decreeing that the society would sponsor a competition for a symphony prize. Such competitions were not unusual as orchestral societies began to grow in numbers throughout Europe in the first half of the 19th century and the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde had not sponsored such a competition since 1835 when Franz Lachner's Symphony No.5 in C minor, Sinfonia appassionata, was awarded first prize over the Symphony No.2 in D major of Carl Otto von Nicolai who, a dozen years later, won his place in musical immortality with his opera, Die lustigen Weiber von Windsor (The Merry Wives of Windsor). For that prize symphony competition of 1835 the protocol of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde registers a total of fifty-seven symphonies submitted for an award - as Nicolai put it in the letter to his father dated Oct. 3, 1835 - of "lumpige 200 Gulden" - "a lousy 200 Gulden". Of the fifty-five remaining entries from that contest of 1835, none of the composers are known and it seems unlikely that they ever will be; as with the competition of 1861 the major interest of the contestants was a performance and the probability of publication thereafter. In 1835 at least some money was offered: in 1861 none at all, only the prestige of patronage by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Indeed, the reasons for the society's 1861 competition - or 1862, since the award was targeted for that year - remain unclear, other than the fact that a quarter of a century had passed since the previous one and that it meant the drawing of attention to Vienna and its supposed prominence and importance in the contemporary music world. The competition may also have been a manifestation of the general cultural foment existing in the Vienna of the 1860's due to the historic renovation of the city's center which brought us Vienna's Ringstrasse as we know it pretty much today, with its neo-classical and neo-gothic facades of the Parliament building, the museums, the Rathaus and university as well as the Staatsoper. With such radical urban renewal surrounding and confronting it, the membership of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde may have taken stock of the more than a quarter of a century since its last such competition and realized that during that time Vienna, as a focal point for influential musical developments, had fallen to inertia and to a position behind Leipzig, Berlin, Munich and Dresden, not to mention Paris or Milan. Beethoven and Schubert were more than thirty years dead and the talents who survived them possessed nothing of equivalent genius - the period of Brahms and Bruckner was still on the horizon. Though a city of glitter and intellectual pretense, Vienna between roughly 1830 and 1870 was more a center of music better noted for whom it hosted rather than of whom it boasted.

The material relevant to the prize symphony competition of 1862 which has been preserved in the archives of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde is scant. In the answer to my initial inquiry into the competition, a letter dated March 14, 1977, the society informed me that there was no protocol concerning the competition which had been preserved. Aside from the original announcement of the competition, nominations for the panel of judges and the final selection of such and confirmation of the total of thirty-two symphonies received, there was no other information which hadn't already been culled from other sources, primarily that which served my own research on the symphonies of Joachim Raff- and it was Joachim Raff's Symphony No.1 in D major, op.96, entitled An das Vaterland, which took first prize.

In selecting the judges for the competition, the administration of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde represented itself with but one of its members, a certain Dr. August Wilhelm Ambros, and initially did not choose a single Austrian, much less a Viennese, for the panel, although several who were chosen, had tenuous ties to the empire. Franz Liszt was asked to judge, probably as much by virtue of his Hungarian lineage as for anything else: there is reason to doubt the invitation was ever sent to Liszt since there is no correspondence between Liszt and the society concerning the prize-symphony competition and he is nowhere cited during the presentation of the award. With certainty Vincenz Lachner, brother of the winner of the 1835 symphony competition Franz Lachner, served on the panel as did Carl Reinecke, among other things at the time, conductor of the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra. Ferdinand Hiller from Frankfurt was also appointed, perhaps chosen in deference to Vienna's large Jewish faction. The last of the judges, but certainly not the least as far as our research is concerned, was the Saxon-born Schumannianer, Robert Volkmann who, in 1861, had just finished a residency in Vienna and had returned to a second residency in Pest.

The letters of Vincenz Lachner have not been published and although they rest safely in the Bavarian State Library, they have not yet been consulted to see if Vincenz Lachner left any spurious information concerning the entries for the competition which he helped judge; inasmuch as there are no letters from him concerning the matter in the archives of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, there is good reason to believe such will not be found in Munich. The same may be said for Carl Reinecke, for in his published letters and autobiographical writings, mention is made only of his participation as a judge and the works which received public acknowledgement. In Ferdinand Hiller's Aus dem Tonleben unsrer Zeit (From Our Contemporary Musical Life) published in 1868 and expanded in 1871, Hiller recounts nothing of the competition and offers no critical appraisal of the two works which won performance by the Vienna Philharmonic

ln the case of Robert Volkmann fortune smiles graciously on the researcher in regard to this 1862 prize-symphony competition, for there exists in the holdings of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde a single letter of Robert Volkmann in which Volkmann writes concerning works by other contestants besides Raff and Becker. This letter is included in the 1915 edition of Briefe von Robert Volkmann (Letters of Robert Volkmann) issued by Breitkopf und Härtel in 1916 and edited by Hans Volkmann, the composer's musicologist son. The limited circulation of this volume during the First World War and the lack of subsequent editions makes this book a very valuable 500 page volume, for it is difficult to come by and, when available, it carries a premium price for good copy. The letter under consideration here is listed as No.79 among Hans Volkmann's choices (and the book does not represent the complete correspondence of the composer) and occupies pages 175-179 in the edition. In trying to trace composers who entered symphonies in the Vienna competition of 1861, it presents the most substantial information thus far uncovered. While it is unlikely that the names of all 32 contestants will ever be known, Robert Volkmann's letter provides tantalizing information for sleuthing at least five entries in addition to the two names already established, Joachim Raff and Albert Becker. When Volkmann penned his letter to the directorship of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde on Sept. 4, 1862, he could not have known that among the total of seven symphonies on which he remarks, two of them, those by Raff and Becker, would be the ultimate winners. In Robert Volkmann's letter however, there remain still five symphonies which beg identification and from that situation arises the title of the present paper, Identity Crisis - or the Vienna Preissymphonie Competition of 1862.

In the opening paragraph of his letter, Volkmann acknowledges that he has received all 32 symphonies submitted and that he has indeed examined all of them. Almost immediately, in the second paragraph, he expresses himself in a coy and dutiful manner while stating to the society:

"To your question, 'Are there among the symphonies presented to you for examination, any at all which seem worthy of public performance in the interest of art and the encouragement of musical talent?', I confess I have to say, yes."

Therewith he announces a choice of three symphonies which, without doubt, exhibit artistic merit. At this point it should be mentioned that all entries for the contest carried individual numbers assigned by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde as well as an obligatory motto supplied by each composer for his symphony.

Foremost among the entries Volkmann placed No.28, with the motto, Nur jene Form eines Tonstückes .... (Only that form of a composition), in itself sufficiently cryptic and mystifying. The identity crisis is not limited here only to the composer of this work but extends to the generic title as well, which is Symphonie-Ode in A. major. Despite the fact that the composer of this work has not yet been uncovered, Volkmann has left a number of enticing and illuminating clues. The designation symphonie-ode is in itself rarely encountered up to 1860 and in an exact listing of a composer's catalog, should be easy to spot. We know from the context of Volkmann's remarks that he was dealing with a four movement work. Among the important observations is that the Adagio or slow movement is placed third, indicating it was preceded by a scherzo or dance movement and an opening Allegro. Volkmann's major criticism of the work gives another clue, namely:

"....that after the third movement, a long spun out Adagio, there follows another lengthily developed movement of slow measure, cast in fugal form and of very serious and melancholy coloration, which as worthy as this may seem, detracts from effectiveness and might work to the detriment of the whole."

In this fugal Finale Volkmann also objects to the punctuation of fortissimo chords with cymbals and bass drum, a gesture not characteristic of the composers of the Mendelssohn-Schumann School, such as Volkmann himself. All that Volkmann writes thus far is excellent information aiding in the effort of identifying the composer of this symphonie-ode. But it is in the concluding remark about this work where Volkmann leaves his most valuable observation:

"Unfortunately, the requirement of a rather large organ in the Adagio makes renditions of this work impossible for many a concert organization."

Speculation on this remark alone leads one to suspect that the composer was associated with a major city with symphony performing facilities housing an organ. While that may seem to limit the hunt, the search continues for the composer of this intriguing four movement Symphonie-Ode in A major which concludes with a slow moving fugal finale and cymbals and bass drum punctuations at the end.

Second among Volkmann's considerations for the prize was No.6, again a work in A major but one whose motto, Nous, tandis que de joie ..., (We, who are meanwhile given to joy) puts the focus on a composer of francophonic background, though it does nothing in assuring one that he is a Frenchman. Once again Volkmann leaves enticing clues, for example, in his comment that the first movement

".... mirrors ingeniously life in the forest, in accordance with the composer's intentions,"

as well as in the Scherzo, which is even titled Chasse fantastique. The Adagio is also given a title, Hymne du matin and one assumes from the chronology of observations by Volkmann that the slow movement of this symphony is placed in third position, parallel to the gesture in entry No.28 - and this assumption seems correct since Volkmann refers to the final movement, Fête rustique, immediately thereafter. Despite the characteristics preserved by Volkmann and victimized by the erroneous belief that not many Frenchmen in the middle of the nineteenth century had much interest in writing symphonies, the composer remains a phantom. At first, Theodore Gouvy (1822-98) seemed a good hunch, but none of his symphonies bear the key of A major.

Trotz allem Freundeswort...(Despite every friendly word) is the motto of entry No. 17, a symphony in G minor and the last of the three major considerations for the prize put forth by Volkmann. In his description of the music Volkmann perceived in the first movement deutscher Ernst und deutsche Art  (German seriousness and German manner) and, as with his two previous choices, finds the symphony characterized by moderner Geist or contemporary thought - whatever that is supposed to mean. As to the authorship of the symphony there is no doubt: it is by Albert Becker (1834-99), for he was named as runner-up to Raff by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Becker himself and this symphony in particular pose problems for the researcher today. In the only extant and reasonably extensive biographical essay on Becker, penned by a certain Anselm Fritzsch in 1882 for Vol.14 of Musikalisches Wochenblatt, pages 179-185 including a lithograph portrait of the still living composer, we are told that the prize winning Symphony in G minor is actually Becker's second essay in the form, composed in 1858 a year after his First Symphony in D major. Unfortunately we are also informed that the G minor symphony was awarded its prize in 1860, a slip uncorrected by Becker himself and one which nurtures suspicion that there are many other inaccuracies in this crucial biographical source. Although a Third Symphony, in D minor, is supposed to have followed in 1865, Becker is rarely listed as a symphonist and, indeed, his large catalogue of works does consist mainly of vocal pieces. It is of note that none of his symphonies, including the prize-sharing G minor Symphony, were ever published. My 1977 inquiries as to the whereabouts of the manuscript of that Symphony led to a cul-de-sac, for the four Berlin libraries which were contacted - and Albert Becker spent most of his life in Berlin -had no listings for such a work. According to contemporary accounts, the Symphony was played a number of times after 1862 and turn-of-the-century reference books often refer to it as his most important work. Be that as it may the Symphony in G minor of Albert Becker, along with any sets of parts, has disappeared. It is possible the work is in some private collection for a large number of other Becker works are catalogued in the Museum Preussicher Kulturbesitz. Perhaps the unkindest cut of all is the fact that the recent editions of MGG, Grove's, Riemann and Slonimsky-Baker have deleted Albert Becker from posterity.

Following this discussion of Albert Becker's Symphony in G minor, Volkmann writes the society that there are four other entries which attracted his attention, though none of them, for various reasons, seem worthy of performance. The very first symphony in this group is none other than No.31, An das Vaterland (To the Fatherland) the Symphony No.1 in D major, op.95 of Joachim Raff which, as mentioned before, was ultimately awarded the grand prize in the competition. Volkmann objected to its seventy-five minute duration, avoiding mentioning for some reason or other the fact that the symphony has five fully developed movements instead of the customary four. At the premiere of Raff's symphony at the Vienna Philharmonic concert of February 22, 1863, An das Vaterland occupied the second half of a program which brought the premiere of Becker's Symphony in G minor in the first half. In his review of Raff's symphony after this concert, Eduard Hanslick assailed the work also for its "immeasurable length" and preferred Becker's composition, all things considered. Nevertheless Raff's First Symphony enjoyed respectable popularity after its almost immediate publication by J. Schuberth in Leipzig. Either complete or in excerpt, it was frequently performed by Theodore Thomas in this country up to about 1880.

When Volkmann examined the score of An das Vaterland he did not describe it as a program symphony and, indeed, until a short time before the premiere, the symphony did not have a program. In the biography of her father, Joachim Raff, ein Lebensbild (Regensburg, 1922) Helene Raff recounts that her father first felt that a program was imperative the day before the first performance. The reason for this sudden insertion of a program seems to have been more politic than poetic for in the fourth movement, which Raff declares to be a description of the (then existing) lack of unity among Germans, he declared:

"The composer believed himself to be at liberty to symbolically introduce a motive not of his invention, Reichardt's melody for the song of Arndt, Was ist des Deutschen Vaterland? (What is the Fatherland of the German?) ."

It seems that the only Austrian on the committee, Dr. Ambros, had taken umbrage at the use of the familiar tune and the possibility of textual recall, citing this as the basis of provocation. The program of Raff is really limited to only a few lines relevant to each of the movements and, although published in the orchestral score, is missing from the piano-four hand arrangement. The recent CD recording doesn't even acknowledge the existence of the program.

Number 26 among the entries, a symphony in E minor with the motto, Nur immer heiter ...(Always of good composure) was Volkmann's fifth choice. While admitting he found no outstanding imagination, it had a certain freshness about it. Volkmann's major complaint with this E minor symphony was an overabundance of development in all the movements and that the Andante second movement was based on thematic ideas which didn't warrant prolonged attention. [The next sentence was subsequently crossed out with the words: “Doesn’t check out”: There-is reason to believe that this is a symphony in E minor by the Dutch composer Jan (or Jean depending on your reference source) Verhulst who lived from 1816 to 1891, but until a score can be found for examination, the question of identity must remain open.]

Number 18 of the competition is a symphony in C minor with the motto, Antik-Romantisch (Ancient-Romantic) and appraised by Volkmann as the work of an accomplished musician, for Volkmann cited appealing invention and developmental craftsmanship but little evidence of moderner Geist or modern spirit - an elusive comment put forth several times by Volkmann in his letter. What he understood by "modern spirit" probably relates to Schumann - if not in matters of orchestration, then to matters of harmony, rhythm and melodic sequencing, for Volkmann did not stand with Wagner, Liszt or the Weimar orchestral school. As a result of the perceived atavism in the piece, Volkmann found his interest flagging throughout the symphony's duration. The motto Antik-romantisch leads one to suspect a mature composer with classical leanings. [In another draft, Dr Krueck added here: This symphony is almost certainly the Symphony No.6 in C minor of Franz Lachner, composed in 1855.]

The seventh and the last of the symphonies cited and discussed by Volkmann is No.14, entitled Symphonia patetica in E minor, with the motto: Wie reich du dich in Lob ergehst (How richly you encounter praise). With this entry Volkmann found the first movement more elegiac than filled with pathos, but also declared the movement the most successful of the four despite the monotonous reiteration of a two measure major motive throughout. The second movement is reported to be a Largo and the third, a Menuett which, considering the year 1862, leads one to suspect an older composer or at least one whose concept of a symphony extends barely beyond early Beethoven. The Finale, according to Volkmann, suffers from an inability to end, having long exhausted its material and the ability to satisfy the listener.

In the summary paragraph of his letter Volkmann desists from naming any of the symphonies he has discussed as candidate for the prize. Ironically in this conclusion of his letter Volkmann felt it necessary to repeat his most damning consideration, that concerning No.31 - Raff's An das Vaterland - which he declares the least recommendable because of its "exaggerated lengths".

As mentioned previously, it is probably hopeless to discover the names of all thirty-two contestants in this Vienna prize symphony competition of 1862 sponsored by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Aside from the seven symphonies described by Robert Volkmann, other sources of the time suggest a few more composers who might have submitted a symphony to the contest.

[Here Dr Krueck subsequently added in bold ink: “insert Goldmark”]

In the biography of his father, Johann Herbeck, ein Lebensbild  (Vienna 1885), Ludwig Herbeck, in recounting the recovery of Schubert's Unfinished Symphony from Schubert's one-time companion Anselm Hüttenbrenner (1794-1868), remarks about the aged Hüttenbrenner's bitter feelings of neglect and lack of performances of his recent works (pages 164-169). A letter from Josef Hüttenbrenner, Anselm's brother, to Herbeck is quoted, in which Josef refers to three recently completed symphonies of Anselm. The letter is dated August 3, 1860. Johann Herbeck in his dealings with Hüttenbrenner thereafter probably called attention to the symphony competition of 1862 and it seems reasonable that Hüttenbrenner would have considered the goodwill of the Vienna Philharmonic's chief conductor as assuringly beneficial for anything he might submit. This is a reasonable assumption but one cannot prove it, at least not until evidence surfaces in Hüttenbrenner's or his brother's correspondence.

One may exclude Johann Herbeck himself from consideration since the competition was not open to members of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Frankly, Herbeck did not need to win a prize in order to get his orchestral works performed, for he could do so whenever he wished and he did.

[This paragraph was subsequently crossed out with the words: “too speculative”: Franz Lachner was an inveterate participant in musical competitions of all sorts and besides winning the 1835 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde competition for a symphony, he has a respectable list of awards for works which extend to such oddball combinations as cello quartets. Although he turned to the orchestral suite in the latter half of his career and regarded it as the form for which he would be best remembered, in 1861-62 he still had an unperformed and unpublished Symphony, in F major, his Eighth, which had been completed in 1856. The fact that his brother Vincenz was one of the judges for the competition doesn't necessarily mean Franz Lachner exhibited scruples in the matter.]

In utilizing Robert Volkmann's letter concerning the prize-symphony competition of 1862 to help identify the composers and symphonies among the entries, one should take into account that Volkmann was aware that no symphonies requiring vocal forces were allowed, for such works had been proscribed by the rules of the competition. Volkmann makes no reference to program symphonies: to be sure he mentions symphonies, and movements from them which have characteristic titles, but he makes no references to genuine program symphonies in the Berlioz-Liszt conception, even though he several times utters the phrase "contemporary" or "modern spirit" in describing some of the entries.

Of the five unidentified composers in Volkmann's list, there is only one about whom this researcher feels confident in identifying and that is the composer of No.28, the Symphonie-Ode in A major which was Volkmann's first citation. This is almost certainly the Symphony in A major of the Dutch born composer Eduard Silas (1827-1909) which was written in 1852 but not performed until 1862 and again in 1863, both times by the London Philharmonic Orchestra. Silas was a highly regarded organist as well as composer, having beaten Saint-Saëns in an organ performance competition in 1858. Though Christopher Senior's article for the most recent edition of Grove does not mention that this Symphony in A major by Silas carries with it the term "ode', he intriguingly lets the reader know that a second symphony by Silas is called Symphonie-burlesque. Until a score to the Silas can be found or an adequate description of the piece comes to light, definite identification is impossible. Until then the work and its composer remain the prime candidates for No.28, Nur jene Form eines Tonstückes.

The awful thing about the identity crisis and the Vienna prize-symphony competition of 1862 is that it stimulates speculation and leaves the concerned researcher with more questions than answers. How tantalizing to ponder whether Camille Saint-Saëns submitted his 1856 A major symphony to the competition, or that the equally youthful Felix Draeseke tried for the prize with his precocious Symphony in C major of 1858 which either was lost or destroyed? Did Joachim Raff perhaps submit two symphonies to the competition, his award winning An das Vaterland and its predecessor, the subsequently dismantled E minor Symphony of 1854? Were there any concertant-symphonies featuring one or more instruments that might have been submitted? We will probably never know. But it is reasonable to assume that with a little bit of luck and a lot more perseverance, at least the five unknown composers of the symphonies described in Robert Volkmann's letter to the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde will have their identities revealed.

Appendix: Possible entrants for the competition.

When reviewing this paper Dr Krueck at some stage drew up a speculative list of possible entrants for the competition, into which he intended to carry out further research. The list is set out below. Dr Krueck’s list entry is in bold type, the rest is editorial addition.

Bargiel, Woldemar (1828-1897)
A German composer and academic, step-brother of Clara Schumann. His only Symphony (in C op.30) was written around 1860 and published in 1866.

Dietrich, Anton - presumably Albert Dietrich (1829-1908)
A German composer and Kapellmeister. His only known Symphony, op.20 in D minor, was written in 1869 and published in 1870.

Esser, Heinrich (1818-1872)
A German composer of two Symphonies (in D minor op.44, published in the 1850s and in B minor op.79, published in 1870).

Fuchs - presumably Robert (1847-1927)
An Austrian composer, the first of his three numbered was composed in 1885, but there are two other early unpublished symphonies.

Goltermann, Georg (1824-1898)
A renowned German cellist, and composer of six cello concertos. A student of Ignaz Lachner, he wrote at least one Symphony (op.20 in A) which was published in 1852.

Hamerik, Asger (1843-1923)
A Danish Symphonist who composed seven published symphonies after 1865. His Symphony in C minor op.3 of 1860 is lost.

Helsted, Carl (1804-1904)
A Danish composer. His Symphony No.1 in D major was written in 1842 and his Symphony No.2 in F major is from two years later.

Hiller, Ferdinand (1811-1885)
A renowned German composer. Dr Krueck specifically noted Hiller's Symphony in E minor op.67 Es muss doch Frühling werden, published in 1865, but had forgotten that Hiller was one of the judges of the competition..

Hofmann, - presumably Heinrich (1842-1902)
A German composer. His only known symphony, the Frithjof Symphony op.22 in E flat was written in 1874 and published in 1875.

Hol, Richard (1825-1904)
A Dutch symphonist and academic. His First Symphony in D minor was written in 1863.

Horn, August (1825-1893)
A Leipzig-based German composer, mainly of choral music and operetta. His is not known to have written a symphony.

Kittl, Johann Friedrich (1806-1868)
A Bohemian composer of operas and symphonies. He was a friend of Liszt, Wagner and Berlioz.

Kufferath, Hubert Ferdinand (1818-1896)
A German composer, pianist and pedagogue, he composed at least one Symphony, in C major op.15, published in 1851.

Leonhard, Julius Emil (1810-1883)
A German pianist, composer and teacher. He wrote a Symphony in E minor.

Maréchal, Henri (1842-1924)
A French composer of operas, he composed a symphonic poem, but no known symphonies.

Markull, Friedrich Wilhelm (1816-1887)
A German organist, scholar and composer of operas and symphonies.

Naumann, Emil (1827-1888)
A pupil of Mendelssohn, this German composer and pedagogue specialised in choral music. No known symphonies are recorded.

Netzer, Joseph (1808-1864)
An Austrian composer of four symphonies (published between 1837-1849)

Norman, Ludvig (1831-1885)
A Swedish composer, trained in Germany. Of his three known symphonies, the Symphony No. 1 in F Major op.22 was written in 1857. The others date from 1871 and 1881.

Pape (?)
Possibly Ludwig Pape (1809-1855), a German violinist and composer. If so, Dr Krueck was unaware of his death five years before the competition.

Pott, August Friedrich (1806-1883)
A German violinist and composer who wrote an unpublished Symphony in C minor.

Radecke, Robert (1830-1911)
A German composer, Kapellmeister and academic. He wrote a Symphony in F major op.50, published in 1878.

Reber, Henri (1807-1880)
A French composer of operettas and instrumental music. All of his four symphonies (No.1 in D minor, No.2 in C major, No.3 in Emajor and No.4 in G major) appear to have been written and Nos.2-4 published before the early 1850s.

Rubenson, Albert (1826-1901)
A Swedish composer who trained in Germany. His only known symphony was completed in 1851.

Södermann, August  (1832-1876)
A Swedish composer who is not known to have written symphonies..

Täglichsbeck, Thomas (1799-1867)
A German Kapellmeister and violinist, composer of operas and two symphonies: No.1 op.10 in E flat was published in 1836 and no.2 op.48 in E minor was published in 1863..

Tillier (? unknown)

Ulrich, Hugo (1827-1872)
A German composer who wrote three symphonies: No.1 op.6 in B minor (1852), No.2 op.9 in C major Sinfonie Triomphale (which won a prize in 1853) and an unfinished later Symphony in G.

Veit, Wenzel Heinrich (1806-1864)
A Czech composer working in Germany, whose Symphony in E major op.49 was published in 1860.

Walter, August (1821-1896)
His Symphony No.1 in E flat op.9 was published in 1857

Wüerst, Richard (1824-1881)
A Berlin-based German composer who wrote three symphonies: in F op.21 (1850s), in C minor op.38 (published 1862) and in D minor op.54, published in 1869.

Zellner, Julius (1832-1900)
An Austrian composer of two symphonies, in E major op.7 (pub. 1871) and B flat major op.44 (pub.1880s).

Grateful thanks to Alan Howe for his contribution to identifying some of the names on Dr Krueck’s list.
© 1999-2016 Mark Thomas. All rights reserved.