Music and Class Structure in Boston PDF

Music and Class Structure in Antebellum Boston Author(s): Michael Broyles Source: Journal of the American Musicological Society,
Vol. 44, No. 3 (Autumn, 1991), pp. 451-493 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the American Musicological Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/831646 . Accessed: 18/10/2011 08:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of California Press and American Musicological Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Musicological Society.
http://www.jstor.org
Music and Class Structure In Antebellum Boston

BY MICHAEL BROYLES* in American musical culture has been one of the central and at the same time more perplexing aspects of American musical history. This duality has been defined in various ways, and its nature, persistence, and especially its desirability have been debated.' Yet its origins have never been carefully examined. The existence of a duality is not unusual. A high culture-low culture distinction has existed for centuries in Western music. Normally the distinction was political and economic: court music differed from the music of the market place, cathedral music differed from the music of the parish church, and aristocraticopera differed from folk play. By the late nineteenth-century the distinction had become ethical in America, although with political, specifically class, overtones. High culture stood at the apex of a pyramid of cultural types because it was morally pure and edifying, and as a result certain literary and artistic products were viewed with a sacred reverence. Paul DiMaggio described this tendency as the "sacralizationof art," and Lawrence Levine, who later explored its historical background
H E PRESENCE OF A FUNDAMENTAL DUALITY
*Research for this study was undertaken partly with a National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship and partly as a Research Associate at the American Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Massachusetts. I wish to thank both the NEH and the AAS for their support. ' Beyond the ubiquitous but notoriously imprecise terms classical and popular music, the most common current characterization of the duality distinguishes between a "cultivated"and a "vernacular"tradition. H. Wiley Hitchcock, although not the first to use those terms, has provided the most well-known definitions in Music in the United States: A HistoricalIntroduction (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1969), 44. Charles Hamm, Musicin the New World(New York:W. W. Norton, 1983), 171-72, viewed the duality as "a dichotomy between the literate and the nonliterate, between music in written tradition and that in oral tradition. Gilbert Chase, although less specific in his definitions, distinguished a folk tradition and the "genteel tradition" as two of the principal sources of American musical life. See America's Music,from the Pilgrimsto thePresent(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966), xix, 17-18, 164-66. Each of the three writers voices concern about the effects that this duality has had upon American musical developments.
452
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY
more fully, called it the "sacralizationof culture." According to both Levine and DiMaggio the tendency was scarcely in evidence until the second half of the nineteenth century, a dating that I dispute. I believe that it can be found much earlier in the nineteenth century.2 Although the concept of music as a moral force is at least as old as Plato, there is little evidence that music was generally or widely accepted in America other than as entertainment throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This is especially true of secular music. A duality did not exist in secular music because the concept of high culture did not extend to music. Thus the crucial historical issue regarding differentiation between the cultivated and vernacular was the establishment of the premise of the cultivated tradition itself. And since the symphony orchestra more than any other institution came to represent high culture in most American cities, the emergence of the cultivated tradition was closely linked to the acceptance of instrumental music as more than entertainment. The establishment of the cultivated tradition in America occurred in three stages in the early nineteenth century. Each stage of the process involved a shift in the perception of the potential of music, and in each stage important leadership came from Boston. The first and third stages are well-known. In the first, Presbyterian-Congregational hymodic reformers argued the ability of music to create a devotional atmosphere in church. Their argument established the idea that music could enrich, but it was limited to church music. In the third stage, transcendental writers, extolling the virtues of abstract music, applied to instrumental, especially symphonic, music the same religious-oriented rhetoric that the Presbyterian-Congregation reformers had used when describing church music.3
2 Paul DiMaggio, "Cultural Entrepreneurship in Nineteenth-Century Boston: The Creation of an OrganizationalBase for High Culture in America," and "Cultural Entrepreneurship in Nineteenth-century Boston, Part II: the Classification and Framing of American Art," Media, Culture and Society 4 (1982): 33-50, 303-22. Lawrence Levine, Highbrow,Lowbrow:TheEmergence of CulturalHierarchyin America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988). 3 In his 1841 Harvard Musical Association LectureJohn S. Dwight defined sacred music as "elevating, purifying, love and faith-inspiring." Dwight, however, was not referring to church music, for to Dwight "musicis all sacred"(Dwight's italics). Absolute instrumental music represented the highest type of sacred music, because it existed purely on its own terms, uncorrupted by language. Dwight illustrated this point with Beethoven's instrumental music: "Are not, for instance, some of the adagio movements, scatttered through the instrumental works of Beethoven, almost the very essence of prayer?-not formal prayer, I grant, but earnest, deep, unspeakable
MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON
453
What has escaped notice is a second stage, in which members of the upper class sought to use music as a means of creating a republican vision of American society. Although the effort ultimately failed as a political stratagem, the process itself had important historical consequences: it convinced broad segments of the upper class to support public musical activity for the first time, and it represented the first considered attempt to place instrumental music in the center of American cultural life. It also created a set of paradoxes for which the only solution was the subversion of the republican vision. In this study I will concentrate on this second stage, and will argue that the polarization of American music into cultivated and vernacular traditions was a direct outgrowth of the subversion of republican vision. Although I do not wish to suggest that it alone created the polarization, it is an important factor that must be considered in any attempt to explain the presence of a cultural duality in nineteenthcentury America. Furthermore, it was articulated most thoroughly in antebellum Boston, where it was closely associated with class structure.
Until the 1830s the socioeconomic elite were for the most part musically illiterate and thus played only a minor role in the musical life of Boston. What musical proficiency existed in late federal Boston came largely via the singing schools, which were middle class organizations most often connected with a congregational church. In Boston class was stratified along religious lines, with congregational churches being overwhelmingly middle class. The socioeconomic elite were either Unitarian or Episcopalian, mostly the former. Amateur musical performance was considered inappropriate among the upper class. When Samuel A. Eliot, Mayor of Boston from 1837-39 and President of the Boston Academy of Music after 1835, participated in the King's Chapel Choir, he had to suffer the strong disapprovalof his brother-in-law, George Ticknor, and when Eliot brought the choir to his house to rehearse Ticknor found it reprehensible. Secular instrumental music in a concert setting, music to which the upper class would later gravitate, received an indifferent reception in Boston prior to 1840. There were few concerts. From 1809 to 181 I,
aspiration? Is not his music pervaded by such prayer?""Address, Delivered before the Harvard Musical Association, August 25, 1841," TheMusicalMagazine3 (1841): 263-64.
454
for instance, only five public secular concerts, other than outdoor summer offerings, were advertised in the newspapers.4 John Rowe Parker, writing in 1820, not only corroborated the lack of interest in secular concerts, but attributed the cause principally to the public's musical ignorance: Is therenot some reasonto doubtwhetherwe arealiveto refinedmusic. That this doubtis not altogether unfounded, maybe provedby appealing to the successof severalconcertsof Instrumental musicwhich havebeen offered the public; not one of the individualshas been substantially neversucceededwell, in this metropolis, and althoughthereexists other causesof failure,besidethe want of knowledge of music, yet this last is is so sparinglybestowedupon profesclearlythe reasonwhy patronage
sors.5
benefited by the exercise of those talents. .
. Regular concerts have
Between i8oo and 1825 the two most important musical organizations in Boston were the Philoharmonic Society and the Handel and Haydn Society.' Both were amateur performing ensembles, and both, as we will see, suffered from insufficient public support. Beyond that the two were radically different: The Philoharmonic Society was formed for performance of instrumental music. It was an informal gathering of professionals and amateurs and at least in its early days existed mainly for the private reading of orchestral music. The Handel and Haydn Society was formed to further the cause of sacred vocal music. It was formally organized from the start and had as its principal goal the public performance of large vocal compositions.
4The nature of these concerts varied. On 23 September 1809 a Mr. Webster performed an "Entertainment, consisting of Dialogue and Songs-called the Songster's Jubilee." On 27 April I809, Catherine Graupner had a benefit at the Boston Theatre, in which Gottlieb Graupner probably performed. On 26 December I8o0 James Hewitt presented a "Musical Entertainment," which consisted of songs and a glee by "two gentlemen amateurs" and instrumental trios and solo violin pieces. Hewitt gave a similar concert 8 January 1811. On 9 October 181 ii, a Mr. Chambers gave a concert, advertising it as the only opportunity that the Boston public would have to hear him. Chambers had an orchestra led by James Hewitt, which played an Overture by Haydn (probably a movement from a symphony), the Overture to Lodoiska by Kreutzer, and the Andante from the Surprise Symphony of Haydn. Accounts are taken from the Columbian Centinel. 5 Euterpeiad,or Musical Intelligencer.Devoted to the GeneralDifusion of Musical and BellesLettres,20 May i820. Information The Philoharmonic Society was sometimes called the Philharmonic Society, the 6 Philo-Harmonic Society, or the Phil Harmonic Society. The society itself used different spellings on various documents or announcements.
455
In 1837 Francis J. Grund observed that the choir of the Handel and Haydn Society consisted mostly of mechanics.' Writing many years later, John S. Dwight described the membership in the early part of the century as "mechanics, tradesmen, marketmen, etc."8 Both men may have been influenced by their own preconceptions. Grund was from Germany where singing societies frequently were workingclass organizations. Dwight was a native of New England, but his impression of the working class was mostly an idealized one connected with Fourierism and his participation in the Brook Farm experiment in the 1840s. Dwight himself was considered a lofty, dreamy, ethereal individual, not always in touch with the world about him,9 and he moved mostly in Unitarian and literary circles, among the elite; he was, for instance, the only person related to the music profession admitted into the elite Saturday Club. While the Handel and Haydn Society did have some members of the working class in it, it was predominantly a middle class organization in its early years.'o Table I lists those occupations that can be determined of the original members of the Handel and Haydn Society:" According to H. Earle Johnson a blacksmith, housewright, and bricklayer all tried out but were discharged. A shipwright, housewright, and a soapboiler were admitted but soon resigned.'' Johnson listed no source for this information, and it is not known whether he
in Their Moral, Social, and Political Relations 7 Francis J. Grund, The Americans (Boston, 1837; reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1968), 84. 8 John S. Dwight, "The History of Music in Boston," in TheMemorial Historyof Boston,ed. Justin Winsor (Boston: James R. Osgood, 1881), vol. 4, 419. 9 Walter L. Fertig, "John Sullivan Dwight: Transcendentalist and Literary Amateur of Music," Ph.D. diss., University of Maryland, 1952, 73-74, 140. ,o Charles C. Perkins and John S. Dwight, Historyof theHandelandHaydnSociety, Season: of BostonMassachusetts, from the Foundation of the Societythroughits Seventh-fifth A (Boston: 1815-1890 Mudge and Sons, 1883-1898), vol. i, Appendix, pp. 22-96), gives a complete list of members and officers of the Handel and Haydn Society, based upon the Secretary's records of the society. Book One of the secretary's records, from 1815 to 1819, has disappeared, making corroborationimpossible. The other books are now in the Boston Public Library. The Act of Incorporationis published in H. Earle in Boston,i795-1830o(New York, I943; reprint, New York: Johnson, MusicalInterludes AMS Press, i967), 145-46. " The information in Table I is taken from The BostonDirectory(Boston: E. Cotton, i8 6). According to Dorothea Spear no directory was issued in I815; Directories Bibliography of American through 86o (Worcester, MA: American Antiquarian Society, 1961), 48. Johnson, Hallelujah,Amen! The Story of the Handeland Haydn Societyof Boston, "2 introduction by Richard Crawford (Boston, 1965; reprint, New York:Da Capo Press, 1981), 34. Johnson provides a list of occupations of original members that varies somewhat from Table i but in general corroborates it.
456
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY TABLE I
Occupations of the Original Members of the Handel and Haydn Society Occupation Merchant Attorney Bank cashier Clerk Music Schoolmaster Shopkeeper Taior Apothecary Blacksmith Building trades Printer Wharfinger Number 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 I I
had access to the original records no longer extant. Book One of the secretary's records, from 1815 to 1819, has disappeared since Perkins and Dwight wrote their history in the i88os. Furthermore, we know neither when nor why the discharges and resignations occurred. Since the one requirement for membership into the Handel and Haydn Society was a good voice, an inability to read music did not preclude admission. Unanimous approval of the Board of Directors, however, was required. Whatever the official reasons, the general patterns of original membership, new admissions, discharges, and resignations suggest that members of the working class were not especially welcome. Less is known about the membership of the Philoharmonic Society, but the close ties between it and the Handel and Haydn Society suggest a class similarity. The Handel and Haydn Society was conceived at a meeting of the Philoharmonic Society, and the two had many members in common.'3 The two organizations frequently collaborated, with the Philoharmonic Society forming the nucleus of the orchestra for the Handel and Haydn Society concerts. '4
'3 When the Philoharmonic Society was incorporated in 1819, five of the six persons listed as directors were members of the Handel and Haydn Society. '4 The origins of the Philoharmonic Society are not clear. Earlier scholars dated its inception ca. 1809-o; Dwight, "History of Music in Boston," vol. 4; Oscar G. in America (73i-i80oo) (Leipzig, 1907; reprint, New Sonneck, Early Concert-Life York: Da Capo, 1978), 309; Johnson, MusicalInterludes,121. More recent thought places its beginnings between 1797, when Gottlieb Graupner arrived in Boston, and Daniel 1799, when an announcement of a meeting appeared in the Columbian Centinel;
457
At first the Philoharmonic Society was a private group. According to Dwight it was "simply a social meeting," of "Mr. Graupner and his little knot of musical friends, mostly amateurs," who "practiced Haydn's symphonies, etc. for their own enjoyment." Thus it is not surprising that its public profile was low. Until 1818 the Philoharmonic Society did not present any concerts per se under its own name, although it participated in public musical presentations. The society sponsored "rehearsals,"which were open to members, many of whom joined as listeners. The distinction between rehearsals and concerts was thus a subtle one. The society also appeared in benefit concerts for individuals or with the Handel and Haydn Society, sometimes with, sometimes without the Society's presence being acknowledged. Most of the early programs of the Handel and Haydn Society do not mention the orchestra. Its formation varied from year to year, but usually the Handel and Haydn Society negotiated with individual players or a leader like Gottlieb Graupner or Louis Ostinelli, who would provide the orchestra. Since the Philoharmonic Society consisted of most of the instrumentalists in Boston,'s5 that the two orchestras in large measure had the same players does not necessarily imply institutional sponsorship. The Philoharmonic Society sponsored or participated in benefit concerts more openly. On 24 June i815 a Mr. Lefolle announced a concert of vocal and instrumental music in the ColumbianCentinel, including a Mozart overture as well as a sinfonia and a finale by Pleyel played by a full orchestra. The Philoharmonic Society orchestra itself was not mentioned, but the concert was announced for "the Hall in Pond Street, occupied by the Philoharmonic Society." Advanced sales were sufficient that Lefolle decided to give a second concert. This time he advertised that the concert would take place "under the Patronage of the Philoharmonic Society."'6 In 1819 the Philoharmonic Society adopted a more public posture. Prior to that time the only notices about the society in the newspapers, beyond bookkeeping items like reminders of dues or of lost items, were brief announcements of the meetings. But beginning in January 1819 the society published more detailed advertisements of its rehearsals. In that month The Boston Intelligencer and Morning and
Layman, "The Philoharmonic Society: Newcomers and the Nucleus of Boston's Orchestral Tradition," unpublished paper read at the Annual Meeting of the Sonneck Society, Danville, KY, April, 1988. '5 Euterpeiad, 27 October 1821. '6 Columbian Centinel,24 June 1815.
458
Evening Advertiserreported that Pythian Hall, where the Philoharmonic Society held their meetings, had been newly renovated, and that several public concerts would be given.'7 The society began to advertise specific programs in the papers, and members were encouraged to bring their friends to hear them. The opening concert of the season, on 2 January 1819, was listed as follows: Rice'ssecondgrandConcerto,'8 allowedto be the greatestpiecethat has been for the Piano Forte, will be among the perforyet composed mances-Gillineck's Queen of Prussia's Waltz with variations-Several songs-Choruses from Haydn's Creation-Quartette, violin by Mr. Ostinelli-Symphonies, but a full Orchestra,etc.'9 Even though this announcement resembles more nearly an advertisement for a public concert than for a private meeting of a society, the concerts were not open to the public. The same announcement stated that members could bring their friends each Saturday, as the by-laws provided. Membership was by ballot, and members paid an annual fee of ten dollars.20 Most members almost certainly joined to attend the concert as listeners rather than performers, but they still had to join. The report of the BostonIntelligencer about the move into Pythian Hall and the presentation of public concerts also explicitly stated that "admission can only be obtained through the members, as no public sale of Tickets will be allowed."2' Attendance at these events was sufficiently strong that limitations had to be set. On 30 January 1819, the "Standing Committee" of the society published a set of regulations on who could attend. The committee first congratulated the members "on the increase and unprecedented popularity of the Society" and then limited attendance to members and two guests. 2 In 1821 the Philoharmonic Society moved to a large new hall, the Pantheon. The hall was almost always full, even though admission was restricted.23
TheBostonIntelligencer and Morningand EveningAdvertiser,19 January 1919. Probably Ferdinand Ries, Concerto pour le Pianoforte, Op. 42 (Leipzig: A. Kiuhnel, [1812]). '9 Columbian Centinel, 2 January 1819. 2 January 1819. Centinel, 2, Columbian 21 7 TheBostonIntelligencer,19 January, 1819. 22 Columbian Centinel, 30 January 1819. 23 Euterpeiad, 27 October 1821. According to this issue, the Pantheon was 72 by 22 feet, commodious, well-lit, and "suitable to the objects contemplated by the Philoharmonic Society."
'7
'8
MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON
459
In addition to its stepped-up advertising, another indication of the changes in status of the Philoharmonic Society to a more public organizationwas its filing for incorporation, which was granted by the legislature on 19 June 1819. In the act of incorporation Gottlieb Graupner, Thomas Smith Webb, William Coffin, Jr., Matthew S. Parker, John Dodd, and Bryant P. Tilden were named as directors, with Graupner specifically authorized to call the first meeting. The purpose of the society was listed as "extending and enlarging and improving the style of performance of vocal and instrumental music."24 The public success of the Philoharmonic Society was short-lived. The last season for which there is recorded public concert activity was 1825-26. A notice on I January 1825 announced that a concert would take place that evening. On 26 November 1825 the Society announced an intention to present a full complement of concerts for the 1825-26 season. Details were not given, except that they would begin at seven o'clock on concert evenings, traditionally the second and fourth Saturdays, at the Pantheon. Whether the concerts actually occurred is uncertain, but the nature of the announcement does suggest that the 1824-25 season was not terminated prematurely. After 1826 an occasional notice in the newspaper of a meeting confirms that the Philoharmonic Society still existed as a private body. Layman concluded that it may have continued to meet until Graupner's death in
1836.25
According to one of its founders, George Cushing, the Handel and Haydn Society originated in informal discussions at meetings of the Philoharmonic Society, where concern was expressed about the low state of sacred music in Boston.26 From those discussions a public meeting was called of all who were interested in the subject. Choral organizations responded positively, and the Handel and Haydn Society was at first considered a general association of the various church singing societies.27 It had two goals: public performance of
Johnson prints part of the Act of Incorporation;MusicalInterludes,145Layman, "The Philoharmonic Society." 26 George Cushing, letter to Rev. Luther Farnham, December I871, quoted in Perkins and Dwight, Historyof the Handeland Haydn Society, 37. 27 Boston Daily Advertiser,i April 1815. When the Handel and Haydn Society was incorporatedin February I816, the Act of Incorporationsupported the church music function of the society. It stated that the society was established "for the purpose of extending the knowledge and improving the style of performance of Church Music." The Act of Incorporation is quoted in TheLyre I (1825): 141-44, and in Perkins and Dwight, Historyof the Handeland Haydn Society,Appendix, p. i.
24 25
460
MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN
large vocal works and the improvement of church music.'8 A formal constitution had been adopted and signed by forty-four members by the end of April I815, rehearsals began in May, and the first concert was presented on Christmas evening. The chorus numbered approximately one hundred, and the audience almost a thousand. Such attendance, in a city of 38,248, indicates broad public support.'29 It is difficult to know whether the Handel and Haydn Society flourished because the climate in Boston was right for it or because of luck. The New England singing schools and church choirs had created an interest in sacred vocal music and spread some knowledge of singing. The level of activity was higher in Boston than in New York, where a similar Handel and Haydn Society was founded in 1816 but survived for only seven years.3 30Samuel Dyer acknowledged the superior singing ability of the Bostonians in 1825, when he wrote to John R. Parkeron behalf of the Philharmonic Society of New York (not the later Philharmonic) to request that some singers come from Boston to assist in a concert. The concert was to include Beethoven's Handel's Worthy is theLamb,and Haydn's, TheHeavens are "Hallelujah, Telling."3' Dyer admitted that "few New Yorkers are equal to the task"and indicated in the letter that he would include travel expenses for any singers.32 In spite of the warm reception the Handel and Haydn Society of Boston received, it was able to weather some difficult financial times only by good fortune. According to the secretary's minutes, it was in serious financial trouble between 1819 and 1822. At that time it sponsored the publication of Lowell Mason's anthology, The Boston Handel and Haydn SocietyCollection Music.33Lowell Mason of Church was then an obscure bank teller in Savannah, and there was no reason to expect much from the publication. Yet between 1824 and 1831 profits on book sales alone netted the society between $600 and $I oo
Columbian Centinel,29 April 1815. The population estimate is taken fromJesse Chickering, A StatisticalViewof the Populationof Massachusetts, from 1765 to 184o (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, I846), 12. 30 Vera Lawrence describes the New York Handel and Haydn Society in Strong on Music: TheNew YorkMusicScenein the Days of George Templeton Strong, 1836-1875 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), xxxv-xxxvi. 3' Beethoven, "Hallelujah to the Father," from Christ on the Mount of Olives; Handel, "Worthy is the Lamb that was Slain," from Messiah;and Haydn, "The Heavens are Telling," from The Creation. 32 This letter is quoted in Johnson, "The John Rowe ParkerLetters," TheMusical Quarterly62 (1976): 84. 33 Boston: Richardson and Lord, 1822.
28
29
46 I
per year.34 By the late nineteenth century the Handel and Haydn Society had become a venerable organization, connected with high culture, and it is still active today. Without the windfall of Mason's publication it might well have suffered the fate of the Philoharmonic Society. In addition to the Philoharmonic Society and the Handel and Haydn Society several other attempts were made to present serious instrumental music to the Boston public prior to 1830. The Apollo Society was founded in i824, flourished only briefly, and then quietly expired. Beyond advertisements in the newspapers, little is known of it. On 3 November 1824 the society announced that their concerts would take place during the winter season on the second Tuesday of each month at Concert Hall, beginning on 9 November. There is no further mention of the society in the newspapers during that season except for the final concert, which was postponed to Thursday evening because Concert Hall was not available. On 20 May 1825 the Apollo Society gave a benefit concert to augment their musical library. They planned a full i825-26 season, increasing their regular concerts from one to two a month. As with the Philoharmonic Society, however, there is no indication that these actually continued throughout the winter months. The Apollo Society existed into the 1826-27 season, although it sponsored no known concerts. On 25 January i826 the society assisted in a concert of Mr. Willis of Westpoint, who played the "Kent Bugle, Common Trumpet, Double Flageolet, and an instrument of his own invention called the vox humana." On 18 March 1826 they assisted in a concert of vocal and instrumental music by Miss Ayling. The society's final recorded appearance was on 30 December 1826, when they assisted in Mr. Williamson's concert. In the latter two concerts they provided a full orchestra.35
According to the Records of the Society, the precise amounts were: 1824, $601.9o; 1826, $964.28; 1827, $8oo (estimate); 1828, $820; 1829, $i,ooo (estimate); 1830, $i,ooo (estimate); 1831, $1,166.67. The figures are from the Treasurer's annual report at the Board of Directors meeting, and the estimates are those recorded by the Treasurer. 35 Positive identification of Ayling and Williamson is not possible. Williamson may have been David Williamson, a Covent Garden singer who was engaged by the Boston Haymarket Theatre in 1796. In 1825 the same Mr. Williamson appeared as Don Giovanni in the "Burlesque Opera, called Don Giovanni" (Columbian Centinel,27 April i825). Information on David Williamson is from George O. Seilhamen, History of the AmericanTheatre(New York, I888-91; reprint, New York: Benjamin Blom, 1968), vol. 3, 346, 355, 35934
462
Both the Apollo Society and the Philoharmonic Society probably suffered from their mutual rivalry. Their advertisements as well as those of various benefit concerts held during the year suggest that little cooperation existed between members of the two organizations. Gottlieb Graupner continued to head the Philoharmonic Society, as he had done since its inception. James Hewitt, Lewis Ostinelli, Asa Warren, and A. P. Heinrich were involved with the Apollo Society, although it is not clear who, if anyone, directed it. Warren acted as secretary. The May 1825 benefit prominently featured Heinrich and both Mr. and Mrs. Ostinelli, with Hewitt's music store the center of ticket distribution. Graupner's music store did not sell tickets for the Apollo Society, and Hewitt did not do so either for the Philoharmonic Society or for Graupner's benefit. When Heinrich gave a benefit on 19 March 1825, Hewitt played the orchestral accompaniment for a clarinet solo by James Kendall. Graupner is not listed on the program, and apparently Heinrich could not assemble an orchestra. Graupner was able to present an orchestra for his benefit on 30 April 1825, but none of the musicians associated with the Apollo Society appeared on the program. One of the least successful, although historically most revealing attempts to form a concert society in Boston occurred in 1826. On 15 May a group of nine prominent citizens circulated a printed letter to various persons in Boston.36 The circular reported a recent meeting that had been called to consider instituting a "Society for the promotion of a taste for Music and the encouragement of the progress of this Science in this city." According to the circular the objectives of the proposed society were "to promote the cultivation of the Science of Music, to afford means and present encouragement for the exhibition of musical talent, and to advance the growth and diffusion of an taste in this department of the Fine Arts." enlightened Some of the terms in the circular are familiar from the Presbyterian-Congregational reformers. The writers speak of progress, Science (with a capital S), taste, and cultivation. Other words, like enlightened and fine arts, reveal a different bent, suggesting the
36 "Circular" ["Promotionof a Taste for Music" added in pencil] (Boston: Dutton and Wentworth), dated 15 May I826. Two copies are in the Boston Public Library. One is addressed to Walter Channing, and one to Professor [Andrews] Norton. The letter is signed by W. [William] Sullivan, W. [William Hickling] Prescott, J. Josiah] Quincy, J. C. [John Collins] Warren, P. T. [Patrick Tracy] Jackson, N. [Nathen] Appleton, I. [Israel] Thorndike, Jr., H. G. [Harrison Gray] Otis, W. H. [William Havard] Eliot. A handwritten note in Norton's copy of the letter states that William H. Eliot wrote it.
463
practice of art for art's sake. Art is neither tied to a broader propagandistic goal, nor viewed within the service of a specific religious objective. Pleasure and enrichment were ends in themselves. Much of the circular consists of a justification of the formation of such a society. The specific aim was to promote public concerts of music. The signers acknowledged that those to whom it was addressed had never patronized the arts extensively, and that "the present period is particularly unfavorable for the collection of funds for the support of any new Institution."37 They criticized Boston particularly and the country overall for the sorry state of the arts and found that for its population Boston was "singularly deficient in public amusements." The theater in particularlacked quality, largely because the wealthy classes did not support it. More generally the circular acknowledged that a taste for music and the arts was rare in Boston society. This lack of taste, however, was itself a principal argument for such a society. The signers of the circular stressed that a taste for good music, not being innate, had to be cultivated. But they despaired of the difficulty of doing so if models of the finest of the art were not available. Beyond this, they stressed that the cultivation of taste required discipline and training and specifically recommended the introduction of music classes for youth as existed in Germany; they found that these would be not only aesthetically but also morally beneficial. Throughout the circular the signers emphasized the moral and social benefits of art music. Quoting Voltaire, "L'amusementest un des premiers besoins de l'homme," they argued that amusement should be innocent and that "it be not below the dignity of a rational creature." Since amusements will exist in society, one better pay attention to them. They dismissed curtly those who did not: To persons who think public amusementsaltogetherundeservingthe and the interestof those whose exampleis constantlyexercispatronage ing a powerful influence in society, the subscribersdo not addresss themselves. They conceive public amusementsindispensable in large societies, and they think it no triflingserviceto good morals,to aid in which are perfectlyinnocent,which are of a renderingthose attractive natureto polishthe manners,which are not peculiarto any sex or age, and the enjoymentof which leavesno regretbehind. In order to implement this goal, the circular proposed that each member of the society contribute one hundred dollars, which would
37 The Atheneum had opened Boston's first art gallery that same year. Raising funds proved a problem.
464
make him a life-subscriber. It suggested that a minimum of ten thousand dollars would be necessary to fund such a society. In addition to sponsoring concerts, the society would establish a fund for professors of music, who might become associates by entering their names. The professors would be compensated for their services and in the event of their death their families would be entitled to compensation (at a rate that was left unspecified). Both the signers of the circular and the known recipients represented a different class and a different outlook from the founders and supporters of the Handel and Haydn Society. Without exception they were from the socioeconomic elite of Boston: many had ties to Harvard and to Unitarianism; none was a member of the Handel and Haydn Society, and as far as can be determined, none was a supporter of evangelical religion. Nine of the eleven were sufficiently prominent either in their own professions or in politics to be listed in the Dictionaryof AmericanBiography. 38 The signers' attempt to found a society bespeaks a European, aristocratic attitude, since the society essentially would have duplicated the academies prevalent in many European towns and cities in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. In Europe the academies formed a link between the private concerts of the more wealthy eighteenth-century aristocracy and the public concerts of the nineteenth century. While admitting members from both the aristocracy and the upper middle class, the academies did not represent a break with aristocratic tradition. The middle class sought participation as a means of emulating and identifying with the aristocracy, and the academies allowed them to do that in an important and highly visible cultural activity. 39 The signers of the circular were well aware of the European model. They compared the theater in America to that in Europe, where in many countries it was state supported and in London it was patronized by the wealthy. They envisioned their role as that of
38 Allen Johnson, et al, Dictionaryof AmericanBiography,20 vols. (New York, 1928-37; reprint, i i vols., New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1963). Israel Thorndike, Jr., and William H. Eliot are not included in the Dictionary. Israel Thorndike, Sr., made a fortune in the shipping business and served in the state legislature from 1788-1814. His mansion was a social and political center in Boston. William H. Eliot graduated from Harvard College in 1815 and died suddenly in 1829 while running for mayor. 39 For a discussion of the role of the Academy in eighteenth-century Europe see Michael Broyles, "Ensemble Music Moves out of the Private House: Haydn to ed. Joan Peyser (New York: Beethoven," in TheOrchestra: Originsand Transformations, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986), 97-122.
465
patron and themselves as part of a class whose obligation it was to improve the taste of the rest of the community. They disavowed being in any sense musical amateurs, thus disassociating themselves from most other musical groups in Boston. They made it clear that they were patrons, no more nor less: We do not assumethe character of Amateurs in Music,becausewe would do somethingfor its encouragement, any morethanwe claimto be men of Science,when we subscribe to a ScientificLibrary,or shouldpretend in Painting,if we wereto associate to be Connoisseurs for the purposeof forminga Public Gallery.We wish it to be distinctlyunderstood,that our objectis to promotea taste, of whichwe do not professto havemore than othersin the community. There is no record of the outcome of this proposal, which suggests that it failed. As it was, the proposal may have been too ambitious, and the city may not have been ready for it. To raise ten thousand dollars at one hundred dollars per head required one hundred subscribers, and no musical activity in Boston had demonstrated any ability to draw that type of support from those members of the community capable of making such a contribution. The Handel and Haydn Society, for instance, had a membership of between two and three hundred in 1826, and during the I820s drew between a hundred and two hundred outsiders per concert.40 Most members of the Handel and Haydn Society's audience were almost certainly friends of performers. Even if some of the founders intended to contribute more that the suggested one hundred dollars, the project nevertheless demanded relatively broad-based support, and the proposal was aimed at a segment of society that had until then shown little interest in supporting musical activities. Other events in the I82os and 30s confirm this lack of support for secular concert music. In 1827 the Tremont Theater opened, with the largest orchestra that Boston had seen.4' Louis Ostinelli, considered
40 Perkins's chronological membership list of the Handel and Haydn Society reaches no. 311 by the end of 1826. This list is cumulative since 1815, but does not indicate termination of membership (Perkins and Dwight, History of the Handel and Haydn Society,Appendix, pp. 22-28). Given normal drop-outs, it is virtually certain that the membership did not exceed 300. The secretary's Records of the Handel and Haydn Society prior to i8 19 have disappeared since Perkins's research. Attendance at the concerts is determined from the concert receipts reported in the treasurer's records. Members were allowed a certain number of free tickets, that varying from year to year. Concert tickets were sold for one dollar. 4' William Clapp stated that the orchestra consisted of twenty-eight players; A Record of theBostonStage(Boston, 1853; reprint, New York: Greenwood Press, 1969),
466
the premier violinist in Boston, was hired to direct it. He was quickly replaced, however, because his standards were too high. Referring to the change in leadership, an article in the Boston Daily Transcript suggested why this happened: of occasionally We now have the gratification music; hearingintelligible down that comes to the levelof ourunderstanding, andcreates something without any wild and erraticattemptsat astonishpleasantimpressions and the firstthing to ment. The theateris a placeof popular amusement, be remembered is, that he does not play by the leaderof the Orchestra,
to an assembly of musical dilettanti. .
.
less to please the public than to please himself.The consequence was that many praised, whilst few listened to his music. . . . The public requires
his object seemed Ostinelli;he was ambitiousand erredin judgement; somethingfamiliar; somethingnationalin character; somethingexciting; something that all can feel, and in the beauties of which all can participate.42
. That was the great fault with
The anonymous writer of this article was clearly aware of a duality in his musical culture. His definition of that duality, between music for the cognoscenti (the dilettante, or the musician himself), and music for the people, was not that different from conceptualizations of the late nineteenth century, but his attitude was that he disapproved of a musician who was too ambitious, who was more interested in his art than in entertaining the public. He defined popular music as something accessible, something familiar, and dismissed originality as "wild and erratic attempts at astonishment." The idealistic aspect is totally absent: there is no suggestion that music, at least for the theater, should have any moral obligation beyond providing pleasure for the listeners. In another attempt to interest the public in secular music several musicians formed the Musical Professional Society in I831. The most prominent of the founders were Charles Zeuner, George James Webb, and Gottlieb Graupner; Graupner was the first conductor. The Musical Professional Society differed from earlier groups in its purpose. An article in the AmericanTravellerstated that its mission
265. A program of the Handel and Haydn Society for 28 January I829 for the first time listed the orchestra; "Programsof the Handel and Haydn Society," Scrapbook in the Allen A. Brown Collection of the Boston Public Library. The Secretary's records of the society indicate that it contracted to use the Tremont Theatre Orchestra for that concert. Twenty-four players are listed. Several programs in 183I listed the orchestra, and some indicated that it was the Tremont Theatre Orchestra. None of the programs listed more than twenty-four players. 42 Boston Daily Evening Transcript,29 September i830o.
467
was to "diffuse a more general taste for Music of a secular character."43The Musical Professional Society not only explicitly stressed secular music but attempted to give it a new status, viewing it as something more than entertainment. The statement closed with the hope that the society could be a "source of gratificationto the friends of musical improvement." The Society gave its first concert on 27 April I831 and its second and last on I June of the same year. The June concert was to be the first of a series of ten, but there is no record of the others having taken place. Neither is there any record of why they did not; like the Philoharmonic Society and the Apollo Society, public activity simply ceased. The collapse of the Musical Professional Society's concert series may have indicated the failure of their objective but did not signal the end of the society. In a highly symbolic move, it turned to the publication of collections of psalmody, sponsoring Zeuner's AmericanHarp in I832 and issuing The Ancient Lyre the following year.44 Through I832 every attempt to establish secular music of a high quality in Boston on an ongoing basis had failed. The most successful organization that attempted to do so, the Philoharmonic Society, was able to sustain its more public activity for only five years, and even then its concerts were not fully open. In each case the cause of failure seems to have been a lack of interest by the public. Although we know little of what happened to some of these groups, audience support clearly was not forthcoming. The reason Ostinelli was displaced is clear: secular music was still conceived within the framework of entertainment. Music that suggested more, music that challenged, or music that necessitated cultivation, was unacceptable. The public might allow its taste in Psalmody to be improved, but would have none of it in regard to secular music. Beginning in the mid-i83os a fundamental shift in musical attitudes occurred in Boston as the socioeconomic elite began to assume leadership of music. This change is seen most dramatically in the evolution of the Boston Academy of Music. It was founded in 1833 for
43 "Musical Professional Society," AmericanTraveller,22 April I831. 44 Charles Zeuner, arr. and composer, TheAmerican Harp:Beinga Collection of New and OriginalChurch Music, underthe Controlof the MusicalProfessional Societyin Boston (Boston: Hilliard, Gray, and Co., I832); idem, TheAncientLyre, a Collection of Old, New and OriginalChurch MusicalSocietyin Music, undertheApprobation of theProfessional Boston(Boston: Crocker and Brewster, 1833).
468
the furtherance of urban, evangelical, sacred music,45 but by the early I84os it had become the principal purveyor of instrumental music. It had virtually dissolved its chorus, and its orchestra, consisting primarily of professionals, was recognized as the best in the city. The Boston Academy Orchestra introduced much of the classical literature, including the Beethoven symphonies, to local audiences. It was the first symphony orchestra in Boston to receive public acceptance, itself evidence of an important shift in musical taste. The change at the Boston Academy occurred in I835, the year that Samuel Atkins Eliot replacedJacob Abbott as president. Eliot had an entirely different background and outlook from most members of the Academy. The son of a wealthy Boston merchant, he graduated from Harvard College in 1817 and Harvard Divinity School in 1820, but declined ordination. His father's death in I820 left him a considerable fortune, and he lived in Europe from 1823 to 1826. His marriage to Mary Lyman, the daughter of another wealthy merchant, in 1826, further increased his wealth. He was related by blood or marriage to many prominent families in Boston. Though Eliot lived in the social insularity of Beacon Hill, he was one of the few members of the socioeconomic elite interested in music.46 A Unitarian, he was active in the West Church Choir. Eliot held several important political positions during his lifetime. He was on the Massachusetts General Court and served as an alderman when his brother-in-law Theodore Lyman was mayor. He was a member of the Boston School Committee in the early 183os. He was elected Mayor of Boston for three consecutive terms, 1837-39. He served as Treasurer of Harvard from 1842-53 and as President of the Prison Discipline Society. He served briefly in Congress, in I850-51, declining reelection. Daniel Webster described him as "the impersonation of Boston; ever-intelligent, ever-patriotic, ever-glorious Boston."47 In 1846 Eliot's net worth was listed at $3oo,ooo, an
45
First AnnualReport of theBoston Academy of Music(Boston: Isaac R. Butts, 1833),
E. Guild stresses the social homogeneity and conformity of Beacon Hill 46 Mary life and her father's interest in music; "Samuel Atkins and Mary Eliot: A Memory Sketch by Their Oldest Daughter," Samuel Atkins Eliot Papers, Harvard University Archives: 4-7, 27. 47 The quotation is from Dictionaryof American Biography,vol. 6, 81-82. Other material is from the Dictionaryand Walter Graeme Eliot, A Sketch of the Eliot Family (New York: Press of Livingston Middleditch, 1887), 50-51.
7.
469
exceptionally large sum for the time.48 We do not know precisely how Eliot came to be elected President of the Boston Academy, but the immediate effects suggest why he desired the position. Eliot brought with him a new agenda for the Academy and wasted no time in implementing it: in his first year he hired J. A. Keller as instrumental professor, formed an orchestra through an alliance with the Amateur Society, who supplied the instrumentalists, and sought to have a larger organ installed. In the second year he hired Henry Schmidt as "Leaderof the Orchestra."49 In 1835, Eliot's first year, the Academy renovated the defunct Federal Street Theater into a concert hall, the Odeon. Such a project required money, specifically $4,000, according to an account book of subscribers.50 $2, 3oo were raised by contributions of $ Ioo each, two of which were from businesses, and another $565 by smaller contributions ranging from $Io to $50. It is not clear where the remaining money came from. The Odeon project succeeded because it was backed by the socioeconomic elite. Fifteen of the twenty-three hundred-dollar subscribers to the Odeon project were listed on the tax records of I847, which were published. Table 2 indicates their net worth.5' At a time when $ioo,ooo was considered a significant fortune, this list represents an extraordinaryconcentration of wealth. By way of comparison I have included three of the wealthiest musicians in Boston, Lowell Mason, George J. Webb, and Shadrach Pearce, a bassoonist. Eliot had entree to the socio-economic elite community in a way that no other member of the Academy did. The elite class had not previously supported either the Boston Academy of Music or the Handel and Haydn Society. Only a single hundred-dollar subscriber other than Eliot, Charles Stoddard, was a member of the Boston
48
"OurFirst Men:"A Calendar a List of of Wealth,Fashionand Gentility;Containing ThosePersonsTaxedin the City of Boston, CrediblyReported to be Worth One Hundred Thousand Notices Dollars,with Biographical (Boston: D. H. Ela and of thePrincipalPersons Co., I846), 21. 49 Schmidt, who came to the United States in 1836, had been highly recommended by J. A. Keller, who probably heard him in New York; letter to J. A. Keller from Samuel A. Eliot, 14 July, 1836, in "Letterbook, 1825-1842," Eliot Papers. 50 "Academy of Musick and Boston Theater," small manuscript booklet in the Allen A. Brown Collection of the Boston Public Library. 5' One of the names on the treasurer'slist is illegible. The information for Table 2 is taken from List of Persons, and Corporations who were Taxed Copartnerships, the Twenty-FiveDollarsand Upward, in the City of Boston, in the Year 1847, Specifying Amountof the Tax andRealandPersonal to an Order Estate,conformably of theCity Council. City Document No. 12 (Boston: Jh. H. Eastburn, 1848).
470
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY TABLE 2
Net Worth of Hundred-dollar Donors to the Boston Academy of Music Measured in 1847 REAL ESTATE [VALUE] $ 93,000
176,000 I53,000
62,000
DONORS Appleton, Nathan Appleton, Samuel

Appleton, William
PERSONAL ESTATE [VALUE]

$275,000
225,000
Eliot, Samuel
200,000 i00,000
Jackson, Patrick T.
Lawrence, Abbott Lawrence, Amos
Fiske, Benjamin
64,600
21,000
599,400
189,500
Lawrence, Stone & Slade Parker, Johanthan Shattuck, George C. Stoddard, Charles Tappan, John Warren, John C. Waterston & Pray Williams, John D. MUSICIANS Mason, Lowell Pearce, Shadrach S. Webb, George J.
20,000 250,000 129,000
35,000
162,200 10o,ooo 109,000 128,900
96,000 663,800 16,ooo 3,600 4,000
75,000 8,000 175,000 o,ooo 60,ooo 18o,ooo 75,000

100,000
25,000
2,000 i,500
Academy of Music, and not one was ever a member of the Handel and Haydn Society. In contrast, nine members of the Boston Academy of Music were members of the Handel and Haydn Society.52 The Handel and Haydn Society had enrolled 369 members by i835, which in a town of 75,000 not noted for its interest in music, represented a relatively significant percentage of the musically-oriented population. The list of subscribers of the Odeon project also provides a further clue to why Eliot became interested in the Academy. Three of the twenty-one individual subscribers of the Odeon project were signers of the 1826 circular. Two others (Eliot and Samuel Appleton) were immediate family members of the signers, and Eliot's brother had written the circular. Eliot may have considered the Academy a way to accomplish the goals of the circular, for in retrospect it became a blueprint for Eliot's tenure as President of the Boston Academy of Music. The Academy became a concert institution, and emphasis
52 Members of both Handel and Haydn Society and the Boston Academy in 1835 were Joseph Brown, Abel W. Bruce, Jonas Chickering, L. S. Cragen, Bela Hunting, Lowell Mason, George Pollock, George James Webb, and Increase S. Withington.
47 I
shifted to secular instrumental music. The moral aims of the circular were upheld, the educational goals of the circular were fulfilled, and even the role of the subscribers, that of benefactors with no interest in music making even as amateurs, was maintained. The Boston Academy of Music became a practical realization of the Boston upper class view of musical activity. Both the 1826 circular and the Boston Academy of Music embraced one principle that the Unitarian socioeconomic elite and middle-class evangelicals held in common: a recognition of the value of education. The educational focus of the Academy had probably attracted Eliot to it originally. Eliot had been an active supporter of education since the early I83os, when he served as Chairman of the Boston School Committee. From his position there and later as Mayor, as well as during his tenure as President of the Boston Academy of Music, he probably had as much to do with music being adopted in the public schools as Lowell Mason did. The papers of the Boston Academy trace the resulting change in emphasis in some detail. Each annual report of the Academy begins with a lengthy statement both summarizing the previous year and explaining the purpose and goals for the forthcoming one. From 1835 on, these reports were written by Eliot. Before 1835 they stressed the sacred music mission of the Academy, but beginning in 1835, Eliot gradually but inexorably disassociated the Academy from sacred music, until in 1838 he could virtually ignore it.53 By 1845 he was attempting to rewrite history: The end and objectof our corporate beingwas to spreadthe knowledge andthe loveof musicas fastandas farwe could. It was not limitedto any particular department,nor by any thing but the boundsof the science and the art themselves.54
I have briefly summarized a series of complex developments and maneuvering at the Boston Academy of Music in order to present a
53 In the Sixth Annual Report (Boston: Perkins, Marvin, and of the BostonAcademy Co., I838) Eliot discussed the educational mission of the Academy. He observed that the Academy had "more just and noble views" than to amuse, principally to build a taste for public exhibitions, which "must be the slow growth of years." Nowhere did he refer to church music. 54 Report of the Government of theBostonAcademy of Music for the Years1845 and 1846 (Boston: T.R. Marvin, 1846), 4.
472
more fundamental question: what was Eliot attempting to accomplish through his efforts at the Academy, and what effect did his activities have upon the evolution of American musical attitudes? Eliot was not only a successful organizer and leader, but also an important propagandist for a specific vision of music in American Life. In the 183os and 4os Eliot wrote extensively about music. His publications include his lengthy essays in the annual reports of the Boston Academy, his lecture given at the Boston Academy in I835,55 and two lengthy articles that he wrote for the NorthAmerican Review. This material has never been examined as a unit, possibly because all of the writings were anonymous, although the authorship of most has been known. Eliot has been virtually ignored as an intellectual force in American music. Two of Eliot's most important statements appeared anonymously in The North American Review. His personal papers confirm his Reviewarticles,s"as they contain authorship of the two NorthAmerican handwritten manuscripts of each of the articles. There are some minor differences in wording and they show sufficient evidence of revision to make it reasonably certain Eliot had not simply copied them from the Review. Furthermore, a short biographical statement that accompanied the gift of the papers to Harvard states that Eliot wrote them. The first article appearedin July 1836, as a review of the first three annual reports of the Boston Academy of Music.57 In it Eliot dealt with the question of cultivation and taste. He placed himself squarely within the cultivated tradition, arguing that music must be cultivated and that its cultivation was just beginning to occur in this country: The taste of the public, too, cannot be forced; but must be carried andeasilyalongto the highestbranches of the art, or it will fall gradually back again to the rude and unformed state from which it is just emerging.58 Eliot advanced two principal theses in this article. The first was that musical taste is universal, not culturally bound:
the BostonAcademy 55 Samuel A Eliot, Address before of Musicon the Openingof the Odeon,August 5, 1835 (Boston: Perkins, Marvin, and Co., 1835). 56 Samuel Atkins Eliot Papers, Harvard University Archives. 57 i"I. First Annual Report of the Boston Academy of Music. 1833 .. . 2. Second Annual Report. 1834 ... 3. Third Annual Report. 1835 .. ." NorthAmerican Review 43 (1836): 53-85. 58 Eliot, "First Annual Report, Boston Academy," 53.
473
It is a mistaketo supposethat there is a particular style of music which is adapted to a particularperiod of the world. Music is a universal andwhatis ablepowerfully to affectone generation of men will language, not fail to affectanother.... Palestrina had the meritand the glory of pointingout the truepathin which musicshouldwalk,the truemode in which she mustproducehereffects;andfromhis day to the presentthere has been but one schoolof good music. Divided and subdividedas the schoolshave nominallybeen, correcttasteis one and indivisible; and all must be conductedby herguidance,or they ceaseto be schoolsof music, and degenerate into academies of uproar.59 In order to demonstrate that the practice of music is universal, Eliot set out to trace its history. After several lengthy observations regarding ancient and medieval music, he arrived at Palestrina, whom he called the founder of the modern school of good taste. Eliot was fervent on this point: he considered Palestrina "the best composer, not only of his own, but of all preceding time. . . . He must continue to be regarded as the successful reformer of a barbarous era, and the father and founder of a better school, which, from that day to this, has been considered as the school of true taste."6o Eliot's second principal point was that taste is progressive. He saw musical taste increasing at an accelerating rate since Palestrina, and acknowledged that since each age has greater resources than the previous one, "succeeding times will go on improving."6' Like many of his time, the concept of progress was fundamental to his theories. Eliot thought that musical progress reached a pinnacle with Handel, Haydn, and Mozart. He discussed each composer at some "one of the best length, in laudatory terms. He called Handel's Messiah musical productions extant . . . [belonging] to the highest class of With Haydn and Mozart, Eliot abandoned himself compositions.'"62 to effusions of unrestrainedpraise. The adjectives and phrases pile up: sublime, extraordinary, incredible, delightful, astonishing, pure, refined, boundless genius, vivid pictures, solemn grace, dignity of expression. He used these terms to describe Haydn alone, for in his eyes Mozart surpassed the capabilities of language itself. Admitting that the moderation necessary to give weight to language makes it difficult to speak of Mozart, Eliot nevertheless tried. Mozart beguiles, enchants, captivates, excites. His works display wonderful beauty, sweetness, inexpressible charm, sublimity, noble harmony, grace and
59 6o
6,
62
Eliot, Eliot, Eliot, Eliot,
"First Annual Report, Boston Academy," "First Annual Report, Boston Academy," "First Annual Report, Boston Academy," "First Annual Report, Boston Academy,"
75. 75. 76-78. 79.
474
delicacy. His genius was such that "one almost despairs of either doing justice to his memory, or making others sensible of his preeminent power." Finally Eliot asserted that Mozart's compositions "form a striking climax to the musical history of the last century." Mozart combined all of the best qualities of both Handel and Haydn, so that, "The force of naturecould no furthergo; To makea third, she joinedthe other two."63 After such paeans, one anticipates with fascination and trepidation how Eliot would describe Beethoven. He is mentioned only once, in a paragraph about Rossini, in one-third of one sentence that also included an appraisal of both Rossini and Weber: "Beethoven has shown us a wonderful scientific skill, and a dark imagination, lightened occasionally by a soft half which shines the brighter by contrast.'64 Eliot clearly had a Pantheon or canon of composers, into which Palestrina, Handel, Haydn, and Mozart had been admitted. Beethoven was yet outside, somewhere below Rossini and on a par with Weber. Eliot was not pleased with the state of music in America, which to him had no history and "scarcely an existence here," America having no instrumental composers and only a few who compose songs and anthems. Eliot found the future hopeful, however. The country was young and vigorous and rapidly increasing in wealth. Recent developments in particular boded well: the change in style in church music was a beginning; the formation of the Boston Handel and Haydn Society was "the dawn of the spirit of improvement"; the establishment of the Boston Academy was further proof of a greater interest in music. In closing Eliot looked at Germany. How was it possible, he asked, that five of the six composers that he mentioned near the end of the article (Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Weber, and Rossini) were German? (Eliot did not distinguish between German and Austrian composers.) How could a nation "with a language almost as unmusical as ours" have produced so many great musicians? The answer lay in education. Germany universally taught the rudiments of music to children. The equivalent in this country would be "the most important means of eliciting the now dormant taste and
63 64
Eliot, "First Annual Report, Boston Academy," 81-83. Eliot, "First Annual Report, Boston Academy," 83.
475
talent of our country." Eliot thus reiterated precisely one of the principal themes of the 1826 circular. In his second article in the North AmericanReview65the political aspect was more focused. Eliot wrote of revolution. He began by claiming that "a great revolution in the musical character of the American people has begun, and is, we trust, to go forward, like other revolutions, till its ultimate object be attained." Later he claimed that the Boston Academy of music was one of the causes of the revolution. Eliot was overtly Platonic in this article. To him music was universal, affecting everyone, a powerful instrument when so put to use. He quoted Plato as follows: "Let me make the people's ballads, and I care not who makes their laws." To prove his point, Eliot cited three modern examples: the French Revolution, in which popular airs provided an additional impetus; the national anthem "God Save the King," whose positive effect had helped save the English monarchy, and the most recent American election, won by William Henry Harrison over Martin van Buren. Eliot was probably referring to the song "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too," but he unfortunately offered no further specifics on any of the three.66 To Eliot the effects of music were deeper than a temporary arousal of passions. Music has a "permanent effect . . . upon the national character." Eliot argued that music, more than any other activity, addressed man's whole nature, his physical, intellectual, and moral aspects. To substantiate his claim Eliot listed the positive effects of music, many of which echo the 1837 report of the Boston School Committee that recommended the insertion of music into the public
schools.67
65 "i.
Musical Magazine, conducted by H. T. Hach. . ." North American Review 52 (I 841): 320-38.
Opening of the Odeon .. .3. Report to the School Commitee of Boston .. .4. The
Annual Reports of the Boston Academy of Music
... 2. Address on the
66 Eliot, "Annual The song was written by AlexReports, Address," 320-22. ander Coffman Ross, a jeweler from Zanesville, Ohio, who set it to the tune "Little Pig's Tail." According to Vera Browdsky Lawrence, it "becamethe theme song of the most singing campaign in American history"; Musicfor Patriots, Politicians, and Presidents: Harmonies and Discords of the First HundredYears(New York: MacMillan,
1975), 269.
67 Music soothes the ferocity in humans and excites "kind and gentle feelings" without weakening "strength or character." It promotes social interaction. It encourages precise thinking. It teaches discipline and the necessity of order and authority. Its study through singing enhances elocutionary abilities and promotes physical well being through the exercise of the lungs. The Committee Report was published in the
476
Eliot straddled the position between an elitist and a populist. He did not deny that music provides pleasure, and he admitted that it may do so at all levels of musical sophistication. Eliot recognized that those who prefer the songs of Henry Russell to those of John Braham, or Billings's anthems to Mozart's Requiem equally share the pleasures of music. He further realized that music other than the most cultivated could not only give pleasure and arouse passion, but could also be a potent cultural force. Eliot believed that music could be spread throughout the population, and the importance he attached to music in the public schools reflects his populist views about universal musical education. He believed that music should be "the property of the whole people" and that with this development "the taste of all will likewise be cultivated."68 He was not ready to abandon the pantheon, however. He still believed in taste, progress, cultivation, and a musical hierarchy. He justified his position by observing that children may enjoy the pleasures of music every step along the way, but as they become more cultivated they prefer more sophisticated music. Eliot did not want to exclude the people. He still shared the early republican dream of a unified society. He believed that the young people would "mould the character of this democracy," and that musical education, with its focus on song, could be a potent tool to effect that end. Eliot, however, wanted to bring the people to his level: rather than broadening his concept of taste to include music favored by other segments of society, he wished to change the taste of others to conform to his. He persisted in the notion that some types of music were superior to others, as well as in the firm belief that through proper exposure and cultivation the population at large would arrive at the same musical preferences as Eliot and others of the cultivated class. Whatever the value of fireside melody, music remained to Eliot fundamentally "abstract," "one of the fine arts," and "the great handmaiden of civilization."69 Although Eliot's democratizing views and his elitism seem contradictory, they were entirely consistent within the framework of early federal political views held by some members of the upper classes.
BostonMusicalGazette,28 November and 26 December i838. It is reprinted in Carol Pemberton, "Lowell Mason: His Life and Work" (Ph.D. diss., University of Minnesota, i97 ), 517-2468 Eliot is quoting T. Kemper Davis, one of the three members of the subcommittee of the Boston School Committee that presented the report recommending the adoption of music in the public schools. Pemberton, "Lowell Mason," 1 i4. 69 Eliot, "Annual Reports, Address," 337.
477
Though these views formed the basis for Whig republicanism, which survived in various forms well into the i840s, they were conservative, almost anachronisticfor the nineteenth century, reflecting the thought of the colonial aristocracy more than the newer socioeconomic elite. Writers in the early nineteenth century distinguished between those two class groups among the wealthy, and the distinction is important for understanding Eliot. In 1823 Adam Hodgson identified one class that consisted of the old Revolutionary War heroes, "who hold a sort of patent of nobility, undisputed by the bitterest enemies to aristocracy." Many of this class were educated in England and resembled the English gentleman "of the old school." This class was very limited and about to die out. The second class included the leading politicians, the wealthier merchants, the more prominent lawyers, and generally the more respectable members of the professions.7' Tocqueville recognized that the older aristocracy had been swept away by the industrial revolution, and when he met Charles Carroll, the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence, he realized Carrollrepresented an almost extinct type. Tocqueville considered him "the exact counterpart of the European gentleman."'' The socioeconomic elite of the nineteenth century differed from the colonial aristocracy in one profound way: many members of the colonial aristocracy believed deeply in republican values; many members of the socioeconomic elite did not. The theoretical basis of early federal republicanism was an egalitarian society, at least in terms of opportunity. Artificial, as opposed to natural, distinctions between individuals were to be opposed, and talent alone would determine one's position in the social hierarchy. Equality of opportunity meant a relatively homogeneous society, and though few, if any, wished to abolish the existence of a social hierarchy, a flagrantdisplay of wealth or social pretension was regarded as incompatible with republican principles. 72 The organic model, which had transformed the conceptualization of both art and science in the eighteenth century, was applied to the
70 Adam Hodgson, Remarks During a Journey Through North Americain the Years 8t19, 182o and 1821 (New York, 1823; reprint, Westport, CT: Negro Universities Press, I970), 82-84. 7' Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America,trans. Henry Reeve, ed. John T. Morgan and John J. Ingalls (New York: Colonial Press, 1899), vol. 2, 238. Stow Persons discusses the significance of Tocqueville's comments about Carroll in The Declineof Gentility(New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1973), 20. 72 Gordon S. Wood, TheCreation theAmerican of Republic, 1776-1787 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969), 70-73-
478
body politic as well. As an organism all members of the community were linked to each other, the actions of one affecting all others. The state was "one moral whole," in which individual interests would yield to the public good. Under such circumstances a homogeneous society was the inevitable outcome. Hierarchy would exist, but a commonalty of social purpose would insure rule by the public. For the colonial gentry this meant government by consensus. Those at the top of the hierarchy were best able to govern, as their position in the hierarchy validated, and they expected the rest of society to agree.73 The Republican ideal was purely an ideal. Already by 1776 republicanism "possessed a decidedly reactionary tone," and many members of the colonial gentry were beginning to have doubts that the majority were "the safest Guardians both of public Good and private rights."74By the early nineteenth century the colonial hierarchy was in disarray, as American society, itself, had changed. The new socioeconomic elite were politically antidemocratic, socially insular, and at times pretentious about their wealth. When Harriet Martineau traveled to the United States in 1834-35 she pointedly distinguished the "real aristocracy of the country" from the socioeconomic elite. The real or natural aristocracy could as easily be found "in fishing-boats, in stores, in colleges chambers, and behind the plough," as in "ball-rooms and bank-parlours."The socioeconomic elite were only vulgar. She found their ostentation and affectation odious. Her greatest contempt was reserved for their anti-democratic attitudes and aristocratic pretensions. In her visit to Boston she even heard some members of the elite class openly advocate a monarchy. It is not surprising that she called Boston "as aristocratic, vain, and vulgar a city . . . as anywhere in the world."75 Eliot's efforts at the Boston Academy represent the last response of a dying social order. Eliot was motivated throughout his career by early Federal Whig republicanism, and even though he worked closely with Lowell Mason his goals were quite different. Eliot saw his musical revolution as an effort to extend the gentry consensus by bringing the masses into the fold of the eighteenth-century hierarchy through a common shared culture. He believed equally strongly in
73 Wood, The Creation of the American Republic,59, 53. 74James Madison, quoted in Wood, The Creationof the American 410. Republic, 75 Harriet Martineau, Societyin America, ed. Seymour Martin Lipset (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1962), 260. Thomas Hamilton also noted the aristocratic leanings of members of the older wealthier families of Boston in Men and Mannersin America(Edinburgh, I833; reprint, 2 vols. in i, New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1968), vol. I, 249-
MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON
479
progress, education, and the preference of the many for cultivated music once given the opportunity, as in a shared social hierarchy of which orchestral music provided a prime metaphor. If there was any doubt that Eliot maintained the Whig ideal of a unified society, and that he related this social goal to music, he dispelled them in I86o in an article for Dwight'sJournal of Music entitled "Music and Politics."76At the time Eliot was sixty-two years old and had not been active in musical organizations since the Boston Academy of Music folded in I847. Eliot drew several parallels between musical and political activity, the most important being that each person had a specific part to play and must be willing to play his assigned part. Not everyone could be a leader, and individual flights of fancy must be subordinated to the needs of the overall ensemble: Music is the only art which, requiring the concertedactionof numbers, in different can and enforce thatprinciple of orderand spheres, exemplify subordination of one thing to another, and of one man to another, withoutwhich harmony,whetherin musicor politics,cannotexist. It is a lesson not unimportant, surely, to young Americato learn,that there are rules which must be obeyed. In regard to how an individual determined his part Eliot's views had changed little since his days at the Boston Academy, when he conceptualized an institution in which the elite, rather than the musicians involved, made decisions: "every man must be willing to take the place for which nature has fitted him, and for which others, rather than he himself, think him qualified." Eliot not only envisaged an ideal order in which every man had his place, but one in which every man would, in the interest of good harmony, accept the place assigned. Who determined the places was to Eliot almost self-evident: those few chosen leaders, who acted in the interest of the common good. If every man was content to play his assigned part, this would create no problem, but for a man not to accept his role in the hierarchy was to Eliot an egregious blunder: "the fate of him who neglects the part and the place in life for which he is fitted, for one to which he is not adapted, is failure complete and irreparable."77 In his discussion of changes in American society by I840 Robert Wiebe distinguished two directions. The more radical one led to the
76 Dwight'sJournal of Music 18 (i86o): 344-46. The article is signed "E.," but Eliot's papers indicate that he wrote it. 77 Eliot, "Music and Politics," 345.
480
revolution in choices and a more individualist society. This direction appealed to the middle class and significantly affected the nature of American evangelicalism. Lowell Mason belonged to that movement. In his efforts on behalf of music education, Mason had been motivated by the pressing religious needs brought about by the newly emergent society. Mason was an evangelical, and to him music had a moral purpose that transcended the artistic.78Concurrently a more conservative track sought to maintain the hierarchy by extending its privileges to deserving citizens.79 Social stability was to be coupled with expanding opportunity. The traditionalists still believed that the integrity of the union required a homogeneous society held together with similar cultural institutions. Eliot belonged to those traditionalists. Eliot was nearly unique among the descendents of the colonial gentry in that he recognized the potential of music to do more than entertain. Few of his peers were even interested in the art, and those that were saw it as little more than a frill. Even Jefferson, who admitted that music was "the favorite passion of my soul," considered it essentially an "enjoyment." Only the Presbyterian-Congregational reformers had earlier grasped the significance of the power of music. They had backed into that: if the wrong kind of music could wipe out the minister's most solemn efforts to create the proper atmosphere at a church service, the right kind could also enhance that atmosphere. Their concerns were thus more religious than aesthetic. Eliot considered the symphony orchestra the cornerstone of the musical pantheon he wished to build. As we noted earlier he began laying plans for the establishment of an orchestra almost from the moment of his installation as President of the Boston Academy, and by I838 he could announce publicly its formation. Yet Eliot chose his vehicle badly, for of all institutions the symphony orchestra appeared most incompatible with the democratic impulses of the age. This point was not lost on early devotees of the medium, who saw in it a troubling conundrum. In I84o an anonymous article that began as a review of Stendhal's Life of Haydn but consisted mostly of a discussion of national music
7" Lowell Mason to his son William, i2 April 1845, "Lowell Mason Papers, MSS 33,"John Herick Jackson Music Library at Yale University. He and William differed sharply on this point: William Mason, Memories of a MusicalLife (New York, 9o01; reprint, New York: Da Capo Press, 1970), io and 25. 79 Robert Wiebe, The Opening of American Society From the Adoption of the Constitution to the Eve of Disunion(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984), 129.
48 I
appeared in the NorthAmerican Review.8o It was partially reprinted in the The Musical Magazine under the title "Prospects for a National Music in America."8' A handwritten note in one copy of the North American Review attributes the article to Henry R. Cleveland.8, Cleveland was a graduate of Harvard, an attorney, a respected organist, a writer and translator in several fields, and well-known enough for his musical interests that he was asked to give the 1840 lecture before the Harvard Musical Association. He had published a lengthy article on music in New England Magazinein 1835 and a review of Gardiner's Music of Nature in New YorkReview in 1837.83 He was known to the North American Revieweditor, who the year before had a review of Cleveland's translation of Sallust'sHistoriesof the printed Conspiracy of Catilineand theJugurthineWar.84 We cannot be certain, but Cleveland was probably the author of the I84O North American Review article. After admitting that America had no national music, because "we have nothing like national taste," Cleveland then considered the possibility of a national music arising in America. And herein lay the dilemma: any national music arising in America must be congruent with the democratic spirit of the country. It may seem a strangeassertion,that an art, which has ever been reared and fostered by wealth and aristocracy,can find a genial soil in this republic.Music, it will be said, is peculiarlyat war with the spirit of on the earththan the democracy.There is not a moreabsolutemonarch leader of an orchestra.The moment his divine right is disputed, the empire falls to destruction.For musicians,in the practiceof their art, therecan be none but an absoluteautocracy,a pure despotism.8s In addition, Cleveland observed, an orchestra is an expensive pursuit, better suited to aristocratic state support than the public citizens in a democracy. Music, "to become national, must be received
"The Life of Haydn, in a Series of Letters written at Vienna; followed by the Life of Mozart, with Observations on Metastasio, and on the Present State of Music in France and Italy. Translated from the French of L. A. C. Bombet, with Notes by William Gardiner. . ." North American Review 50 (1840): 1-19. 8' MusicalMagazine2 (1840): 17-22. 82 Copy at Cornell University. I wish to thank William Austin for pointing this out to me. 83 "The Origin and Progress of Music," New EnglandMagazine9 (1835): 58-65, Io6-17; "GardinerMusic of Nature (Boston:J. H. Wilkins and R. B. Carter, 1837)," New YorkReview 3 (1837): 157-97. 84 North American Review, April, 1839. 85 Cleveland, "Life of Haydn," 14.
8o
482
by the people at large." For this reason Cleveland dismissed opera, which to Cleveland appealed to the wealthy class and could not be sustained by the wealthy even in New York. Yet Cleveland could not admit that national music could come from a simpler, more popular oriented, folk-related style. He was concerned that music in America would only gratify "a vulgar and depraved taste," a phrase that could have easily come from a Psalmodic reformer. His solution was to elevate the taste of the people: "Music must be made popular, not by debasing the art, but by elevating the people."86 It is thus not surprising that Cleveland strongly supported the efforts of the Boston Academy of Music. He articulated with considerable precision the republican point of view: "The efforts of the Academy are calculated in the best possible manner to prepare the way for national music among us. Its object is to render music popular; to plant the art among the people; to make it a universal resource for elegant enjoyment." Cleveland also shared Eliot's belief in the importance of educating children in music.87 Cleveland was not alone in his awareness of the problem that an orchestra posed. Theodore Hach, in his MusicalMagazine, confessed that music was still in its infancy in America, and that "ourrepublican spirit, which revolts at any kind of personal restraint, can but ill brook the necessary discipline which the practice of the art requires of us.""88 Neither Cleveland nor Hach, however, provided specific recommendations as to the resolution of the paradox. The same point about the paradoxof a democratic society and elite musical institutions was echoed in another magazine, The Musical Cabinet,which was edited by George J. Webb and T. B. Haywood. Webb was probably the most versatile musician in Boston in the I830os and 40s. Identified primarily with psalmody in the I83os, as an organist, compiler of sacred anthologies, and professor at the Boston Academy, he made the transition to symphonic music in the I84os, becoming the conductor of the Musical Fund Society orchestra. Even earlier, however, Webb had not limited his activities to sacred music: he was one of the founders of the Musical Professional Society in 1832. Little is known of T. B. Haywood, except that he was associated with Hach in editing the MusicalMagazineand had lectured at the Handel and Haydn Society on "The Musical Profession."
86 87
88
Cleveland, "Life of Haydn," 14-16. Cleveland, "Life of Haydn," 17-18. MusicalMagazine2 (I840): 365-66.
483
TheMusical Cabinetpublished an expanded version of Haywood's lectures, which were delivered before the Teachers' Class of the Boston Handel and Haydn Society in August 1841.89 In it Haywood conceded that the visual arts belong to the elite: "Painting and sculpture are expensive in their individual encouragement."Haywood sought to stake out music, however, for the "middling class." He considered music to be preeminently social, and, in a country where the middle class comprise the bulk of the population, urged that it must have that middle class support. Haywood opposed elitist institutions that do not cater to the people: Her [music's] appeal,therefore,is to the people;not to the rich, nor to institutionsgot up and endowedwith the aristocracy of wealth. If such institutionsariseat all, they can only flourishin proportion as they are the people'sinstitutions,in the samemanner as ourcommongovernment is the people'sgovernment.90 Haywood's class structure varied considerably from Eliot's and Cleveland's. He identified the upper class with aristocracy and the middle class with the people. At the same time he clearly distinguished a middle class from other classes. Like Hach and Cleveland, however, Haywood had no program to secure the class support he believe necessary. Although Cleveland articulated most directly the paradox of democratic music and authoritarianmusical institutions, he remained optimistic that the two could be reconciled. And even though he supported music for the people, he remained elitist about taste. He and Eliot shared the same convictions about those issues, both being convinced that only an ignorance of the type of music that they preferred prevented its universal acceptance. Their viewpoint depended upon the related beliefs that the art of music was progressive and the people were educable to that progress. Through education the people would come to prefer better music: "Once excite a general love
"Lectures, The Musical Profession." Delivered before the Teachers' Class of the Handel and Haydn Society, August 26, 1841, by T. B. Haywood. TheMusical Cabinet(1841-42): 66-67, 82-83, 98-99, 114-15, 130. H. Earle Johnson's claim that Haywood had lectured at "Mason's Academy," which is quoted by Wunderlich, is apparently in error. Charles Edward Wunderlich, "A History and Bibliography of Early American Musical Periodicals, 1782-1852," 2 vols. (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1962), vol. i, 144. 90 Haywood, "Lecture," 130.
89
484
of the art in all classes, and the standard of music will rapidly rise. In no art is taste more rapidly progressive."9' Eliot and Cleveland cannot be dismissed because of their seemingly naive position regardingthe taste of the people. In his discussion of the symphony orchestra Cleveland pointed to one of the central paradoxes of the genre, and in his work at the Academy Eliot did more than anyone to establish the orchestra as a viable musical idiom in Boston. Rather than perpetrating his vision, however, Eliot's success had the opposite effect, to lay the foundation for the orchestra's later elite status. Eliot's attempts to establish the orchestra as a popular or a national medium never succeeded, but Eliot did demonstrate that the symphony orchestra was a highly appropriate vehicle for the type of taste that he and others articulated. The immediate result of Eliot's efforts, however, was its own undoing. At the same time that the Boston Academy succeeded in creating an audience for symphonic concerts, they also succeeded in spawning rival orchestras. These orchestras performed music of a more popular character and attracted an even greater audience. The most serious rival to the Boston Academy during the I84os was the Boston Philharmonic Society (not to be confused with either the earlier Philoharmonic Society or the later Boston Philharmonic Orchestra). It was formed by a group of young musical amateurs in October I843, purely to sponsor concerts.92 Although the records of this society have not survived, there is little indication that the sponsors were motivated by issues of taste, idealism, or any sort of grandiose vision beyond providing Boston with "good musical entertainments," as the Boston Daily Transcript reported.93The record of the concerts bears this out. They featured a large orchestra, of between thirty and forty-four musicians.94The first year the orchestra was led by James J. Kendall, with his brother, Edward Kendall, featured playing the bugle. The presence of the Kendall brothers, who were well known in Boston as band leaders, suggests that the orchestra resembled a band more than a symphonic ensemble, a view confirmed by John S. Dwight three years later, when he looked back upon that
Cleveland, "Life of Haydn," i6. Paul Eric Paige summarizes the activities of the society in "Musical Organizations in Boston: I830-i850" (Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 1967), 254-77. 93 Boston Daily Transcript,18 January 1850. 94 Most articles about the Boston Philharmonic Society concerts report an orchestra exceeding thirty players. The Daily Evening Tribuneof 22 March 1845 reported an orchestra of forty-four for a concert that day, "the largest ever got up in Boston."
9'
92
485
season: "What they called an orchestra was only a wind-band, principally of brass instruments, which by turns brayed out noisy overtures, or murdered unmeaning solos."95 Dwight also asserted that the quality of the performanceswas low. The musicians did not play well, the choice of music was poor, the hall, the largest in town, was not well-suited for concerts, and even the audience was not very musical. He noted with disgust: "The impression was so sickening to whatever soul of music we had in us, that we have not been able to overcome the associations of the place enough to enter it again, until the late festival of Henri Herz."96 Although Dwight's assessment must be viewed cautiously, because he was not sympathetic to such popularizing attempts, it is probably accurate, as other contemporary accounts confirm it. The BostonDaily Transcript observed that "it has never been argued in favor of the Society that it has improved the musical taste of the community." The same reviewer was heartened to learn that "it will be in the power of this Society next winter, through some new arrangements, ... to produce a variety of superior music.'"'9 Nevertheless, the Boston Philharmonic Society drew large was forced to acknowledge. The crowds, as even the Daily Transcript Philharmonic Society's programs were of a lighter and more popular character than the Academy's, featuring arias and overtures from bel canto operas, especially Rossini and Bellini. The society actively sought to engage touring virtuosi, like Vieuxtemps and Ole Bull. Equally important was the ticket price of fifty cents for the concerts, compared to that of one dollar, which had been standard for tickets to similar concerts in Boston since the eighteenth century. All of this did not sit well with Eliot. Matters came to a head in 1844, when the Boston Philharmonic Society replacedJames Kendall with Leopold Herwig as leader of the orchestra. That is probably the source for the Transcript's allusion to "new arrangements" for the coming season. By 1844 Herwig was rapidly becoming one of the most important musicians in Boston. After he was introduced to Boston audiences in a small private violin concert in 1841, word of his abilities spread so quickly that when he followed with a public concert at the Melodeon a few weeks later hundreds were turned away. The called the concert the "most brilliant affair ever given Daily Transcript
95John S. Dwight, "Musical Review," TheHarbinger4 (1847): 77. Dwight, "Musical Review," 77. 97 BostonDaily Transcript,26 January 1844.
96
486
in this city."98 Herwig began teaching music in Boston and appeared with the Boston Academy of Music, was appointed leader of the orchestra of the Handel and Haydn Society in 1843, and played first violin in the string quartet at the Harvard Musical Association chamber concerts in I844. Although he died suddenly on 3 November 1845, his brief involvement with the Philharmonic Society was a source of consternation to Eliot. Eliot's papers contain a copy of a lengthy letter that has neither addressee nor date. The letter does refer to the opening nine years before of the Odeon, the concert hall that the Boston Academy of Music had refurbished in I835. The bulk of the letter discusses attempts of another organization to form a substantial orchestra, which the Philharmonic Society had hired Herwig to do, and which no other organization was attempting. Later the Philharmonic Society and the Boston Academy reached a tacit agreement to alternate their concerts so that dates would not conflict, an issue in the letter. One can conclude that it was written by Eliot to Herwig in 1844. In the letter Eliot rejected a proposal that they share members of the orchestra and cooperate on sponsoring concerts. Eliot's objections were partly out of pique at the success of the new rival and were partly practical. Eliot realized that Boston had neither sufficient instrumentalists nor audience to support two rival organizations. In that he proved right, as attendance, especially at the Academy concerts, went down considerably. Eliot's objections were deeper than practical concern or personal affront, however. The Philharmonic Society was a different group in both composition and philosophy. Not only was it oriented more toward popular entertainment, but its government was more open. Although some of the early officers, like S. Abbott Lawrence, one of the hundred dollar contributors to the refurbishing of the Odeon, or Oliver Brewster, an officer in the Harvard Musical Association, were from the elite, the society was not an elite organization. Other officers in the 1840s included J. F. Marsh, proprietor of the The Daily Bee; Joseph L. Bates, a musical instrument dealer; George P. Reed, the owner of a music store; and the musicians Edward Riddle and James Parker.99 Though Eliot believed strongly in the spread of high culture to the masses, he also believed that the elite should control its activity. This was consistent with the republican notion that those at the top of the
98 BostonDaily Transcript, 18 October 1841. 99 The annual election of officers, held each year in October or November, was reported in the BostonDaily Transcript.
BOSTON MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM
487
hierarchy were best able to govern. In describing the Boston AcadReviewEliot took pride in its organization. emy in the NorthAmerican He found the constitution of the Boston Academy an ideal one because "the financial and prudential concerns of the society are in one set of hands, and the musical department in another." Such a separation of powers served the public far better than if the musicians themselves ran things. In such circumstances Eliot implied that "desire for attainment in art," "the wish to gain temporary popularity," and "pecuniary advantages"would surely conflict.'00 Beginning in the 184os a tone of pessimism set in among those writers who believed in the educability of the common man. The change was prompted by questions of taste. A fear began to surface that less tasteful, more vulgar music, such as the Philharmonic Society produced, or worse, might be preferred by the public. The new tone is particularly apparent in the writings of the Harvard axis, but even the writings of Eliot have a more pessimistic sound. In his 1844 address to the Boston Academy of Music, he spoke of the natural capacity of the American people for music and reasserted his belief that in America, as in other countries, "the taste for music, when once cultivated, grows broader and deeper by time, and that no fluctuation of fashion or feeling ever leaves it to be neglected or disregarded."But Eliot did not sound entirely convinced: Why should we doubt that it will be equally so here? Can we go backwards? Wouldany one consentfor instanceto returnto the inferior of church music to which we were formerlyaccustomed,after style learnt to the betterperformances now? Does any one having appreciate relishthe untutoredballadsinger,afterbecomingfamiliarwith the skill of a Caradori, or a Malibran? or preferthe naturalmusic of an African minstrelto the finishedperformance of a Vieuxtemps?'o' Eliot was forced to acknowledge that the answer to these questions might be yes. As a consequence he had to reevaluate his positions regarding the acceptability of all types of music and the certainty that better music would be preferred by all who were exposed to it. Eliot continued to adhere steadfastly to the concept of progress in music, but he had to reconcile that with the disturbing tendencies he was beginning to notice. His earlier tolerance of those who did not prefer better music was beginning to be strained:
'" Eliot, "Annual Reports, Address," 334'o' TwelfthAnnual Reportof the BostonAcademy of Music (Boston: T. R. Marvin,
1844), 4.
488
So if, with us, therearecrowdswho go to heara rusticballad,or a solo on the bugle, and hear them with delight, and preferthem to Cinti's singing and Art6t's playing, this is not to be attributedto a want of musicalperceptions, but to the absenceof cultivation. The natural power is in the audience,but they havenot yet learnedto distinguishthe good from the bad;and with the generalpreference of untutoredpersonsfor ratherthanthe stronganddecidedsensations, they choosethe boisterous delicate.The earliesttastefor musicis for thatwhichis roughandnoisy. But as surelyas the desirefor any musicexists, it will be indulged;and and those who began indulgenceis practice,and practiceis cultivation; with the balladwill end with the cavatina,and the symphonyand the violin will takethe placeof the militaryair and the post horn. o2 By the mid I840s Eliot was relatively isolated in his views. Other writers and musical organizers of the time no longer attempted to accommodate the common man in their visions of high culture. Instead of the strained optimism of Samuel Eliot we find the more acerbic disparagement of John S. Dwight, William W. Story, and Christopher P. Cranch. With the latter group a retractionset in. They addressed a limited circle, not the entire population. The Harvard Musical Association concerts, which they sponsored, were purposely elite. Tickets were priced at $2.00 for the series, which sold out. Audience was limited to I50, the size of Chickering's room. John S. Dwight, who played a majorrole in organizing the series, implied that this size limitation was intentional. In a lengthy laudatory review of the concerts in TheHarbinger,Dwight portrayed the concerts more as a religious assembly than entertainment. He called the string quartet the "quintessence of music" and among German musicians "the purest and favorite form of musical communion." In it music stands "in its naked beauty," in which "no original sin or weakness . . . can escape detection." He argued that for such presentations "the audience must be small and select, since the music is not on a scale sufficiently grand for great halls, nor must its sphere be disturbed by the presence of incongruous and unsympathizing elements." No longer were the elite seeking the common man. In 1845 Christopher P. Cranch gave the annual Harvard Musical Association lecture. John S. Dwight later published the lecture in the Harbinger,with an introduction of his own.'o3 Dwight discussed the objectives of the association, which included the elevation of taste,
""2
103
Harbinger 3 (1846): 98-1oo,
"Mr. Cranch's Address: Address, Delivered before the Harvard Musical Association, in the Chapel of the University at Cambridge, August 28, I845," The
o9-10o, 123-24.
Twelfth Annual Report, 5.
489
hardly an unexpected goal. Dwight, however, connected the elevation of taste with class. The means of achieving it in American society were by "making it an avowed and corporate interest of men of intelligence and education, by attaching respectability to the musical profession. . . ." These were the same ideas and some of the same key words that Dwight used in his 1841 Harvard Musical Association address.104 Dwight continued to speak in religious terms, referring to the efforts of the society toward "deepening, and purifying and informing of the general taste for music," and of the "ministry of music," through which will come "moreand more believers." Dwight described the small, select audience of the Harvard Musical Association's chamber music concerts as "those best qualified to enjoy it in Boston. "'05 In his address Cranch disparagedthe tendency toward display that had suddenly become popular with the appearance of a number of foreign virtuosi in Boston and lamented the popularity of the Russells, the Hutchisons and Italian opera. He called for performers to be content with "smaller audiences and fewer dollars, with better music." He characterizedthe Harvard Musical Association's efforts as "a marked exception to this superficial standard of musical cultivation." To Cranch: The musicwhichsuchconcertsmakefamiliar, will inevitably elevatethe standard of in taste the and from banish refined and general community, cultivatedcircles the trashy and commonplace which find their things way into so many fashionable parlors.'o6 Some years later John S. Dwight confirmed this elitist approach toward music: We neverhavebelievedthatit was possibleto educatethe whole massof society up to the love of what is classicalandgreatin Art:we knowthat all the great loves, the fine perceptions and appreciations belongto the
few. 107
Dwight's vision ultimately prevailed: high culture came to be perceived as the provenance of the privileged few. Yet the spirit of
104John S. Dwight, "Address, Delivered before the Harvard Musical Association, August 25, 1841," MusicalMagazine3 (1841): 257-72. 105 Dwight, Introduction to Cranch, "Address," 98-99. io6 Cranch, "Address," 124. 10,o7 John S. Dwight, "The Alleged Decline," Dwight'sJournal of Music 22 (1862):
271.
490
republicanism that motivated earlier attempts to spread such culture should not be underestimated in an assessment of musical developments in America. Eliot recognized the Platonic potential of music when such recognition was limited to a relatively narrow segment of church music. Historians have given considerable weight to the influence of the Presbyterian-Congregational reformers in shaping American musical attitudes. Their vision of music was precise but narrow: it was idealistic, it was limited to church music, and it subordinated music to religion. By uniting with the PresbyterianCongregational reformers through the Boston Academy of Music, Samuel Eliot not only helped extend their revolution to secular instrumental music, but secured the musical patronage of the upper class, a segment of the community that had until then remained aloof from musical developments. While Eliot's vision ultimately proved unrealistic, it nevertheless was an important element in establishing cultural distinctions that are still with us. University of Maryland
LIST OF WORKS CITED
"Academy of Musick and Boston Theater." Small manuscript booklet in the Allen A. Brown Collection of the Boston Public Library Annual Reports of theBoston Academy of Music. [The Academy issued an annual report from 1833-1844, and a combined report for 1845-46: First Annual Reportof the BostonAcademyof Music, Second.. , etc., and Reportof the Government of the BostonAcademyof Music,for the Years1845 and 1846]. Boston: Isaac R. Butts, 1833; Perkins, Marvin, and Co., 1834-40; T. R. Marvin, 1840-46. Broyles, Michael. "Ensemble Music Moves out of the Private House: Haydn to Beethoven." In The Orchestra: edited by Originsand Transformations, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, Joan Peyser, 97-122. 1986. Chase, Gilbert. America's Music,from the Pilgrims to the Present.New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Chickering, Jesse. A StatisticalViewof thePopulation ofMassachusetts, from 1765 to 1840. Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1846. "Circular." ["Promotion of a Taste for Music" added in pencil.] Boston: Dutton and Wentworth, dated 15 May 1826. Clapp, William. A Record of the BostonStage. Boston: James Monroe, 1853. Reprint. New York: Greenwood Press, 1969. Cleveland, Henry R. "GardinerMusic of Nature (Boston:J. H. Wilkins and R. B. Carter, 1837)." New YorkReview 3 (1837): 157-97. . "TheLifeof Haydn, in a Series writtenat Vienna;followed of Letters by the on Metastasio,and on the PresentState of Life of Mozart, with Observations Musicin FranceandItaly. Translated from the French of L. A. C. Bombet, with Notes by William Gardiner. . . ." NorthAmerican Review50 (1840):
I-19.
491
"The Origin and Progress of Music. No. I and No. 2." New England Magazine9 (1835): 58-65, io6-i6. Cranch, Christopher P. "Mr. Cranch's Address: Address, Delivered before the Harvard Musical Association, in the Chapel of he University at Cambridge, August 28, 1845." TheHarbinger3 (1846): 98-1oo, 10o9-Io,
123-24-
DiMaggio, Paul. "Cultural Entrepreneurship in Nineteenth-Century Boston: The Creation of an Organizational Base for High Culture in America," and "Cultural Entrepreneurship in Nineteenth-century Boston, Part II: the Classification and Framing of American Art." Media, Cultureand Society4 (1982): 33-50, 303-22. Dwight, John S. "Address, Delivered before the Harvard Musical Association, August 25, 1841-." MusicalMagazine3 (1841): 257-72. . "The History of Music in Boston." In TheMemorial Historyof Boston. 4 vols., edited by Justin Winsor, vol. 4, 415-64. Boston: James R. Osgood, 1881. . "Musical Review." TheHarbinger4 (1847): 76-7. theBoston Eliot, Samuel A. Address before Academy ofMusic,on the Opening of the Odeon,Aug. 5, 1835. Boston: Perkins, Marvin, and Co. 1835. . "i. Annual Reports of the Boston Academy of Music ... 2. Address on the Opening of the Odeon ... 3. Report to the School Committee of Boston ... 4. The MusicalMagazine, conducted by H. T. Hach. .." North AmericanReview 52 (1841), 320-38. . "I. First Annual Report of the Boston Academy of Music. 1833 ... 2. Second Annual Report. 1834... 3. Third Annual Report. 1835 - North AmericanReview43 (1836): 53-85. . "Music and Politics." Dwight's Journal of Music 18 (186o): 344-46. Eliot, Walter Graeme. A Sketchof the Eliot Family. New York: Press of Livingston Middleditch, 1887. Fertig, Walter L. "John Sullivan Dwight: Transcendentalist and Literary Amateur of Music." Ph. D. diss., University of Maryland, 1952. in TheirMoral, Social,and Political Relations. Grund, Francis J. TheAmericans Boston: Marsh, Capen and Lyon, 1837. Reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1968. Guild, Mary E. "Samuel Atkins and Mary Eliot: A Memory Sketch by Their Oldest Daughter." Unpublished manuscript in the Samuel Atkins Eliot Papers, HUG 1322, Harvard University Archives. Hamilton, Thomas. Men and Manners in America. Edinburgh: William Blackwood, 1833. Reprint (2 vols. in i). New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1968. Hamm, Charles. Musicin the New World.New York: W. W. Norton, 1983. Haywood T. B. "Lectures, The Musical Profession." Delivered before the Teachers' Class of the Handel and Haydn Society, August 26, 1841, by T. B. Haywood. The Musical Cabinet(1841-42): 66-67, 82-83, 98-99,
114-15, I30.
Hitchcock, H. Wiley. Music in the United States: A HistoricalIntroduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, i969.
492
NorthAmericain the Years During a JourneyThrough Hodgson, Adam. Remarks 1820 and New York: 1819, J. Seymour, 1823. Reprint. Westport, I821. CT: Negro Universities Press, 1970. Johnson, Allen, et al. Dictionaryof AmericanBiography.20 vols. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1928-37. Reprint, i i vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1963. Johnson, H. Earle. Hallelujah,Amen.'TheStoryof theHandelandHaydnSociety of Boston.Introduction by Richard Crawford. Boston: Bruce Humphries, 1965. Reprint. New York: Da Capo Press, i98i. "The John Rowe Parker Letters." The MusicalQuarterly62 (1976): 72-86. . Musical Interludes in Boston, 1795-i83o. New York: Columbia University Press, 1943. Reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1967. HarmoLawrence, Vera Brodsky. Music for Patriots,Politiciansand Presidents: niesand Discords the First Hundred Years. York: New Macmillan, of 1975. Strong on Music: The New YorkMusic Scene in the Days of George Templeton Strong, 1836-1875. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Layman, Daniel. "The Philoharmonic Society: Newcomers and the Nucleus of Boston's Orchestral Tradition." Unpublished Paper read at the Annual Meeting of the Sonneck Society, Danville, KY., April, 1988. in Levine, Lawrence. Highbrow,Lowbrow:theEmergence of CulturalHierarchy America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988. List of Persons, Copartnerships, and Corporations who were Taxed Twenty-Five Dollars and Upward, in the City of Boston,in the Year 1847, Specifying the Amountof the Tax and RealandPersonal to an Order Estate,conformably of the City Council.City Document No. 12. Boston: Jh. H. Eastburn, 1848. Lowell Mason Papers, MSS 33. John Herrick Jackson Music Library at Yale University. Martineau, Harriet. Societyin America. Edited by Seymour Martin Lipset. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1962. Mason, William. Memories of a MusicalLife. New York: The Century Co., 1901. Reprint. New York: Da Capo Press, 1970. "OurFirst Men:"A Calendar and Gentility;containing a List of of Wealth,Fashion Those PersonsTaxedin the City of Boston,Credibly to be WorthOne Reported HundredThousand Noticesof thePrincipalPersons. Dollars, with Biographical Boston: D. H. Ela and Co., 1846. in Boston: i83o-i85o. Ph.D. diss., Paige, Paul Eric, Musical Organizations Boston University, 1967. Pemberton, Carol. LowellMason:His Lifeand Work,Ph. D. diss., University of Minnesota, 197 I. Perkins, Charles C. and John S. Dwight. History of the Handel and Haydn Society,of BostonMassachusetts, from the Foundation of the Societythroughits Season:I815-i890. Boston: A Mudge and Sons, 1883-1898. Seventh-fifth "Programs of the Handel and Haydn Society." Scrapbook in the Allen A. Brown Collection of the Boston Public Library Seilhamer, George O. History of the AmericanTheatre. 3 vols. New York, 1888-91. Reprint. New York: Benjamin Blom, 1968. in America (I73i-i8oo). Sonneck, Oscar. G. Early Concert-Life Leipzig: Breitkopf and HIrtel, 1907. Reprint. New York: Da Capo, i978.
493
Directories of American through Spear, Dorothea. Bibliography 186o. Worcester, MA: American Antiquarian Society, 1961. The BostonDirectory.Boston: E. Cotton, 1816. in America. 2 vols. Translated by Henry Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy Reeve. Edited by John T. Morgan and John J. Ingalls. New York: Colonial Press, 1899. Wiebe, Robert. The Openingof American Society From the Adoption of the Constitution to the Eve of Disunion. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, I984. Wood, Gordon S. The Creationof the AmericanRepublic,1776-1787 Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969. Wunderlich, Charles Edward. "A History and Bibliography of Early American Musical Periodicals, 1782-1852." 2 vols. Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1962. Zeuner, Charles, arranger and composer. The American Harp: Being a Collection Music, underthe Controlof theMusical of New and OriginalChurch Professional Societyin Boston.Boston, Hilliard, Gray and Co., 1832. , arrangerand composer. TheAncientLyre,a Collection of Old, New and under the the MusicalSociety Church Music, Original of Professional Approbation in Boston.Boston: Crocker and Brewster, 1833.
ABSTRACT
The division of American musical culture into a cultivated and vernacular tradition may be traced in large measure to developments in antebellum Boston. It was there that American writers first argued fervently for the association of Platonic idealism with secular instrumental music, and some of these same individuals established the symphony orchestra as the musical medium most capable of realizing their ideals. Musical developments in antebellum Boston were affected by the class structure, which was closely related to religious preference. The upper class, mostly Unitarian, did not participate significantly in music until the late I830s. The middle class, mostly congregational, favored religious, amateur performing ensembles. The socioeconomic elite began to support music in the 183os. Led by Samuel A. Eliot, three-time Mayor of Boston, they wrested control of the Boston Academy of Music from the Congregational evangelicals and made it the premier secular musical institution of the city. The Academy featured the first successful symphony orchestra in Boston and one of the first in the country. Ironically, however, Eliot's motivations, which were articulated in several important articles, harked back to early federal Republican concepts of creating a homogeneous society through a commonly shared culture. They contrasted sharply with the more insular goals of the nineteeth-century socioeconomic elite, who wished to use music as a means of distancing themselves from other segments of society. Eliot's vision ultimately was not realized, but his efforts did much to establish the symphony orchestra in American society as well as the notion of high musical culture itself. As such Eliot is an major, although hitherto ignored, figure in American musical history.

Music and Class Structure in Boston PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Music and Class Structure in Boston PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Music and Class Structure in Antebellum Boston Author(s): Michael Broyles Source: Journal of the American Musicological Society,

Music and Class Structure In Antebellum Boston

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

benefited by the exercise of those talents. .

. Regular concerts have

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY TABLE I

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

. That was the great fault with

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

First AnnualReport of theBoston Academy of Music(Boston: Isaac R. Butts, 1833),

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY TABLE 2

DONORS Appleton, Nathan Appleton, Samuel

PERSONAL ESTATE [VALUE]

20,000 250,000 129,000

96,000 663,800 16,ooo 3,600 4,000

75,000 8,000 175,000 o,ooo 60,ooo 18o,ooo 75,000

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

Eliot, Eliot, Eliot, Eliot,

75. 75. 76-78. 79.

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

Annual Reports of the Boston Academy of Music

... 2. Address on the

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

BOSTON MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Harbinger 3 (1846): 98-1oo,

Twelfth Annual Report, 5.

MUSIC AND CLASS STRUCTURE IN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

MUSICOLOGICAL SOCIETY JOURNALOF THE AMERICAN

MUSICAND CLASS STRUCTUREIN ANTEBELLUM BOSTON

You might also like