Completing Mozarts Requiem

Yu Austin Liu
May 14, 2014
Abstract
Mozarts unnished Requiem presents some of the most compelling choral music
of the 18th century. The traditional S ussmayr completion presents certain interesting
features that suggests that Mozart had a hand in the movements that S ussmayr claimed
to have composed. I hope that this article will highlight some of the issues surrounding
the completion of the Requiem and the possibilities that Mozart may have envisioned
for the Requiem.
1 Introduction and Historical Context
Mozart began work on the Requiem in the middle of September 1791, but an acute illness
left him bedridden by 20 November 1791. [2, p. 28] At the time of his death in December
1791, the Requiem was left unnished.[2, p. 2] In the autograph, only the Introit is fully
orchestrated. The Kyrie, Sequence and Oertory have their part writing worked out, but
the Sequence famously breaks o at the Lacrimosa. Throughout the fragment, we also see
certain important orchestral gurations notated, allowing us a glimpse into Mozarts com-
positional methods. The state of the music in the autograph folio and autograph sketch is
a window into Mozarts compositional process at the time. Throughout the sketch, we see
that Mozart rst worked out the voice writing and bass line carefully, writing in important
orchestral parts as necessary when the voices are not singing. Among the more memorable
instrumental sections are the frenzied string tremolo in the Dies Irae, the trombone solo of
the Tuba Mirum, and the leaping violin gurations in the Quam Olim fugue.[9]
Mozart was commissioned to write the Requiem, and therefore, Constanze, Mozarts widow,
wasted no time in nding someone to complete the work so that she could receive the
payment and support her two young children. The burden of completing the work eventually
fell to Franz Xaver S ussmayr, a pupil of Mozart, who claimed to have nished all of the
parts which were not notated in the Requiem fragment[2, p. 16], i.e. the remainder of the
Lacrimosa, and the entirety of the Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei. Consequently, it
was believed that the remainder of the work, i.e. the Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei,
were wholly composed by S ussmayr. Because of the historical weight associated with this
completion, it is still generally the most performed realization of Mozarts Requiem today.
The authorship of the Requiem has always been a source of controversy. Jacob Gottfried
Weber famously criticized the authenticity of the Requiem in 1825[2, p. 7]. The autograph
score later surfaced, and Johannes Brahms, in his edition of the Mozart Requiem, labels
explicitly the parts written by Mozart, and those by S ussmayr.[13, p. 48-50] [12]
1
Though the autograph itself has been analysed to reveal the parts that Mozart actually wrote
down, the question of whether there is any genuine Mozart in the sections that S ussmayr
claimed to have completed all by himself remains controversial.[2, p. 42] Keefe in particular
feels that the question of authorship is fundamentally unanswerable, and therefore eorts
to separate Mozarts ideas from S ussmayrs ideas are futile. [3, p. 7] While denitive evidence
on what is genuine Mozart in the portions that S ussmayr completed is lost to history unless
more autograph sketches surface, even a relatively quick survey of the Requiem reveals much
evidence that suggests that S ussmayr did have access to Mozarts sketches for the remaining
movements. This is not necessarily in contradiction with S ussmayrs testimony to Breitkopf
and Hartel in 1800 in which he states that the Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei were
wholly composed by me is a translation of ganz neu von mir verfertigt. Wol notes that
the phrase neu verfertigen means putting elements together to make something new
and so does not imply whether the elements are original or borrowed. [2, p .42, 146]
While it may be impossible to denitively say that any particular part of the S ussmayr
completion is by Mozart, it is without question that there exist aws in S ussmayrs comple-
tion that distract both listener and performer from the intensity of the work. Consequently,
various musicologists have attempted new completions of the work, with varying degrees of
convincingness.
2 Form and Structure of the Requiem
Mozarts Requiem, as set to music, is divided into ve large sections, the Introit-Kyrie, the
Sequence, the Oeratory, the Sanctus, and the Agnus Dei-Communion.[2, p.70] Mozarts Re-
quiem is similar in structure to those of his contemporaries, for example Bonno, Gassmann,
Michael Haydn, etc. [4, p.5] [7, p. XIV]
Keefe in particular makes a comparison between the specic movements of the Mozarts
Requiem with those of Mozarts contemporaries to emphasize certain points about the
structure of a typical Requiem mass for the Viennese audience. In particular, Mozarts
and Gassmanns settings divide the text of the Sequence in a similar manner, and Mozart
would likely have been well acquainted with Gassmanns and Michael Haydns settings of
the Requiem Mass. [4, p. 4-5]
In a similar vein, Wol notes that the selection of these movements, ignoring other move-
ments that could be included in a Requiem, reects the practice in Salzburg and Vienna at
the time.[2, p. 70]
The following schematic shows the layout of the Mozart Requiem, with information drawn
from a much more detailed table by Christoph Wol. [2, p.72]The nal bracketed chord
reects the chord of the nal cadence of the movement, which is signicant in ensuring a
smooth key transitions at many points, for instance, at the end of the Confutatis, where
Mozart utilizes a modulatory sequence to descend chromatically from the key of a minor into
F major, before a nal A major chord prepares the listener for the d minor of the Lacrimosa.
2
I. Introit-Kyrie
1. Requiem aeternam (d (d
V
))
2. Kyrie eleison (double fugue) (d)
II. Sequence
3. Dies Irae (d)
4. Tuba Mirum (B)
5. Rex Tremendae (g d)
6. Recordare (F)
7. Confutatis (a F (d
V
))
8a. Lacrimosa (bars 1-8 by Mozart) (d)
8b. Amen (fugue sketch not realized by S ussmayr) (d)
III. Oeratory
9a. Domine Jesu (g (g
V
))
9b. Quam olim (fugue) (g) 10a. Hostias (E g(g
V
))
10b. Quam olim (fugue) (g)
IV. Sanctus
11a. Sanctus (D)
11b. Osanna (fugue) (D)
12a. Benedictus (B)
12b. Osanna (fugue) (B)
V. Agnus Dei-Communion
13. Agnus Dei (d B (B
V
)
14. Lux aeterna
1
(B (d
V
))
15. Cum sanctis tuis
2
(d)
One important structural element is the conclusion of every large section with a fugue. This is
not uncommon in Requiem settings of the time - Michael Haydns Requiem, which Mozart heard,
also has fugal conclusions for each large section. Mozart likely used Michael Haydns Requiem as a
model, as evidenced by his setting of the same sections of
Also, we can already see a potential mistake in the key relationships in S ussmayrs sections, though
some clarication will be required to see this. First, we observe that the Oeratory is in the key
of g minor and ends on g minor. Mozart modulates from E major into g minor at the end of the
Hostias to allow a complete repeat of the Quam olim fugue in the same key.
The move to D major in the Sanctus can be justied by the fact that the text of the Sanctus is in
praise of a benevolent God, so a shift to the parallel major emphasizes that God is magnanimous.
Maunder contends that the entirety of the Sanctus is spurious because of the lack of a clear key
relationship between the G minor of the Oertory and the D major of the Sanctus, citing the fact
that all the movements of the Sequence are connected by key by way of at least two shared notes
between the tonic triad of a movement and the cadence of the previous movement. However, the
Sanctus is specically a movement in the Requiem Mass that is in common with Ordinary Mass,
so the move to D major may be a deliberate choice to highlight the dierence between the Sanctus
movements from the rest of the movements of the Requiem.
1
reprise of Introit bars 19-48
2
reprise of Kyrie fugue in full
3
The Agnus Dei has an extensive quote from an earlier setting of the Mass by Mozart, KV 220,
nicknamed the Sparrow Mass.[5, p. 59][11, p. 170] At bar 39 of the Gloria, the text Qui tollis
peccata mundi, miserere nobis
3
, is set to music in a manner very similar to the way these words
are set in the Agnus Dei, in terms of rhythm and thematic material. Maunder, who analyzes the
voice leading issues in the S ussmayr movements very carefully in his book, notes that there are
no contrapuntal errors in bars 2-9 of the Agnus Dei, which he analyzes as an almost direct quote
from KV 220. He goes on to note that the dierences in harmonization in the Agnus Dei of the
Requiem and the Gloria of KV 220 suggest that Mozart likely reworked previous ideas because of
the similarity of the bass of that particular part of the Gloria to the Requiem aeternam theme in
the Introit, pointing to examples of Mozarts harmonic preferences in 1791 to justify this.
Further evidence that sections of the Agnus Dei likely are based of a Mozartean sketch can be
found in S ussmayrs working method. We must bear in mind that S ussmayr was often unaware of
Mozarts nal musical plans, for instance, he inserts an awkward Lamentatio into Mozarts sketches
for a Horn concerto in D major,[2, p. 48] likely because the musical material just happened to be on
the same page.
4
This suggests that S ussmayr did not actually draw inspiration for the completion
of the Agnus Dei of KV 626 from KV 220, but instead had access to a sketch of the movement.
Assuming then that Mozart intended for the Agnus Dei to be in d minor, S ussmayrs completion
results in an awkward key relationship between the end of the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei. It is
likely that instead of remaining in B-at major after the Benedictus, Mozart would likely have
modulated to D major towards the end of the Benedictus to allow a reprise of the Osanna in D
major. A cadence on D major would then lead into the d minor of the Agnus Dei, from which the
Communio, in d minor, then follows. In the following sections, I will cite evidence that suggests
that Mozart had left sketches for the Sanctus, Benedictus, and Agnus Dei, that were ostensibly in
S ussmayrs hand.
This unusual choice of not modulating at the end of the Benedictus is but the rst of many un-
settling compositional errors in S ussmayr completion of Mozarts Requiem. As a result, many
scholars have sought to produce their own completions, which they believe to be closer to what
Mozart ultimately intended. Some scholars, feel that S ussmayrs completion is fully legitimate and
more convincing than modern completions.[4] A closer examination of how the aws in S ussmayrs
completion will show, conversely, that they mar the work and require correction.
As a nal remark, the reprise of the rst two movements for the Communio may be Mozarts in-
tention according to a statement by Constanze, in which she states that Mozart wanted to end the
Requiem with the Kyrie fugue [2, p. 43]. However, it should be borne in mind that Constanze had
a strong incentive to promote the work as being wholly by Mozart and not by S ussmayr in order
to give the work an illusion of legitimacy and so we can only speculate as to whether Mozart would
have composed new music to end the Requiem.
3 Thematic Relationships in Mozarts Requiem
S ussmayrs completion draws its legitimacy from the fact that S ussmayr did have contact with
Mozart during his life. As such, the possibility that Mozart may have communicated some of his
ideas to S ussmayr, regardless of how well they were nally realized, cannot be ruled out. In fact,
3
who takest the sins of the world, have mercy on us
4
An example of this is the Amen sketch, which is on the same page as a sketch for the Rex Tremendae
and Die Zauberote. [2] As these passages were contrapunctally tricky, Mozart would have worked out the
counterpoint before writing the nished music in a dierent folio.
4
circumstantial evidence suggests that much of the thematic material of the Sanctus, Benedictus
and Agnus Dei likely originates with Mozart.
An examination of the thematic relationships in the autograph fragment reveals how Mozart sought
to link the movements of the Requiem cohesively. In the Preface to his completion, Robert Levin
makes a number of observations.[7] Some of the more convincing relations that have potential sig-
nicance are enumerated here. Figure 1 shows the opening theme of the Introitus.
Figure 1: Opening Theme of the Introitus

At bar 34, an version of this theme in diminution appears as countersubject in the fugato. This
foreshadows the importance of this theme in the work
Figure 2: Alto countersubject

Mozart then links the Introitus, to the Dies Irae by using the theme of the Introitus as the bass
line of the Dies Irae.
Figure 3: Dies Irae opening - bass part

The Amen sketch, which Mozart likely intended to use after the Lacrimosa, marking the mid-point
of the work, uses the thematic material of the Introit as well. The subject in the alto is a melodic
inversion of the theme of the Introitus in augmentation[7, p. XVII]. In addition, Wol observes that
the Amen sketch comes before the Rex Tremendae sketch on the sketch leaf that was previously
mentioned. Furthermore, the Rex Tremendae sketch begins on bar 7 of the movement when Mozart
begins a fugato. Wol believes this suggests that Mozart largely sketches contrapunctal working
and thematically or formally signicant expositions[2, p. 32]
Figure 4: Amen subject

4
3

Finally, we see the Introit theme appear in the Agnus Dei, which S ussmayr claimed as his own
work. More convincing evidence that this is likely based on a sketch by Mozart is to be found by
examining the violin accompaniment. The last four notes of the violin accompaniment contains a
5
quotation of the Introitus theme in retrograde diminution in the last ve semiquavers. [7, p. XIX]
Figure 5: Agnus Dei bass line

,
,
, ,
:
s
,
_

_
,
Figure 6: Agnus Dei violin accompaniment bar 1

4
3

Another signicant relationship is found between the theme of the Dies Irae and that of the Sanctus.
As previously mentioned, the movement is in D major, which generates harmonic interest since most
of the previous movements have been in the minor key. Furthermore, by recalling the theme of the
Dies Irae so dramatically, S ussmayrs completion highlights how God is both destructive, yet holy
and benevolent.
Figure 7: Dies Irae theme
,
,

,
,
_
,

, , ,
.
_ ,
,

,
,
,
,
.

,
_

,

,

, ,
,

,
Figure 8: Sanctus theme

Arguments for the strength of the S ussmayr completion have been given by various authors, in-
cluding Simon Keefe, who makes such an argument in his article in the Journal of the American
Musicological Society[3], citing the praise of various critics on portions of the Requiem that were
completed by S ussmayr. However, this does not contradict Christoph Wols observation that the
portions of the Requiem completed by S ussmayr betray an especially high degree of technical
unevenness and a large number of mistakes in the voice leading, as Mozart scholars recognized at
an early date [2, p. 38]. This lends credence to the argument that Mozart may have left some hints
to S ussmayr on the completion of the Requiem, perhaps in the form of sketches. The following
section will explore some of these strange passages.
4 Technical unevenness
Before moving on to specic examples, it must be borne in mind that based on the autograph and
the Amen sketch leaf, Mozart placed the four-part vocal writing as his highest priority, and would
have sketched this before any other parts. Also, it is plausible to believe that Mozart would have
required some sketches to work out contrapunctal textures before setting them down.
6
A passage from the end of the S ussmayr Lacrimosa completion warrants special attention:
Figure 9: Lacrimosa bar 24
,
,

,
is

,
re-

_

,
,

,
qui-

,
em
,
na

,
e-

.
_
,
s
Iz

,
Do-

,
na

,
e-

,
is,

do-
,
The text Dona eis, requiem is important because it occurs at the Introitus, the end of the Sequence,
and the end of the Agnus Dei. That Mozart may have wished to work out the thematic material
at this juncture of the work, before the Amen fugue, is a denite possibility. Oddly enough, we see
that the word requiem does not match up with the Introitus theme. Mozarts intention was most
likely to have the word Requiem coincide with the Introit theme at the end of the descending scale
passage. This would reinforce the thematic unity of the work before the Amen fugue, which would
have utilized the Introit theme in inversion. While it is impossible to prove that Mozart actually
wanted to do this , the circumstantial evidence is fairly strong, even without arguments related to
S ussmayrs technical ability to write counterpoint[2, p. 43]
Figure 10: Sanctus violin part - bar 4 of S ussmayr completion

A second particularly obvious error occurs at bar 4 of the Sanctus.[10, p. 150]. Bars 1-5 of the
Sanctus are generally considered an excellent piece of vocal writing[2, p. 38] [7, p. XIX], error free
and a dramatic restatement of the Dies Irae theme in the major key. However, in bar 4 we see
parallel fths between the soprano and the rst violins, which detracts from the vocal material of
the Sanctus. The false relation of C-natural in bar 6 against C-sharp in bar 5 is also problematic.
However, this sort of technical unevenness is yet more evidence that S ussmayr had access to
Mozarts sketches for this movement. This runs contrary to Maunders analysis that the Sanctus
and Benedictus are wholly by S ussmayr [2, p.40].
The Osanna fugue subject utilizes a thematic element of the Quam olim fugue subject. It is
clear that the rst four notes of the Osanna subject are a reference to the Quam olim subject[2,
p. 93]. Levin claims further that the second half of the Osanna subject is related to the Amen
subject[7, p. XIX], though this may just be a coincidence. Regardless, in the S ussmayr version of
the Osanna, we see hardly any contrapunctal development after the exposition, which would be
highly uncharacteristic of Mozart considering the scale of the Kyrie fugue and Quam olim fugue.
Again we see a gross incongruence, this time in the quality of the fugue subject and that of the fugal
development. It is not unreasonable to hypothesize that Mozart may have sketched the subject
and part of the exposition, not unlike the sketch for the Amen fugue, though the complexity of the
counterpoint necessitated the need for technical details to be explored and nalized on paper.
Figure 11: Quam olim subject
,
,
, ,

,
,
,
,
,

,
,
, , ,
,
_
,
,

,
_ ,
,

,
7
Figure 12: Osanna subject

4
3

With regard to the Benedictus, it should be noted that the theme of the Benedictus is found in a
book by Barbara Ployer in which her composition classes with Mozart were recorded [7, p. XIX],
and that there are signicantly fewer errors in the voice parts compared to the orchestral parts [7,
p. XX] [2, p. 40]. This also suggests the existence of a Benedictus sketch that S ussmayr used in
completing the Requiem - if we assume that Mozart generally wrote down error free vocal parts as
sketches.
5 Recent Completions
In the previous sections, I have outlined the evidence that sketches from Mozart likely provided the
thematic material and inspiration for much of the contrapuntal passages in S ussmayrs completion
of Mozarts Requiem. The strength of the S ussmayr completion lies in the thematic unity that
is created through the utilization of these sketches. In addition, as a contemporary of Mozart,
the scale of the movements that were composed is generally in accordance with the norms of the
time. Wol notes that the primary strength of the S ussmayr completion is therefore structural
[2, p. 112]. Among the key issues identied are the lack of an Amen fugue to close the Sequence, an
awkward repeat of the disproportionately short Osanna fugue in B-at major and not in D major
and various technical issues with regard to voice leading and counterpoint. While we can never
reconstruct what Mozart conceived in his mind, completions of the Requiem help us frame the rest
of the work and allow listeners insight into Mozarts musical architecture and a deeper appreciation
for the actually completed sections of the work.
Various completions of diering scale have been attempted in the past decades. The less extreme
versions by Franz Beyer and H.C. Robbins Landon deal with modifying the orchestration of various
parts of the Requiem.
In 1984, Duncan Druce published his own revision of the Requiem [14, p. 145], which included a
new completion of the Lacrimosa with an Amen fugue, and revisions of the Sanctus, Benedictus and
Agnus Dei using the existing thematic material. A new segue into the reprise of the Introit for the
Communio section for also composed. The Benedictus strikes the listener as being somewhat too
long, considering the brevity of Mozarts Hostias. As a result, while the imitation of Mozarts style
is evident in the completed movements, the structural aspects of those movements are somewhat
unconvincing because of their length.
In 1988, Richard Maunder published his own revision of the Requiem using the Amen sketch to end
the Lacrimosa. He analyzes the voice leading of the Sanctus and Benedictus harshly and argues
that they cannot possibly originate with Mozart. He does observe that the Agnus Dei has the
extensive quotation from KV 220, the Sparrow Mass, and revises it accordingly.
As shown previously, the Sanctus and Osanna may well derive their thematic material from Mozarts
sketches. Even if they do not, their themes have been shown to be related to important themes
that Mozart intended for the Requiem, and therefore their use in any completion is justied. Aside
from this, the use of modulations in Maunders Amen fugue may be inappropriate as Mozart does
not modulate in fugues that end a section of the Mass, partially for reasons of scale.[7, p. XX].
The completion by Robert Levin in 1993 is slightly less extreme. He states in an interview that he is
8
aiming to change as little as possible in order to respect the weight of history [8]
5
. The result
is a completion that generally is in accordance with the guidelines of the S ussmayr completion,
and therefore roughly adhering to the length of the S ussmayr completion, except with the addition
of an Amen fugue and a fairly extended Osanna fugue. The Osanna fugue is criticized by David
Black [6, p. 599] as being too long, the only other large scale Osanna fugue that Mozart wrote
being in the c minor Mass KV 427. However, it should be noted that Mozart clearly had accorded
the c minor Mass a great deal of attention as he intended for it to be dedicated to his wife. With
this in mind, the scale of Mozarts Osanna fugue need not necessary match up with those of other
composers that Black cites. The length of this Osanna fugue is criticized similarly by Keefe, who
argues that its scale would not be in accordance with Viennese tradition of the time.[6, p. 606] One
could argue continuously about just how long the Osanna fugue should be, but the fact remains
that S ussmayrs version, which ends fairly abruptly after the exposition, is far too short and lacks
sucient contrapuntal development.
By mostly retaining the vocal writing of the S ussmayr completion, most of Levins completion
sounds familiar to those used to S ussmayrs version. This contributes signicantly to the strength
of Levins completion - part of the reason it sounds convincing is simply because it sounds like what
we are used to, though most of the errors in orchestration and voice leading have been excised.
It is impossible to quantify Mozarteaness, but by showing the striking thematic unity of Mozarts
musical material, we can at least nd it plausible to imagine that Mozart likely intended for the
unnished movements to enhance the thematic unity of the work. Removing the distractions of
bad voice leading and somewhat uninspired orchestration elucidates this aspect of the Requiem and
helps listeners view the work in a more holistic fashion.
It should be noted that a much more involved way of analysing a completion could involve looking
at the internal harmonic progression of a completed movement. Wol does this very carefully to
show that the sections by S ussmayr are somewhat lacking in modulations. His table of Mozarts
key movement shows that Mozart moves uidly through dierent tonal centres to continuously gen-
erate harmonic interest.[2, p. 100] A very notable exception to the norm is the Quam olim fugue,
which remains in g minor throughout even though many borrowed chords are utilized for dramatic
eect. An interesting point that becomes clear is the fact that the Agnus Dei has the modulatory
motion that is characteristic of the movements that are denitively in Mozarts hand, which is more
evidence that S ussmayr used one of Mozarts sketches for that movement. It is beyond the scope
of this paper to analyse completions in such a thorough fashion, but even without a thorough anal-
ysis, this leads to a weakness in more conservative approaches. Levins completion does increase
the harmonic movement of the Lacrimosa, Sanctus and Benedictus somewhat, but mostly retain
S ussmayrs framework, so more modulations in those movements could make it more convincing by
some standards.
Another important consideration is that S ussmayrs orchestration in the Sequence and in other
movements is often particularly uninteresting compared to Mozarts, and is often awkward at
times. For example, the trombone solo in the Tuba Mirum is supposed to accompany the stanza
beginning with Tuba mirum spargen sonum
6
. S ussmayr continues the trombone solo even after
the tenor enters with Mors stupebit et natura
7
. Had Mozart wanted this he would denitely have
written it down, but it is clear that the colour of the trombone is not required for this stanza.
Instead, a shift from B-at major to f minor is used to highlight the new stanza. Again, a thorough
examination of all the orchestration details of these completions is beyond the scope of this paper,
but the above more radical completions are able to better eect the orchestration details such as
the violin gurations at the Quam Olim fugue, the use of trumpets in the Dies Irae, etc.
5
roughly 18 minutes into the video footage
6
The trumpet spreads a wondrous sound
7
Death and nature will marvel/ be struck
9
6 Conclusion
The Mozart Requiem, though unnished, stands as one of the most signicant settings of the Re-
quiem Mass of the common practice period. Arguments for the strength of the S ussmayr completion,
such as those by Keefe, focus on its orchestration or the fact that S ussmayr was a contemporary of
Mozart. I have shown that Mozart viewed the vocal parts as the primary musical material for the
Requiem, and that S ussmayr was often unable to execute Mozarts intentions in a convincing man-
ner. The S ussmayr completion remains an important historical completion that roughly adheres to
the proportions intended and likely contains many snippets of genuine Mozart. A brief survey of
some of the thematic and structural relationships between the movements of the Requiem reveals
to us a glimpse of the full structure of the work that Mozart would have written had he lived to
complete it. Understanding and even listening to the work in its fragmentary form gives us a sense
of its incompleteness, but ultimately, for the work to function as a whole for listener and performer,
the completions that have been attempted at least provide a way for us to move from the beginning
to the end of the Requiem mass. We will never know what Mozart actually would have written,
but various new completions of the work help to complete the listeners journey from the Introit
to the Lux aeterna in a more satisfying manner, allowing us a glimpse of what the Requiem might
have sounded like, as well as Mozarts incredible sense of structure and unity in his music.
10
References
[1] Leslie Lamport, L
A
T
E
X: A Document Preparation System. Addison Wesley, Massachusetts, 2nd
Edition, 1994.
[2] Christoph Wol, Mozarts Requiem: historical and analytical studies, documents, score. Univer-
sity of California Press, 1994.
[3] Simon P. Keefe, Die Ochsen am Berge: Franz Xaver S ussmayr and the Orchestration of Mozarts
Requiem, K. 626. Journal of the American Musicological Society, Vol. 61, Number 1, pp. 166,
2008.
[4] Simon P. Keefe, Mozarts Requiem: Reception, Work, Completion. Cambridge University Press
2012.
[5] Richard Maunder, Mozarts Requiem: On Preparing A New Edition.. New York: Oxford Uni-
versity Press, 1988.
[6] Robert D. Levin, Richard Maunder, Duncan Druce, David Black, Christoph Wol, Simon P.
Keefe Colloquy: Die Ochsen am Berge: Franz Xaver S ussmayr and the Orchestration of Mozarts
Requiem, K. 626. Journal of the American Musicological Society, Vol. 61, Number 1, pp. 583608,
2008.
[7] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, completed and edited by Robert D. Levin, Requiem KV626.
Stuttgarter Mozart-Ausgaben, Carus-Verlag, 2004
[8] Robert D. Levin, Interview with Arik Vardi,. Israel Educational Television, Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jER0dzMiUDo
[9] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, ed. Leopold Nowak Requiem Fragment KV626. Neue Mozart Aus-
gabe I/1/Abt. 2/1: Requiem: Fragment, Score 1965
[10] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Franz Xaver S ussmayr ed. Leopold Nowak Requiem KV626. Neue
Mozart Ausgabe I/1/Abt. 2/2: Requiem: Completions, Score 1965
[11] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, ed. Walter Senn Sparrow Mass KV220. Neue Mozart Ausgabe
I/1/Abt. 1/2: Masses vol. 2, Score 1975
[12] Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Franz Xaver S ussmayr ed. Johannes Brahms Requiem KV626.
Leipzig: Breitkopf & H artel, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozarts Werke, Serie XXIV: Supplemente
1877
[13] Imogen Fellinger Brahms: Biographical, Documentary and Analytical Studies, ed. Robert Pas-
call, pp.41-58 Cambridge University Press 1983
[14] Daniel N. Leeson Opus Ultimum: The Story of the Mozart Requiem Algora Publishing 2004
11