• Hlahol: participating institution, vv
• LUKES, Jan Ludevít: director of ensemble, conductor

News of this event was published by Dalibor 1/11/1862 in a report that noted that the: ‘Local Hlahol is giving on 9 November 1862 at its religious service Zvonař’s Mass in B minor, then as interpolations four-part sacred songs (from the musical legacy of Zvonař].’ The source then related that an entertainment was to be given by Hlahol on the evening of the following day, and that the general meeting of the singing society had taken place on 21/10/1862.

The Dalibor 10/11/1862 review, signed ‘-s-’, praised J.L. Zvonař’s ‘new’ mass performed on this occasion, commenting that it is ‘a profound work, distinguished by piety in the word setting and mastery in the working of the musical motives: the part writing is exemplary, the harmonisation first-rate, the solo quartet tender, delightful. As a peculiarity we must draw attention to the grave tempi and the [use of] chorales for the ‘cum sancto Spiritu’ in the Gloria [and at] ‘et vitam venturi’, and in the ‘Hosanna’ of the Credo, which made a very good impression on the listeners. In short, Mr Zvonař’s mass is an excellent, ingenious work but we regret that it did not receive a better performance. It was conducted by Mr Lukes, that well-known excellent solo singer and also one of the directors of Hlahol. Hlahol appeared in public, performed a new composition, performed a first-rate composition, however the conductor did not grasp the true spirit of the work. The Gloria he hurried along, similarly the ‘Et resurrexit’, so that the richly worked ideas often came over to the ears of the listeners as a strange chaos, even the ‘Dona’ contained a quite considerable assortment of varying tempi. Moreover, the whole mass could have been rehearsed with respect to refinement in execution, nuance in pano and forte, and in other details. We would have wished - to put this simply - preferably Mr Heller, also a director of Hlahol, to have been at the conductor’s desk in such a production! We have no doubt that he is an excellent singer but he cannot be a conductor... decisiveness in beat, precision, no toiling away on the rostrum - these are the requirements of a good conductor. Finally we must mention the solo quartet and say that it would not be fair to criticise [them] only leniently; first the voices were not robust, [nor] well-chosen, secondly these four gentlemen had evidently not rehearsed their parts, for sometimes there were mistakes and unrefined intonation, overall a barren, drab performance.’ The critic concluded with an appeal to the committee of Hlahol to be more careful in deciding which of its conductors would be best suited for specific occasions. In this case they were ‘mistaken’ in their choice, as a result of which the performance of Zvonař’s composition was not as successful as the work itself warranted. Lukes conducted the following day’s entertainment given by Hlahol; the review of that event which was published by Dalibor 20/11/1862 praised his direction. However, less than a month later Dalibor 1/12/1862 published news that Lukes had resigned from the directorship of Hlahol, the report noting that his departure stemmed from unspecified ‘important personal business’ reasons.

Národní listy 13/11/1862 published a combined review of this annual Mass performance by Hlahol and the Society’s first entertainment of the new season. The correspondent related: ‘Annual Mass and entertainment of Hlahol. Hlahol began the second year of its activities as the last year in a dignified manner. True to its principle that it will also cultivate church music, it performed on 9 November the Mass in B minor by J.L. Zvonař in a fitting manner and to a reasonable standard. The lofty requirements for a first performance could not be met, since perhaps only four Sundays had passed since the new members [of the society] had gathered and since rehearsals began. This year’s Mass performance was of course lesser than last year’s, however only for the reason that last year the Mass had been studied over three months. This year the time could not be spent on this [because] Hlahol had to keep to the schedule of productions laid down by its founding and contributing members.’ The correspondent then noted that if other programmes being given by Hlahol had not been so demanding or called for so much rehearsal then the rehearsals would have been more effective. The rehearsal programme and the excessive demands these placed on the singers was held to blame for the lower standard of the Mass performance. Interestingly however, no mention was made of the effectiveness or otherwise of Lukes’s direction.’  

This event was not reported upon by Prager Morgenpost, Bohemia or Prager Zeitung.

The event was listed in articles published by Dalibor 20/2/1864 and Národní listy 17/2/1864 giving details of the official report released by Hlahol concerning its activities during the society’s first two seasons, from October 1861 until October 1863.