• BENNEWITZ, Antonín: instrumentalist, vl
• KINDL, Jan: instrumentalist, vl
• PAULUS, Alfred: instrumentalist, va
• GOLTERMANN, Julius: instrumentalist, vc

The string quartet comprised vl, Antonín Benewitz; vl, Jan Kindl; va, Alfred Paulus; vc, Julius Goltermann. The second viola player, Bauer, in Mendelssohn’s Quintet was identified only by the Bohemia 30/12/1858 review.

News of this third chamber music event, ‘Quartettsoirée’, was published in Bohemia 24/12/1858. This noted only that the production would be given next Wednesday and that the programme was to contain a quartet by Haydn, a ‘grossen Quartet’ by Mendelssohn [actually the Quintet in B-flat major op.87], and Beethovens ‘op.130’ [actually op.127] in E-flat major. This brief report may have been published because the annual series of three chamber music productions were usually spaced at an interval of a week between each concert, which meant that the third and last production would have been due to have been given on 24/12/1858, the date of this newspaper source. That the performance did actually occur on 29/12/1858 was confirmed by the Tageskalender appearing in Bohemia on that day, which also noted the time, venue and the performers in the quartet.

A report detailing the event, signed ‘V.’, appeaed in Prager Zeitung 30/12/1858. Almost all of this text was given to descriptive résumé of the three compositions performed. The first and last numbers of the programme were enthusiastically praised. Haydn’s ‘extraordinary and bold’ writing in the Finale of his ‘beautiful’ D minor Quartet op.9 inspired particularly florid description, its key changes specifically regarded as being of ‘elemental’ force and a ‘revelation of the all-profound Tone-poet’. The ‘partly ingratiating, partly great-Art, ever-spirited dialect of Mendelssohn in his posthumous Quintet spurred [revived] new interest among the numerous audience after the [Beethoven quartet], so that all the movements received acclaim.’ Beethoven’s late quartet was evidently considered to be more problematic. This was a work thought to be less representative of the composer’s own time than it was of the present. In the ‘marvellous and fantastic lofty harmonies and unexpected sound effects’, in being governed more by ideals of poetry than of fundamental musical relationships, exhibiting an ‘almost embrassing forcefulness’ its content anticipated the principles of modern art.

The Prager Morgenpost 31/12/1858 review, signed ‘R.’, reported that ‘this third soirée was through its programme as well as through its performance the most attractive of all that we have had this year.’ Almost all of the following text focussed upon describing the compositions given. In the opening work by ‘old Haydn’ there was manifest in ‘outmoded forms a young spirit, the healthiest humour’. Such description formed the basis of the critic’s perception of a composer who on account of his music of grace, mildness, of real unaffected expression, of ‘harmless, innocuous joviality’ should not ‘from the world be banished’; this view represented a reflection of broad contemporary opinion of Haydn’s music during the middle nineteenth century, and in which lay the reasons for the eclipse of his music during that era. Following this quartet, the ‘crown of the evening’ was Beethoven’s Quartet in E-flat major, Op.127, ‘a work which undoubtedly [stands] at the summit of quartet music.’ Eschewing any detailed comment on the music itself, the critic considered that this ‘incomparably rich composition’ was not only difficult for the broad public to appreciate, but also represented a great task to performers. ‘Our splendid quartet we [may] credit with great thanks for the performance in all parts was precise.’ Mendelssohn’s Quintet was also praised, particularly the third and last movements, for its considerable drive, for the composer’s perceived ability to ‘fill broad and massive forms with his inexhuastible fantasy,’ and in the middle [presumably the slow movement] for his ‘a noble simplicity’. The ’wonderful’ Andante scherzando had to be encored.

The Dalibor 1/1/1859 review, signed ‘P.’, expressed delight over what was considered by this critic to be a very successful choice of programme, the „finis coronat opus“ of this series of three chamber music entertainments, and enthused about the high standard of performance. The programme is listed in performance order according to the Dalibor publication, the substance of which simply comprised brief descriptions of the three compositions performed.