Show Less
Open access

The Beginnings of Polish Musicology


Małgorzata Sieradz

The book presents the history of the only strictly scientific Polish musicological periodical Kwartalnik Muzyczny. It shows how the editorial board of the periodi-cal met with true approval and harsh criticism. The subject allows the author to present the beginnings of Polish musicology and its evolution through three epochs: the late partitioning period, the interwar period of Poland’s independ-ence, and the early years after the Second World War
Show Summary Details
Open access

1. The idea of publishing a musicological quarterly – preparatory work – establishing Kwartalnik Muzyczny: the periodical’s concept – programme assumptions: the first editorial – reactions of the milieu

1. The idea of publishing a musicological quarterly – preparatory work – establishing Kwartalnik Muzyczny: the periodical’s concept – programme assumptions: the first editorial – reactions of the milieu

Excluding the first Kwartalnik Muzyczny – the organ of WTM – whose goal was the planned, statutory activity of the management Board announced in the annual report of the Towarzystwo,1 all nineteenth and most twentieth-century music magazines were (at least in their original intent) one-man initiatives of their editors (we should exclude from this periodicals that were created as organs of the scene, such as publications of singing unions or various foundations and religious associations). This is also how Adolf Chybiński wanted to see ‘his’ quarterly/annual, and he shared this idea with his musicologist friends. Let us remember that Henryk Opieński already wrote in 1920 about publishing his little work in an unspecified edition of Chybiński’s yearbook.2 Without doubt, the professor was thinking about his own journal for years. He was strongly associated with each of the editors to whom he directed the results of his research – he appeared not only as an author, but he also served as an adviser and through the great intensity of his contributions, which filled the pages of the music and socio-cultural-literary press in a profound manner, he had already previously given a scientific tone to several titles: from the period before the Great War – Kwartalnik Muzyczny, Młoda Muzyka, the Warsaw-based Przegląd Muzyczny, and from the twenty year interwar period – the Poznań Przegląd Muzyczny, Myśl Muzyczna, Muzyka (at least in those columns devoted to historical and theoretical issues).

The editors of these magazines probably realised that they were not ambitious enough for the expectations of the most elite readers – a new class of musicologists – their profile, when (generally) for pragmatic reasons (the expectations of the bodies appointing them, finances) they published publications for a wide range of music amateurs, and therefore for everyone and for no-one3. The ←151 | 152→first generation of musicologists educated at foreign universities realised that they owed it to society not only to study, but also to popularise music, even if this did not always coincide with their professional ambitions. Łucjan Kamieński, albeit with apprehension, once accurately spoke of the threats connected with activities in the field of journalism, criticism and music education. He was not an advocate of frittering away time and academic knowledge in favour of popular literature, while in musicological studies he saw the possibility of developing new, qualified, early career specialists prepared to undertake professional activity other than strictly scientific – as publicists, music activists, and educators:

It must be better that we do it, rather than dilettantism takes over all musical education, but, of course, then studies and research suffer, because … leaving aside wasted time, writing for the community scientifically demoralises, the scientific and feuilletonistic psyches (even if the feuilleton covers 3 columns or 12 sides) are so different, it always takes me much effort to change from one to the other. … It will be better if our circle is multiplied and after graduation our students are specialised, some in certain directions of academic work, others in journalism and popular literature, still others in practice.4

Perhaps not all representatives of musicologists considered such a division necessary and justified, and some (sometimes by choice, sometimes against themselves, out of necessity forced by life situation) successfully practised popularisation and scholarship together; at the same time, however, the need to set up a scholarly journal smouldered in the community.

In 1925 a reporter in Przegląd Muzyczny signed with the monogram ‘s’ mentioned in the information provided about the newly-created periodical – the varsovian Muzyka – and other local publishing initiatives that ‘in Lviv publication of Kwartalnik Muzyczny is being planned.’5 Let us also recall here the words of Henryk Opieński about including in the nearly unknown yearbook ‘a little work … from Bakwark, a few of his letters and information about his previously unknown Polish manuscripts.’6 Some organisational work took place, because the gentlemen returned to a specific conversation about the publication with Chybiński, probably the following summer, when Opieński agreed to the proposed offer, and he began to work in autumn, after returning to Switzerland from his artistic journey.7

←152 | 153→

Evidently, nothing came of these plans at the dawn of the twenties – at that time, Chybiński still lacked the facilities that could support him financially. The country had just been revived, it was difficult (amongst many other urgent needs of the resurrected state) to find sponsors to support new low-profit initiatives, such as scholarly activities in niche specialisations, to which the then young and little-known Polish musicology belonged. For sure, however, there were still discussions among active musicologists about the necessity of opening an editorial office for a ‘professional’ journal, with a strictly academic profile, not a potpourri combining serious presentations of the state of academic research with current affairs of music or musical journalism, magazines that would not limit the authors to short forms, popularising music.8

Almost at the same time as Chybiński’s first plans appeared, in Poznań Łucjan Kamieński raised the idea for a monthly or biweekly, which he wrote about extensively in a letter to Lviv:

So now I will tell you confidentially about a particular project, about which I counted a priori on your support, the more so because you encouraged me to do something similar…. And so: a musical monthly, or eventually a biweekly, is being made … and I will take over the chief editorship. We will rely on this rag … Muzyka i Śpiew, but we will change the title and its whole scope…. The actual management, however, must be entirely in my hands, along with the right to choose professional staff …. I am asking you then, my beloved colleague, to support us with your cooperation and also to inspire the ‘younger brothers’ of Lviv, that is, your helpers and mature students, to cooperate…. Apart from me, from Poznań there will be Gieburowski, Piotrowski, and after the fait accompli and in any case Henio [Opieński], from Cracow I will ask Jachimecki and Reiss; from Lviv I count, apart from you sir, on Wójcikówna and Father Feicht. But how now with Warsaw? I want to strictly aspire to a serious level, something like Berlin’s Musik – but from that Warsaw mob, perhaps only one Binental could write for such a journal. Also, at the same time, I would like to give the thing a Christian profile… Ergo? ←153 | 154→I will further invite Kromalicki and Landowska9 (o Moses!), also Alicja Simon. I would also like … to have correspondents relating from abroad, in Berlin, Paris, London, Rome, Milan. Could you, sir, advise me in this regard?10

One can see from this letter that Kamieński wanted to break with the current practice used by most music press publishers, of combining various types of historical sketches with popular feuilletons and with concert hall and opera critics. He suggested creating a magazine after the form of the ‘Berlin Musik,’ referring with this comparison to the one published since 1901 (we can add that it lasted until 1943), the German bi-weekly led by conductor and publisher Bernhard Schuster, in which magazine we can find the texts of Boris von Schloezer, Theodor W. Adorno, Franz Schreker, Curt Sachs, Ferruccio Busoni, Karl Geiringer and many other outstanding music historians and theoreticians. A small group of educated Polish musicologists may not have been able to meet such ambitious plans at once, but the direction was indicated, and the names mentioned by Kamieński did indeed guarantee the highest possible level for the ‘expert’ periodical.11

However, these were only the first projects whose realisation turned out to be not so obvious. Just a few months later, Kamieński spoke not about a bi-weekly, but only about an annual publication,12 but he was soon busy with the organisation of the next Polish branch of musicology in Poznań, and left aside his ‘editorial’ plans, perhaps with the hope that Lviv would organise the ‘annual’ ←154 | 155→publication. Meanwhile, the leader of Lviv musicology patiently waited for any kind of ‘publishing’ opportunity, which finally appeared in 1927. Let us remember that at this time Chybiński was invited by young Warsaw musicians – Ochlewski, Rutkowski and Zalewski – to the group of founding members of SMDM established by them (see chapter I-2). The Association’s planned activities included, amongst others, apart from organising concerts, the launch of the WDMP sheet music series and the creation of a music magazine, for which a subsidy from the FNP was obtained. The first attempts to select the appropriate printing press (led by Zygmunt Łazarski) took place before these decisions, in November 1927. In the following months, the cover design and detailed budget were agreed, and in June 1928 a meeting was held with the professor and the local group in Warsaw (Kazimierz Sikorski, who was invited to act as the responsible editor and was supposed to arrive in Warsaw in September).13 The editorial team was two people – Chybiński–Sikorski – and the official address they used was ul. Okólnik 1 in Warsaw (the Conservatoire building), then also (as ‘administrative’ headquarters) Świętokrzyska 16 apt. 8, and private addresses: Chybiński’s Lviv home at ul. Kalecza 20 and Sikorski’s Warsaw flat at ul. Korzeniowskiego 6 apt. 25. (We also know for sure, that as the third one, as a volunteer and as a person for special assignments in works requiring special care, the editorial team were sometimes supported by Bronisława Wójcikówna, for example, in the case of proofreading articles by Ludwik Bronarski, held in such high esteem by the editors.)

Kwartalnik Muzyczny in its second incarnation was an organ of SMDM, and the idea was a consequence of conversations held in the Warsaw circle of musicians gathered around the Association, but in accepting the invitation from its Board to cooperate and to lead the journal, the professor’s own academic personality dominated the journal completely. The members of the SMDM however, despite the fact that they targeted the magazine to a wide group of musicians, accepted this ‘scholarly’ domination, being aware (based on their own ←155 | 156→experience) of the importance of musicological research for responsibly undertaken workmanship.14

The enthusiasts expressed the motives for opening the scholarly journal in an editorial at the beginning of the new title: ‘The necessity for us of the existence of a scholarly magazine is too much visible in present times. Today the evaluation of our musical culture is marked by musicians belonging to certain musical groups, their official influences and relations. An objective assessment of our musical achievements from the earliest times to the contemporary era is not only desirable, but also necessary.’15 Fully sharing these beliefs signed by the Board under their editorial, Chybiński immediately started organising the first number, the work of which was primarily devoted to musicologists belonging to his immediate circle and proven in previous cooperation – Henryk Opieński, Feliks Starczewski, Maria Szczepańska, Heronim Feicht. In acquiring an article about Chopin’s pianos by the French musicologist, organist and harpsichordist Paul Brunold, as already mentioned, he was probably helped by Emma Altberg, co-founder of SMDM, putting the editorial team in contact with this French musician. Through the Warsaw circles of Kwartalnik Muzyczny, the first number also included material from the field of acoustics by Gabriel Tołwiński and the essay ‘O kulturze muzycznej w Polsce’ [About musical culture in Poland] by Stanisław Furmanik. Chybiński himself published an essay on Marcin Mielczewski’s vocal-instrumental concerts and short remarks on the history of musicology in Poland. With the beginning of work on Kwartalnik, the acquaintance of Adolf Chybiński and Ludwik Bronarski became stronger and so began the long-standing history of their fruitful cooperation in the pages of Polish musicological periodicals. In the autumn, directed to Bronarski in Switzerland, independently by Bronisław Rutkowski from Warsaw and by the professor on his ←156 | 157→own behalf and that of the Secretariat of SMDM from Lviv, a ‘request to send a piece titled Harmonika Fryderyka Chopina [Frederic Chopin’s harmony].’16 The author did not provide SMDM with the requested article – as is known, the work Harmonika Chopina, conceived on a much grander scale, appeared in the year 1935 in Warsaw published by TWMP – but he prepared a different text for the first number of Kwartalnik, discussing issues of a collective and critical edition of Chopin’s works. With his studies and reports, he was present in nearly all the pre-war editions.

The first issue of Kwartalnik was released in the final days of December 1928. Chybiński wrote the editorial to it, however – as Zalewski himself admitted – the text was significantly modified by the Warsaw part of the editorial team (unfortunately, it is difficult to say in which regards).17 It is known, that reading the contents of the ‘editorials’ and notes ‘From the editors,’ it is usually possible to follow the current moods accompanying the editorial work on the following numbers, the motives for the decision to open or close the title, the mood of the editors and representatives of the ‘superior authorities.’ In the first editorial of Kwartalnik, it is possible to sense much enthusiasm. This enthusiasm raised the tone accompanying the founding of a journal with such a serious profile: ‘SMDM, spreading the passion for musical masterpieces of the past and striving for a deeper knowledge of them, organised ongoing concerts and programmes, brought to life WDMP, and now undertakes to publish Kwartalnik Muzyczny. … This will be a magazine intended primarily for musicians, a magazine that deals with extensive musical issues in a serious, factual and expert manner.’18 These words were extended with a statement about the desirability of supplementing musical knowledge, where ‘talent … and technical skills are not enough if they are not supported by knowledge and thorough education,’ and the country needs ‘seriously educated musicians with broad horizons and established views on all phenomena in the field of art.’

With awareness of the notion growing in general opinion of a ‘lack of more serious interest for art [and] the proverbial non-musicality of … society,’ the Board of the Association expressed its belief that ‘by associating with the past, taking from it values that have survived for centuries, examining the life and works of old masters, penetrating the essence of their creative spirit, we create strong foundations on which talent, skill and work will build an edifice of ←157 | 158→contemporary creativity. Without these lasting foundations, the music culture of our country cannot develop normally.’ Moreover, according to the signatories, society ‘understands the importance of art, [hence] it is the duty of every musician to tirelessly extract and intensify this passion.’ This duty was to be served, amongst others, by ‘scholarly research on music in recent decades [which] has produced serious results, establishing a number of facts and displaying many musical issues.’ Next came the explanation of the decision to establish a new journal: ‘Polish musical knowledge is not well known to the wider public, or even musicians due to the lack of extensive publications and professional magazines. Already more than once we have tried to publish music magazines of a scholarly nature: unfortunately, obstacles of various natures interrupted their existence. In this way, a very serious gap has appeared in our life that SMDM wants to fill in by publishing Kwartalnik Muzyczny.’

The programme mainly dealt with promoting the idea of resurrecting early music (through planning the repertoire of concerts or setting up a series of WDMP), and the Board felt obliged to explain to readers that indeed in the case of Kwartalnik this principle will not apply and the journal ‘will deal not only with early music, but to an equal degree with later music up to and including contemporary music. … usually in placing early music in contrast to contemporary, they are characterised as two opposite poles, one is said to fight the other, and they are never combined with each other. In our opinion, this view is mistaken. We are sincere admirers of early music, but we do not tear it away from the present times. … Putting the question this way, we liberate music from the clusters of passing historical phenomena and give it a characteristic of eternity…. This is also why we do restrict the content of Kwartalnik Muzyczny only within the boundaries of early music. We want to give a magazine dedicated to music, not just the history of music.’19

←158 | 159→

In practice, the break with the formula of all other music magazines, filled with numerous departments and columns, to which almost every submitted text could be assigned – whether that be an article or a chronicle note, or thoughts poured onto paper from connoisseurs of music, professionals and amateurs20 – influenced the decision for a simplified content structure of Kwartalnik. This time Chybiński modelled on the ‘classics’ of European journalism – the German Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft and French Revue de Musicologie, where most of the volume was filled with articles and reports from musicological publications and important sheet music editions, and information about the most important periodicals and current news, e.g. from the activities of leading music societies, such as Société Française de Musicologie, were only an essential addition.

In essence, four columns were established in Kwartalnik Muzyczny. The main part, of course, was filled with articles that followed ‘Historical material’ (depending on the content, also known as ‘Materials for the history of Polish music,’ ‘Documents and materials for the history of Polish music,’ and ‘Materials and documents for the history of music in Poland’). ‘Materials’ were complementary to the part which was made of articles, and were directed to this section because of their documentary content or small size (though sometimes also due to the subjective opinion of the editor-in-chief concerning the theme of such a publication) and distinguished by their two-column layout and a smaller font, like in the case that followed them, ‘Reports’ (although at the end of the edition, the two-column system was abandoned); followed by further ‘Chronicles’ and usually also a chapter on ‘Polish musical magazines’ (taking in to account information about the contents of the magazines: Hosanna, LWML, Muzyka, Muzyka Kościelna, Muzyka w Szkole, Orkiestra, Śpiewak). A surprisingly large number of ←159 | 160→reviews were included in ‘Reports’ (both books and sheet music), which I will return to discuss in chapter II-4; ‘Chronicle’ was an information corner about the activities of SMDM – here concert programmes and music programmes were given as well as notes about realisations (finished and planned) of the WDMP series; the third of the mentioned headings was sometimes expanded with a column ‘Z czasopism muzycznych zagranicznych’ [From foreign musical magazines], in which reprints from publications on the achievements of Polish musicologists were published, and in practice – about editions in the framework of WDMP.21

A novelty against the background of all previous musical publications was to include also a table of contents in French in the book, through which Chybiński signalised the potential international reach of the journal.

Each number usually ended (only sporadically started) with notes ‘from the editor,’ in which the editorial resources of the portfolio were presented. Several times the editorial staff prepared a wider commentary, as in the fifth number, which opened the second year of work. Chybiński sustained the magazine’s programme assumptions there, regretting that the lack of an abundance of sufficiently scholarly musicological creativity did not allow full realisation of the intended plans for broadening knowledge about the history of Polish music. In turn, in the ninth number, he announced further expansion of the areas not yet sufficiently exploited and planned thematic numbers, to participate in which – on account of the ‘niche’ character of the themes – he decided to invite authors from outside his known circle of scholars (sociologists, music psychologists and pedagogues, and also ethnographers and folklore researchers).22

Chybiński planned one more column, which he wrote about to Ludwik Bronarski: ‘for a long time I have been planning a column in Kwartalnik …, and it’s titled “Miscellanea” (after “Historical Material” and before “Reports”). If you sir, my friend, have some material for this column, then I will try for still another so that we can create this column starting from number 14.’23 The next idea was born less than a year later – this time Chybiński planned a column for ‘Actualia’ [Current affairs],

in which the authors, signed or unsigned, will deal with current matters, but not in the sense of sensations or some brief news, but … permanent current affairs. I want to bring ←160 | 161→our Kwartalnik to life at all costs. If you sir, my friend, have something ‘troubling you’ and it would be worth giving it a more general meaning, then exploiting your innate sense of tact and taste and ability for deep reflection, you would sir, my friend, serve many good causes. Maybe something about “Polish music abroad” etc.? You have at your disposal all matters of art, science, knowledge, culture etc.24

A magazine thus conceived, very strict in its structure and not giving the opportunity for current journalism and criticism in its pages, but only pure scholarship, on the one hand, aroused enthusiasm among (some) Polish researchers of music history and related fields, and on the other hand it quickly became an object of criticism. This criticism resulted from both a different approach to musicology and purely pragmatic motives (for example, personal conflict or the issue of uneven distribution of finances by the state institutions appointed for this). Shortly after the appearance of the first issue, Henryk Opieński, one of its authors, wrote: ‘I was very happy with Kwartalnik; after all, finally a Christian – truly scientific and honest journal. I was writing the other day to Rutkowski – although it is rather to you, dear sir, to whom congratulations should be given. As for the vignette, it is good as it is – you know, sir, that only now (that is after your letter) looking at the vignette of Sebastian that I saw German text there – I also wrote to Rutkowski that I regretted that there was no memory of the deceased “Kwartalnik I” in the preface, as they are from one family, though a descendant – as befits a free Poland – more robust in serious materials.’25

In turn, in one of the February numbers of Kurier Warszawski, in the column ‘Z wydawnictw muzycznych’ [From music publishers], Felicjan Szopski’s26 review appeared. The publicist, briefly recalling the history of Polish music magazines, associated the new quarterly with success associated with even the fact that it was not – in contrast to its predecessors – under political pressure. Szopski very highly rated the contents of the first journal published under the auspices of SMDM, and also praised the preparation of the publication from a technical viewpoint. At the same time, he addressed the activists of the Association with words of appreciation for their full initiative and energy which helped establish ←161 | 162→‘the basics of musical knowledge and healthy love for music budding from the seed of highly interesting concerts and publications.’27

From Kamieński from Poznań however, there were questions about the possibility of taking over the title from the custody of SMDM and under the wing of PTM, led by him. The members of SMDM also often expressed their satisfaction with the publications prepared by Chybiński with gratitude: ‘We were all impressed with number 6–7 of Kwartalnik: it looks beautiful outside and inside it is exceptionally interesting. We congratulate the Professor – and thank him.’28

Not everyone, however, supported such hermetic literature as represented in the pages of Kwartalnik. In 1930/31, a discussion about the culture of ‘paper musicology’ practised in Lviv swept through the circles of journalists and music academics and the sense of producing such publications for a handful of readers. The Warsaw group of critics, with Karol Stromenger at their head, sympathised with Zdzisław Jachimecki, in the criticism of ‘technically’ treated musicological research, and put forth his views in the pages of the capital’s journal, mercilessly highlighting mistakes made in the scholarly narrative (also in the pages of Kwartalnik Muzyczny) and ridiculing misguided research interpretations.29

Mateusz Gliński, in turn, tried not to comment on the achievements of the ‘competition,’ although in this period he often wrote to Chybiński. In his letters, he said little about his impressions after the appearance of Kwartalnik, but in January he noted the first number in Muzyka.30

We can find the most information about the Warsaw-Lviv contacts in the abundant, often cited correspondence between Adolf Chybiński and Ludwik Bronarski. It is from the pages of these letters that we have the opportunity to get to know the creative process over subsequent editions, the editor’s remarks about events related to the work on the contents of the editorial portfolio, and the many detailed reports about editorial life was written up almost ‘day by day.’ In one of the letters, for example, the editor explained the rather unfortunate practice of dividing essays into episodes:

In this annual [avoiding division] was … almost impossible, because the material with which I started publishing the magazine consisted, with few exceptions, of excerpts from longer works, not very digestible in extenso by readers of Kwartalnik. I also wanted to ←162 | 163→help Polish historical musicology and to print at least parts of ‘heavy’ works. For the next year, I will place whole works (even longer ones). I am already introducing this principle by printing the extensive work of Father Dr Feicht about Pękiel’s ‘Cantata.’ Of course, in the fourth number already we have the end of ‘further parts’ (completion). My remarks go mainly to my closest employees and me, as the authors of printed works, because the separation of anyone’s work into two numbers happens everywhere and in every publishing house.31

Of course, there were more editorial problems: almost from the very beginning, there were problems with completing the numbers and keeping the deadlines for editorial work, the shipment from Lviv with the texts to ‘number one’ did not contain all the necessary materials and plates, and therefore the letter sent to Chybiński by Ochlewski is one of dozens similarly filled with reminders, such as accompanied the Kwartalnik publications (also after the war).32 In October the following year, a question was asked about the ‘July’ edition, in November delivery was expected of the complete set of materials to the ‘fifth’ as soon as possible, in February 1930, there was a constant lack of texts to fill the double edition scheduled for the first half of the year. Also, on the other hand, not much later, Chybiński even thought about increasing the frequency of the publication of the magazine: ‘I have a sincere desire to convert the Kwartalnik into a bimonthly, but these are dreams only. Let’s stay ahead, what we gain with difficulty, trying to achieve a higher and higher standard of the whole.’33

The tardiness at the editorial office also overlapped with problems with the printing press. The Board of the SMDM alerted: ‘The technical side is failing – we must battle with the printers, and we don’t know how. We often telephone and from time to time confer with Mr Łazarski, he always promises and assures us that we will not have difficulties with his press. We are seriously wondering if we should not change the printers.’34 With these delays (less often from an excess of accepted materials) the decision to combine numbers was taken (6/7, 10/11, ←163 | 164→12/13, 14/15, 17/18, 19/20; adhering to the principle of not linking journals falling between the years, no common number 5/6 was issued, as initially planned).

Finally, after months of quarrelling about further plans for press publications of the Association, a delegation from Warsaw announced a visit to Lviv in late autumn 1933.35 A few of the people most loyal to Chybiński expressed their opinion in connection with the decision to close Kwartalnik. Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian, the author of many foreign publications, wrote: ‘I cannot restrain myself … from expressing sincere regret on account of the closure of the publishers of Kwartalnik. Whoever understands European periodical publications in the field of musicology must state objectively and impartially that Kwartalnik stood at the highest scholarly level, which was not matched by any musicological journal, not even the German Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft with such a long scholarly tradition behind it. Undoubtedly this character of Kwartalnik was an obstacle in achieving material successes, but for all that Kwartalnik could be proud of the fact that it served reliable research work and grew our scholarly culture.’36

At the announced meeting and as a result of conversations amongst the Board of SMDM it was proposed to create a division into two periodicals: 1) closer to the formula of Muzyka (that is, next to historical or theoretical publications of a lighter nature, full of musical current affairs) a quarterly (over time, a bimonthly and monthly magazine) Muzyka Polska (initially, at least formally, with Chybiński as a co-editor), and 2) the strictly scholarly Polski Rocznik Muzykologiczny run independently (and alone) by Chybiński. The histories of the inauguration and the activities of both periodicals will be presented below (chapter II-5). However, in order to find out how much the scholarly musicological quarterly was needed in those years and how the ‘expert’ milieu gathered around it, it is worth becoming familiar with the outline of the contemporary history of musicological departments and discussions about the form of the young field practised in Polish universities (chapters II-2 and II-3).

←164 | 165→

1 Sprawozdanie Komitetu WTM 1909 1910, 24.

2 Opieński to Chybiński from Łódź 11 II 1920, AACh-BJ, box 6, O-2/67.

3 See for example, the already cited letter from Gliński to Chybiński from Warsaw from 1 II 1926, AACh-BJ, box 4, G-5/31.

4 Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 12 I 1926, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/27.

5 PM 1925/2, 15.

6 Opieński to Chybiński from Łódź 11 II 1920, AACh-BJ, box 6, O-2/67.

7 See Opieński to Chybiński from Miłosław 3 VIII [1921], AACh-BJ, box 6, sign. O-2/68.

8 We should appreciate those editors who did not avoid extensive dissertations of authors that are most important for the history of music (and related fields). There are many examples of such publications printed ‘in sections’ in the pages of Przegląd Muzyczny, Myśl Muzyczna, Muzyka Kościelna, Lwowskie Wiadomości Muzyczne i Literackie and a number of other titles already referenced in chapter I. But for example, already the editors of Muzyka refused greater size even to such an authority as Chybiński: ‘MUZYKA cannot place larger works due to technical reasons (we currently assign a maximum of 18–20 pages for articles. Further continuations are almost categorically deleted). Therefore, despite the most sincere intentions, I could only reflect on a fragment of 5 pages from the study about which the Professor writes in his letter…. If not, then please, dear sir, think about a new article for MUYKA,’ see Gliński to Chybiński from Warsaw 1 I 1925, AACh-BJ, box 4, G-5/13.

9 Wanda Landowska (1879–1959), an outstanding pianist and harpsichordist, to a large extent contributed to the renaissance of the music of J.S. Bach. She was also the author of many works devoted to the performance of early music.

10 Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 21 V 1921, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/2.

11 It should be added that Kamieński, modelling himself on the plans for the Berlin Die Musik, was thinking primarily of the quality, not the layout, of the content. In Shuster’s bi-weekly there were – apart from the work of the most outstanding musical pens of the time (and archival texts) – also reports on the contents of German and foreign musical journals, reviews of books and musicalia, including those of a lighter genre, concert reviews, a chronicle of current events and announcements of new publications, reports on the matters of musical societies. In principle, all larger Polish periodicals corresponded to such an arrangement in this time – Muzyka, Przegląd Muzyczny (Lwowskie Wiadomości Muzyczne i Literackie, further LWML) printed in newspaper format, the content was also similar).

12 ‘Time now for a musicological annual. Remember that [the Poznań publishing house] Św. Wojciech once told me they were ready to publish it. Well, I think I will use it. You have something, send it,’ see Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 9 XI 1921, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/11.

13 In addition to engaging in the work of various associations and unions, including editorial work, Kazimierz Sikorski was first and foremost a composer and theorist as well as a teacher. He existed as an author thanks to theoretical works written for the needs of music schools – his textbooks for harmony, instrumentation and counterpoint are still the basis of music education at the secondary level. Despite his close cooperation (before the war) with Chybiński, he did not offer Kwartalnik Muzyczny a single text for publication, his participation in the organisation of work in the editorial team was invaluable.

14 I have written about the differences which began to emerge at the turn of 1928 and 1930 regarding the different perception of the ‘target group’ of readers of Kwartalnik Muzyczny by Chybiński on the one hand and the Warsaw editors on the other in chapter I-2. It is then that the professor wrote to Bronarski, elaborating his further publishing plans: ‘But let only [the Board of SMDM] adopt a resolution that the Kwartalnik will survive until the end of its second volume, and I will not grieve at all, because then we will create an annual based on the Swiss model – just that one that it is no longer musical, but musicological.’ Writing about the Swiss annual, he had Schweizer Jahrbuch für Musikwissenschaft/Annales Suisses de Musicologie/Annuario Svizzero di Musicologia in mind which appeared from 1924, see Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 24 I 1930, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 30.

15 KM 1928/1, III.

16 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 20 IX 1928, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 9.

17 Zalewski 1977, 108–109.

18 This and further quotes from the editorial in KM 1928/1, [I–III].

19 We can find an extension of this idea a year later in the note ‘From the Editor’ closing the first period of editorial work. ‘a magazine published in the form of a quarterly, can only take into account works in the field of contemporary music which have a more permanent value and are not a product of a temporary vein of writing, or … are a product of “ephemeral” current trends. … With the greatest willingness we will always show hospitality to work whose content is addressed to the most up to date moment and to “music of the future” – we do not demand that these are strictly scholarly works; however, we do demand that these works have material value and be free of phraseology concealing emptiness of thought. We do not in any way give priority to purely scholarly works; it is also desirable to have accessible works which are characterised by an original view of themes known or not touched by our musical journalism,’ see ‘Od Redakcji’ [Editorial] (KM 1929/5, I–II).

20 For example, in Muzyka, in addition to the section with articles opening monthly, over the whole range of the magazine edition there were a dozen or so headings, appearing with different frequency: ‘Impresje muzyczne’ [Musical impressions] (in which the editor himself, Mateusz Gliński, was a permanent columnist), ‘Z oper i sal koncertowych’ [From operas and concert halls], ‘Trybuna artystów’ [Artists’ tribune], Nowe wydawnictwa’ [New publications], ‘Przegląd prasy’ [Press review], ‘Rozmaitości’ [Varia], ‘Kronika’ [Chronicle], ‘Dział informacyjny’ [Information section] (which contained advertisements for other magazines, publications, etc.), ‘Korespondencje’ [Correspondence], ‘Listy do redakcji’ [Letters to the editors], ‘Wesołe i smutne’ [Funny and sad], ‘Przegląd pedagogiczno-muzyczny’ [Pedagogical-musical review], ‘Wiadomości radiofoniczne’ [Radiophonic news], which later evolved into the column ‘Radio i muzyka mechaniczna’ [Radio and mechanical music]. In such an arrangement, articles usually took up a smaller part of the monthly.

21 For example, reprint of the review by L.M. Pereyra and Paul Brunold included in Revue de Musicologie from the first four numbers of WDMP (KM 1929/5, 98–99), or Hugo Leichtentritt in Die Musik about numbers 1 and 2 WDMP (KM 1931/10–11, 341–342).

22 See notes ‘Od Redakcji’ (KM 1931/10–11, 348, 1931/12–13, 480).

23 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 2 XI 1931, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 71.

24 Chybiński to Bronarski from Zakopane 29 VII 1932, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 79.

25 Opieński to Chybiński from Morges 14 (finished 19) III 1929, AACh-BJ, box 6, O-2/103.

26 Felicjan Szopski, ‘Kwartalnik Muzyczny. – Muzyka’ (KW 1929/45 from 15 II, evening edition, 12).

27 Ibid.

28 Rutkowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 12 VI 1930, AACh-BJ, box 6, R-19/17.

29 Maria Szczepańska’s publications, amongst others, mercilessly ridiculed by Jachimecki and Stromenger, served as an example of such a scholarly ‘false start,’ which we will be talking about later while discussing the contents of Kwartalnik (chapter II-4).

30 ‘Przegląd prasy’ [Press review] (Muzyka 1929/1, 43).

31 Chybiński to Bronarski 20 IV 1929, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 15. Chybiński decided to publish Maria Szczepańska’s article ‘O utworach Mikołaja Radomskiego (z Radomia) (Wiek XV)’ a few years later in volume II of PRM (pp. 87–94). In the post-war edition of Kwartalnik Szczepańska’s article ‘Studia o utworach Mikołaja Radomskiego (wiek XV). Zagadnienia form’ [Studies on the works of Mikołaj Radomski (15th Century). Issues of form] (KM 1949/25, 7–54, 1950/29–30, 64–83) appeared.

32 Ochlewski to Chybiński from Warsaw 13 IX 1928, AACh-BJ, box 6, O-1/33.

33 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 12 III 1931, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 59.

34 Rutkowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 11 I 1930, AACh-BJ, box no. 6, R-19/12.

35 Rutkowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 3 XI 1933, at AACh-BJ,box no. 6, sign. R-19/35.

36 Wójcik-Keuprulian to Chybiński from Lviv 30 I 1934, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/126.