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

2. Musicological circles in Poland (Lviv, Cracow, Poznań, Warsaw) as addresses of the Kwartalnik – socio-scientific contexts: ideas about the functioning of the musicological environment – main topics of interest – other possibilities of publishing musicological studies: academic publishing

2. Musicological circles in Poland (Lviv, Cracow, Poznań, Warsaw) as addresses of the Kwartalnik – socio-scientific contexts: ideas about the functioning of the musicological environment – main topics of interest – other possibilities of publishing musicological studies: academic publishing

At the threshold of the second decade of the twentieth century, Adolf Chybiński, who was educated in the German university ways and the structures not just from Munich but also from the institutes of Vienna or Berlin, tried to create a centre based on similar principles when he took on the newly created department in his Alma Mater in Lviv. The Lviv musicology group was not the first in the history of the science in Polish lands – for a year a department had been led by Zdzisław Jachimecki at the Jagiellonian University. However, from the point of view of, in particular, the history of scholarly musical journalism, through the person of the head of both the institution and the main nationwide (at least in principle) musicological periodical, it became a nursery for musicological writing activities. Therefore, I propose to open a review of Polish academic centres, which had the largest influence on the form of the literature with a short snapshot of the history of the environment of what was on one side of the academic, and on the other, artistic capital of Galicia.

The turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was a period of prosperity for Lviv. Even in the 1860s-1870s, numerous industrial, economic and social institutions began to emerge (Pedagogical Society, Colleges’ Society, Loan Bank).37 During this time, at the University of Lviv, from the Congress of Vienna until 1918 operating as the Franciscan University, the fight to increase the number of lectures conducted in Polish started. Already in 1882, the University was partially polonised, and the number of Polish-language lectures grew from a dozen or so to nearly two hundred at the beginning of the twentieth century, when the university became the largest Alma Mater of Galicia, just before the First World War, with nearly five thousand students.

←165 | 166→

The Lviv University was called Jan Kazimierz a year after Poland regained statehood, in November 1919, and soon thereafter also gained a new location – the building of the former Sejm Krajowy [National parliament]38 and a dozen other facilities in Lviv. It could be mentioned that it was difficult to house musicology at the same address as other humanities departments: its first, modest home was at Mikołaja street, in time, it was changed to a three-room office at Długosza street 27, in rooms occupied by the university’s Department of Physics, and in the twenties it was headquartered at Mickiewicza street 5, where there were four rooms for use.39

As Jan Draus wrote in the monograph of the university, the Lviv University ‘experienced a scientific apogee in the interwar period,’40 which created – but not always in accordance with the expectations of the musicologists’ environment – a potentially favourable field for the development of the centre led by Adolf Chybiński. In the academic atmosphere of Lviv during this time masters created their own centres: historians Franciszek Ksawery Liske, Tadeusz Wojciechowski, historian of diplomacy and political science Szymon Askenazy, historians and art theorists Jan Bołoz-Antoniewicz and Karolina Lanckorońska specialising in Italian Renaissance and Baroque, philosopher Kazimierz Twardowski, Oswald Balzer – creator of the school of Polish law, anthropologist Jan Czekanowski, mathematicians – Stefan Banach, Hugo Steinhaus, Leon Chwistek and many other outstanding intellectuals and researchers, and among the creators of Lviv ‘schools.’ Draus also mentions – as the father of the Polish musicological school – Adolf Chybiński,41 who found a friendly group of academics from the beginning of his stay in Lviv, as evidenced by his memories of musical evenings in the house of Kazimierz Twardowski, in which he often took part.42

Unfortunately, despite such huge intellectual potential, the University sometimes – and not only in the first years of the existence of the young state – succumbed to the pressure of current affairs, and politics influenced the activities of cultural and scientific institutions in various ways. The situation inside the Lviv university was complicated by the city’s multiethnicity – similarly to the (also borderland) Vilnius Stefan Batory University – which to a lesser extent ←166 | 167→touched the teaching staff, but to a greater extent the students, which became particularly evident in the first months after Poland gained statehood. The six-month Polish-Ukrainian open conflict and battle for Lviv (from Novemeber 1918 to June 1919) resulted amongst others with a complete ban on admission to the University for young people who could not prove Polish citizenship (though not necessarily Polish nationality) and certify participation in military service during the Polish-Ukrainian war (or present legitimate reasons for not participating in these events). Through the decision of MWRiOP from March 1920 the previously utraquist school became a completely Polish-speaking institution. Ukrainian lecturers were removed, which led to legal and shortly after secret attempts to organise university and technical courses and lectures by the academic Ukrainian community. Thus, two universities of a national nature were established in Lviv: Secret Ukrainian University and the secret High Technical School. At the same time, however, protests from Ukrainian creative and scientific associations, also in the international arena, aimed to bring about considerable relaxation of the restrictive regulations at local universities within a few years, and the UJK Senate with commented on the plans to establish a public Ukrainian university in Lviv in the 1920s in a spirit of goodwill, stressing that they were always ready to support the aspirations of that nation to cultivate its own culture and achievements in the field of science.43 Restrictions were gradually abolished, including admitting people without Polish citizenship to the student body; the situation began to return to normal after 1923, when ‘after the Council of Ambassadors recognised the eastern borders of Poland … access to study for Ukrainian youth was successively eased’;44 by 1925, secret universities in Lviv discontinued their activities.45

The second wave of conflicts that afflicted the academic community in all Polish universities was related to the reform of Janusz Jędrzejewicz in 1933, introducing limitations on the independence of the universities, including the possibility of top-down removal of departments. The changes in the UJK resulting from these regulations brought about protests by the teaching staff and student strikes, and from Minister Jędrzejewicz’s side, failure to approve subsequent ←167 | 168→candidates for Rectors presented by the Senate and assigning a commissioner to the University. The situation in this respect de facto stabilised only four years later, when Wojciech Świętosławski, an opponent of previous reforms, became the new Minister for WRiOP.

Fortunately for the milieu of the University of Lviv, at no critical moment was the university closed. Classes were however suspended, but without the need to repeat semesters or re-recruit students (which happened several times in the thirties at the University of Warsaw and the Stefan Batory University in Vilnius) and the university library was also closed periodically.

Chybiński always tried to remain on the sidelines of current events, but often mentioned the protests in letters to Bronarski: ‘University troubles again in Warsaw. I wonder if the echo will resonate in Lviv and elsewhere. Unfortunately, it seems so, and soon. How I do not like this!! It seems to me that the new law on academic associations will not remove the disturbance.’46

More important to the life of the University were disruptions in the course of classes arising against the background of Polish-Jewish conflicts – starting with the introduction of the numerus clausus rules by successive departments at the beginning of the 1920s, through the ‘bench ghetto’ and attempts to push through the so-called numerus nullus in the late thirties. At that time, unlike a few years earlier, when the majority of the academic community – both students and the academic staff – supported one side against state interference in the internal affairs of the university, there was also a division line within the conflict. Although the main core of the academic staff were sympathisers of the then National Democracy, a large group of Lviv academics had progressive and democratic views, sometimes even leftist. In such a situation, the collision of these two elements in the local Alma Mater was unavoidable, which could again result in suspension of classes.

In anticipation of the history of the Lviv Department of Musicology which will be presented below, it should be mentioned that the ethnic melting pot was also typical of the entire university. In connection with the wave of anti-Semitic student riots in the autumn of 1937, Chybiński was concerned above all for the situation of his pupils and the course of their studies. He wrote: ‘I am very concerned about the state of affairs at the university. I have had several students since last year, whom I came to like for their diligence, reliability (I won’t mention the exceptions) and whom I value for usually being capable as well as intelligent and passionate people. Nevertheless, my best intentions are paralysed by ←168 | 169→fighting, hindering systematic pedagogical work. On the other hand, without exception they are all people who are calm and slow to wrangle.’47 And further:

We’ll see if we can save this trimester. Despite all things, me together with Mrs. Szczepańska and Mr. Dunicz mustered our students so that they do not lose any of the exercise material for this year, even if the trimester is lost on the order of the rectorate or even the ministry, due to the constant suspensions of lectures and without any fault on the part of my students. If it is cancelled, then I shall grant them the double number of hours on the colloquial testimonies for the exercises in the second trimester.48

On the other hand, Chybiński’s nationalistic and chauvinistic beliefs were repeatedly to be seen in those years. Opinions expressed in private at that time did not prevent him, after many years, in a different historical situation, from maintaining contacts with former students of Ukrainian or Jewish descent. Inclined, as we know, to conduct rich correspondence, during the war, in 1942, Chybiński responded to letters originally from Vienna, and after the war, from Utrecht, from one of his former students, Myrosław Antonowycz49, who was known after the war as an outstanding musicologist (he also studied with A. Smijers), researcher and publisher of the work of Josquin des Prés, specialist in the field of Orthodox Ukrainian music, creator and long-time leader of the Utrecht Byzantine Choir. I will have the opportunity to write about the strong, permanent cooperation with representatives of the Lviv minorities – Józef Chomiński or Zofia Lissa – after 1945.

It was in such realities of political skirmishes and national animosities – that the formation of one of the main musicological centre in Poland took place in the twenty-year-long interwar period. Let us not forget, however, that the Lviv department was important, but not the only circle in the city in which musicological thought could reach fertile ground, and the group of local musicologists, also graduates of foreign institutions, could realise their calling and use the education gained in this field in a variety of ways. For years, other institutions had been active in the city, gathering music lovers and people interested in knowledge about music – the opera house, the philharmonic, music schools, the scientific and musical society, magazines.

←169 | 170→

The tradition of music associations in Lviv dates back to 1826, when Franz Xaver Mozart – son of Wolfgang Amadeus – founded the Society of Saint Cecilia, which patronised concert performances of church and secular music. After fuctioning for a short time as the Towarzystwo Wykształcenia Muzyki w Galicji [Music education society in Galicia] (1857–58), finally (in 1853–54) the movement assumed the name Galicyjskie Towarzystwo Muzyczne [Galician music society], and after 1919 as the Polskie Towarzystwo Muzyczne [Polish music society] and in this form survived until 1939. In the years 1887–99 it was directed by Chopin’s student, Karol Mikuli, and for the next forty years by other well-known Lviv musicians: Mieczysław Sołtys in the years 1899–1929, and in the years 1929–39 his son, Adam. The Society and its orchestra had a special significance for Lviv, especially in the 1930s, when the standard of music production in the city, which was previously well-renowned for this cultural field (here we can point to the rich history of the Lviv opera, especially at the turn of the century) was clearly falling and the Society’s conservatoire this was also a difficult period. As evidence we have, recalled by Maria Ewa Sołtys, a quotation from the quarterly Muzyka Polska: ‘It is difficult to talk about the musical life of Lviv nowadays. It is rather a slow but continuous decline of the musical movement in our “most musical” – ironically! – Polish city. A praiseworthy exception has been the interesting and valuable programme of a well-prepared inaugural concert [musical society] (conducted by Adam Sołtys).’50

Both Sołtyses were first and foremost conductors. Mieczysław, after studying law and philosophy at the University of Lviv for a year, was also a student at the University of Vienna, where he attended, among others, classes with Robert Hirschfeld, a student of Eduard Hanslick. However, Mieczysław’s deepening of university knowledge did not result in activity in this field, although it may have influenced the new ‘Plan of learning’ he initiated in 1911, which was adopted for the Society’s Conservatoire, according to which the theory and composition were given a thorough, eight-year course, and counterpoint was a compulsory subject.51 (This was not without significance for the parallel development of Lviv musicology, because its leader, Adolf Chybiński, set high demands in this area, which were difficult to meet, and for young people the local Conservatoire of the Polish Musical Society was one of the few institutions where such skills could be gained at the right level). In any case, in his professional life Mieczysław focused on conducting, composing and teaching.

←170 | 171→

It was different for his son Adam, educated in the direction of music from an early age (he played the violin, the piano, attempted composition, and began conducting internships at an early age). However, when he went to Berlin in 1911, he studied composition privately with Robert Kahn, he also became a musicology student at the University of Berlin, taking part in the seminars of Johannes Wolf, Hermann Kretzschmar and Karl Stumpf. He finished his Berlin studies after the war – in 1921 he defended his dissertation titled Georg Österreich (1664–1735). Sein Leben und Werke. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der norddeutschen Kantate. Both practical music and university education allowed Adam to pursue two types of activities in parallel: he was a very active conductor, and at the same time he was a music critic, author of articles and reports, mainly on current affairs, in music magazines – the Warsaw Muzyka,52 Kurier Lwowski, Lwowskie Wiadomości Muzyczne i Literackie,53 for which he was a member of the editorial committee, and in Józef Koffler’s Orkiestra; in 1928 he became Chybiński’s deputy in the Lviv chapter of the PTM, and at the beginning of 1930 president of the new branch of the PTMW established there. While devoting himself mainly to artistic work, he did not conduct any research.

Apart from the Konserwatorium Galicyjskiego (Polskiego) Towarzystwa Muzycznego [Conservatoire of the Galician (next Polish) Music Society] and among many smaller institutions with different levels of teaching, the Lviv Institute of Music played an important role, especially in the second half of the nineteen twenties. From 1931 it was renamed (at the request of its owner, Anna Niementowska and with the consent of the proposed patron) to become the Lwowskie Konserwatorium Muzyczne im. Karola Szymanowskiego [Karol Szymanowski Lviv Music Conservatoire]. It was important for the musicological milieu that several representatives of this discipline were among its lecturers: Seweryn Barbag, Zofia Lissa, Stefania Łobaczewska, Józef Reiss, Vasyl Barvinski.

Another base for the Lviv musicological school – apart from the local Alma Mater – was the Towarzystwo Naukowe [Scientific society] founded at the beginning of the twentieth century by Oswald Balcer (at the time as the Towarzystwo dla Popierania Nauki Polskiej [Society for supporting Polish science]), which focused the intellectual fora of the Lviv elite. As part of the Society, there were ←171 | 172→three departments: philological, historical-philosophical, and mathematical-natural sciences, and the Section of History of Art and Culture, independent of them. Musicology was represented in the first of the departments: a local active member was Adolf Chybiński, after time Bronisława Wójcik (elected 9 II 1925), Father Hieronim Feicht (from 1 III 1926) and Maria Szczepańska (from 18 III 1929)54 became coopted members; Chybiński was also an additional member of the Section. The activities of the institution were financed on the one hand by membership fees, on the other by MWRiOP funds and all kinds of private donations. These funds covered the needs related, amongst others, with publishing activity: in the years 1921–39 Sprawozdania Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie [Reports of scientific society in Lviv] (three books in the year) appeared, compact publications were announced as part of the series Archiwum Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie [Archive of scientific society in Lviv]. The pages of both the magazine and the open series were not only for members of the group. Apart from, for example, Adolf Chybiński’s information about his own research in Podhale,55 we can find summaries of his public presentations of other works in the field of musicology. For example, at the meeting of the Society on May 2, 1921, the professor presented two items: by Father Wacław Gieburowski, ‘Trzy dokumenty neumatyczne z Biblioteki seminarium duchownego w Poznaniu’56 [Three neume documents from the seminarium library in Poznań] and Witold Chrzanowski about Frederic Chopin57 rondeaus, and a few years later Seweryn Barbag’s essay about Chopin’s58 songs.

Seweryn Barbag himself was one of the most active musicologists in Lviv.59 In addition to his law studies at his home university, in 1924 he graduated in musicology from Vienna where he studied with Guido Adler with a dissertation ←172 | 173→on the works of César Franck. After returning to the capital of Galicia, he professionally joined the local Conservatoire, taught privately, and was also occupied with music journalism, he also wrote numerous reviews, reports and articles in the local press – Lwowskie Wiadomości Muzyczne i Literackie, Echo, Szopen (where he popularised and brought the figures and works of classical masters closer to the public – Beethoven, Wagner, Wolf, Brahms, but he also dealt with issues from the borderline of psychology and pedagogy60 and sociology)61 – as well as nationwide music press – Mateusz Gliński’s Muzyka and Kwartalnik Muzyczny.62 Particular attention in his work should be paid to the aforementioned study about Chopin’s63 songs and one of the few attempts in the inter-war period to propose systematics of musicology.64 His main interests were, above all, issues related to new genres of creativity that emerged in connection with the new media – cinema and radio,65 and musical education and didactics.66 In connection with these interests and activities for education, he was appointed, among others, to the Opinion Committee of the MWRiOP on the system of ←173 | 174→music education. He also spoke about contemporary music,67 and an especially interesting text related to the (then) newest music was the article ‘Semper idem’ about turning points in the history of music and against this background about the latest breakthrough brought about by the music of Schönberg, Stravinsky, Debussy and R. Strauss.68 His text ‘Przykre sprawy muzykologii polskiej’69 [The sad affairs of Polish musicology], in which he presented his – let’s add: very critical – point of view on conflicts within the environment echoed widely throughout the musicological world.

In the first period of World War II, he became one of the musicology lecturers at the newly renamed Lviv State Conservatoire, launched after the annexation of Lviv by Soviet Russia. Due to his state of health and progression of tuberculosis from 1942 to death in autumn 1944, he was in Otwock near Warsaw.

At about the same time as Barbag, Józef Koffler also studied musicology at Vienna University. Although he began his studies a little earlier, but as a result of war activities and the resulting mandatory (and in his case also voluntary) service, it was not until 1923 that he obtained his doctoral degree on the basis of his dissertation on instrumentation in Mendelssohn-Bartholdy’s symphonic compositions. Also educated in the field of playing the piano, harmony, counterpoint and conducting, after returning to Lviv he joined the conservatoire of the Polskie Towarzystwo Muzyczne [Polish musical society].

From the point of view of both music journalism and ‘professional’ musical writing, the character of Józef Koffler appears quite interesting.70 Firstly, due to his sudden and, in terms of quantity, very intense contribution to the ‘media’ market, and secondly – his rather ambitious attempts to manage musical periodicals. In 1926, the artist was soon to dedicate his piano variations to Schönberg (15 Variations d’apres une suite de douze tons Op. 9 ‘Hr. Arnold Schönberg zugeeigne’), he established cooperation with Eugeniusz Dawidowicz and the monthly published by him amongst the Grudziądz scene, Muzyk Wojskowy dedicated to musical culture in the Polish Army. In the sketches this included, he presented ←174 | 175→the profiles of contemporary composers (Stravinsky, Schreker, Szymanowski),71 he brought closer the history of music in episodes,72 and with military ensembles in mind he prepared a cycle called ‘O barwach orkiestrowych’73 [About orchestra colours]. In 1930 he founded his own popular science monthly ‘devoted to the propagation of musical culture among orchestras and music societies in Poland’ with the title Orkiestra. In comparison with other titles of this period, the long period the magazine was in print is surprising (1930–38). Having an idealistic goal and wanting ‘above all, to serve musical art,’74 the editor-in-chief consistently used the form of thematic cycles in a form which was almost like a course of lectures. In this way, he published over twenty episodes of ‘lectures’ about theory of music and composition, over thirty regarding instrumentation, similarly regarding harmony, also a multi-part ‘Repetytorium z historii muzyki’ [Repetitorium of music history] and ‘Formy muzyczne’75 [Musical forms]. Katarzyna Madaj counted that ‘more than half (about 61.5 %) of the contents of Orkiestra were articles in the form of lectures, thanks to which the monthly could almost replace the handy encyclopaedia of music’76 and – let’s add – therefore, it was undoubtedly a sensation on the music market of the interwar period. An additional service of the editor was soliciting authors of such calibre as Adolf Chybiński, Zdzisław Jachimecki, Henryk Opieński, Stanisław Niewiadomski, Józef Reiss, Alicja Simon, Władysław Fabry, and representatives of the next generation – the extremely promising musicologists Jerzy Freiheiter, Włodzimierz Poźniak, Adam Sołtys. In the pages of Orkiestra Chybiński brought readers a closer view of composers such as Gustav Mahler77 amongst others, and sketched one of his favourite topics in a contribution ‘Podhale we współczesnej muzyce polskiej’78 [Podhale in contemporary Polish music], constituting a ←175 | 176→kind of historical sketch of ‘playing in a highlander style’ and issues related to ‘mountain culture’ – both in general cultural contexts (the personage of Tytus Chałubiński, Tatra threads in literature), as well as the work of young Polish composers – Szymanowski, Maklakiewicz, Kondracki. He also gave Koffler the text of his speech about Frederic Chopin delivered to the academy ceremony at the Grand Theatre in Lviv on November 16, 1931. At the end of 1932, in one of the episodes of the regular column ‘Co każdy muzyk wiedzieć powinien’ [What every musician should know], which was a form of a small encyclopaedia of music in episodes, he also prepared an extensive biography of the professor as one of the following entries.79

In Orkiestra Henryk Opieński shared his many years of memories and experiences as a conductor,80 and in one of the first notebooks in the chronicle, information about his sixtieth birthday was published along with the biographical note. Stanisław Niewiadomski was the author of a multi-episode cycle ‘Szkice historyczne’ [Historical sketches], in which he introduced the history of music, in chronological order, beginning in ancient times.81

In 1931, Zdzisław Jachimecki presented the figure of Władysław Żeleński (in the tenth anniversary of his death),82 almost two years later, returning to his work, when in the pages of Orkiestra he straightened out his misinterpretation of style in the composer’s Piano Sonata op. 5, drawing inspiration, as Jachimecki saw after some time, from Beethoven’s works.83

In addition to these names, there were however, not just from the sidelines of musicology but also of journalism and music criticism, names of local music activists and pedagogues who were interested in instrumental and orchestral music: Julian Adamski from Rohatyn, Leon Solski, Adam Czerwiński from Stryj, Faustyn Kulczycki from Katowice, M. Papermann from Jarosław, Tomasz Szyfers ←176 | 177→from Lviv, R. Czerwiński from Warsaw, Ryszard Eblisiewicz from Gdańsk, Piotr Gromski from Warsaw – they are the authors of composers’ silhouettes, articles on the history of music, instrumentology and organology, pedagogy and music education, and even music therapy or on the phenomenon of synaesthesia (as in the case of Gromski’s text ‘Czy barwy są słyszalne?’ [Can colours be heard?]),84 maybe not revealing and not very original, but mainly because they were supposed to be communicative and through their simplified message were intended to interest the addressees of the magazine, i.e. members of the broadly understood environment of instrumentalists and conductors.

Having already had many years of experience as an editor, in the second half of the thirties Koffler decided to create his own magazine, which indeed was of a local character, but was important because it focused a small thriving group of Lviv musicologists acting in opposition to the traditionally understood historical musicology of the Chybiński school, and which was also linked to the local branch of the PTMW. Quite clearly, however, Echo. Miesięcznik poświęcony kulturze muzycznej Lwowa did not appeal with its ideological programme to many readers, as it ceased to appear after just a few monthly editions (from September 1936 to March the following year). In the editorial to the first edition the editors declared that it would develop conscious music lovers, educate and sharpen the sense and awareness of qualities that constitute the foundations of a true musical culture, combat all influences harmful to music and musical culture, and control the activities of the factors responsible for musical culture. Even in its assumptions, this periodical did not aspire to be a scientific journal. It had a social-cultural character and addressed current issues affecting the musical growth of society, but the names of the authors published in it could guarantee serious and valuable statements. In the inaugural edition of the magazine devoted to the musical education of children and youth, contributions came from, amongst others Adam Sołtys, Seweryn Barbag, Stefania Łobaczewska and Zofia Lissa;85 the last was also the author of an article on the role of radio in shaping musical culture.86

←177 | 178→

As an author, Koffler was invited several times to the pages of Kwartalnik Muzyczny: he prepared reports on books about conducting and instrumentation and presented his method of mastering the art of diatonic modulation.87 He wrote quite frequently for Muzyka. He joined a group of musicologists speaking in the press about the role of radio;88 he himself as a composer using twelve-tone technique, took up polemics on contemporary music with Stefania Łobaczewska;89 he sent correspondence and reports from Lviv, he participated in surveys on current issues affecting the music community, led by the editor of Muzyka, Mateusz Gliński.

Along with the above-mentioned active representatives of musicology in Lviv (Sołtys, Barbag, Koffler), the ‘field’ environment was mainly made up of graduates of the new musicology centre with their master at the forefront. The history of establishing the Faculty (Department) of Musicology at the University of Lviv is known90: the instigators of the opening of this direction in the capital of Galicia were two local professors: Jan Bołoz-Antoniewicz, art historian, head of the department at the university, and Wilhelm Bruchnalski, literary historian, dean of the Faculty of Philosophy, both convinced of the necessity of introducing this field into the structure of the faculties of the local Alma Mater. From Bruchnalski in 1907, even before receiving his doctorate (which took place in 1908) Chybiński, first a student at UJ, and at that moment, the University of Munich in the field of musicology, classical philology and German studies, was asked if he would be interested in conducting music history classes in Lviv. He recalled this years later: ‘I was already writing my PhD thesis, having collected the materials for it, when I received an inquiry from Prof. Bruchnalski, dean of ←178 | 179→the philosophy department in Lviv, asking me when I was going to graduate from university to be able to… habilitate as an assistant professor of musicology at the University of Lviv as soon as possible.’91

Over the next few years, establishing an independent department was not possible, as in order to fulfil formalities, it was necessary for Chybiński to attain habilitation, giving him venia legendi, or the right to conduct lectures. Although the candidate Bruchnalski was a native Cracovian, had begun his higher studies here and had also been keenly involved in research with Cracow collections for years (the UJ library and Wawel archives), he could not count on a position at his alma mater as this was proposed to Zdzisław Jachimecki. Jachimecki, in turn, of Lviv origin, after four years of musicology studies with Guido Adler in Vienna, defended his doctorate based on a dissertation on the Psalms of Mikołaj Gomółka in 1906 in Cracow, and gained his habilitation there four years later on the basis of the work Wpływy włoskie w muzyce polskiej od roku 1540 do 1640 [Italian influences in Polish music from 1540 to 1640]; he became an associate professor and was able to join the organisation of classes as part of the Jagiellonian University History and Music Theory Seminar.

We learn the most about the years of education, first in Cracow, then in Munich, and finally in the crossings between these two cities from Adolf Chybiński’s own memoirs.92 Let us only recall here only the most important moments for him at the beginning of his musicological path.

Born and raised right under Wawel Castle, Chybiński, having been educated musically not only in piano playing but also with a solid theoretical foundation obtained under Professor Jan Drozdowski of the Cracow conservatoire, began studying humanities – classical philology and German – at Jagiellonian University in the year 1898. In the 1901/02 academic year, he went to Munich, where he quite soon decided to direct his primary interests in the area of musicology, while continuing classical studies at the same time. After a two-year break, in 1904 he returned to Bavaria in order to continue studies at Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität under Adolf Sandberger and above all his assistant Theodor Kroyer, as well as composition under Professor Ludwig Tuilly of the local conservatoire. The young Cracovian – in the future, a medievalist, ethnographer, ←179 | 180→music critic, expert in the Young Poland music movement, thus became the first Polish student studying at a German university (the first Polish musicologists Konrad Zawiłowski, Józef Reiss and Zdzisław Jachimecki studied in Vienna, and others in German centres – Łucjan Kamieński in Berlin, or Henryk Opieński in Leipzig – but these were a few years later).

The Musicology Department in Munich, where Chybiński decided to take on studies, had operated at that university since 1894 under the direction of Adolf Sandberger. This German musicologist, interested above all in studying the works of Orlando di Lasso, collected at the local Hof- and Staatsbibliothek, provided a clear direction for research conducted at his institute. The study of old musical prints and manuscripts became its main objectives. The faculty’s students, engaged in work on volumes of ‘Denkmäler,’ prepared them in the areas of musical history and theory, as well as harmony, counterpoint and paleography. As a teacher he passed on this passion for palaeographic research to the next generation of his pupils, who included, amongst others Theodor Kroyer (after Sandberger, the second Munich ‘master’ of young Chybiński), Thrasybulos Georgiades, Ernst Bücken, and Ludwig Schiedermeier; also Adolf Chybiński. In students, Sandberger aroused fascination with artefacts of European music and deepened access to rich collections of sources documenting the creativity of works of the rank of the legacy of notable people such as Pierre de la Rue, Nicolas Gombert, Adrian Willaert, Guido of Arezzo and Franchinus Gaffurius, which have been preserved in the collections of these libraries.

From Munich, Chybiński brought back to Poland not only research interests and the necessary scientific methods, but also – which would soon turn out to be helpful in carrying out the tasks given him – profound knowledge of the system in which German universities worked, where students, choosing classes individually and according to their own interests in philosophy, philology, major subjects, and with the possibility of constant contact and consultation with the professor, obtained an education providing substantial erudition and a broad, humanistic perspective on knowledge. It was on these principles that Chybiński based his didactic activities and contacts with students throughout his teaching career, first in Lviv, and in his last years in Poznań. In addition, Uljana Hrab, author of works on the history of Lviv musicology and its creator,93 draws attention to the fact that he managed to implement and continue this classic European methodology and the organisation of musicological studies as a discipline being an element in the system of university sciences (let us add – in opposition to the ←180 | 181→practice of placing musical-historical trends in the structures of conservatoires, as was the case, for example, in Soviet education) despite the changing geopolitical realities: until the year 1918 Lviv and his Alma Mater belonged to Austria-Hungary, during the next twenty years to Poland, from the start of World War II to 1941 the city was under Soviet occupation then German.94 During his last months in Lviv and before he left for Zakopane, where he spent the rest of the Second World War, the professor was no longer active as a musicologist (at least officially – he was working then as a translator). However, in Soviet Lviv, transferred to the Mykola Lysenko State Conservatoire, he was appointed Director of the musical history section, part of the theoretical department led by Zofia Lissa.

Before he became a creator and one of the pillars of the new Polish discipline, in 1908 he finished his Munich dissertation on the history of conducting,95 and then returned to Cracow, where for the next four years he conducted an intense penetration of local archives and libraries: the Wawel, municipal, and Jagiellonian libraries.96 These researches and studies enabled him to gather materials for many subsequent years for research and publishing. At the same time, in 1905, he associated himself with the capital of Galicia as a local reviewer of Gazeta Lwowska, in which he repeatedly promoted the achievements of the composers of Young Poland and contemporary, progressive European artists, contrasting their work to the conventional achievements of the composers of the older generation.97

←181 | 182→

From the first months of the formation of Chybiński’s Lviv school of musicology, it was characterised – in the words of Uljana Hrab – by a humanistic worldview, research on musical phenomena from a wide historical perspective, acceptance of a common methodological approach, perfect mastery of scientific research methods, both in the area of musicological study as well as those characteristic of widely-understood humanities studies, objectivism and criticism in relation of the studied material, and striving towards self-learning.98

At this point, referring to the words of Adolf Chybiński himself, we should verify the beginning of musicology at the University of Lviv as being in the year 1912, which is the correct date from a formal viewpoint: the decree of the MWRiOP of 30 October 1912 gave the recently promoted docent the opportunity to organise a new faculty and regular work at the institution from 31 November. The year 1912 was given by Zdzisław Jachimecki in his summary of the achievements of Polish musicology included in a ‘report’ prepared for the PAU, Muzykologia i piśmiennictwo muzyczne w Polsce [Musicology and musical literature in Poland].99 However, he evidently attached more importance to the actual facts rather than formal records, since in 1938, inaugurating the series of Lwowskie Rozprawy Muzykologiczne, he wrote that ‘The Faculty was established in 1913 with the support of the then Academic Senate of the University of Lviv and has simultaneously received the right to use a private musicological library…,’ and further: ‘However, the Faculty’s administration hopes that from this year on, with 25 years of the actual existence of the Department, good fate will be bestowed on the publication of works and that the Faculty of Musicology of the Jan Kazimierz University will be able to continue to render its service for the good of Polish science.’100

This would explain why, in the register of lectures of Lviv University, the classes conducted by Chybiński, preceded by his inaugural lecture ‘University and music,’101 only appear in the summer semester of 1913, but rather earlier than in ←182 | 183→the summer (Maciej Gołąb mentioned this in his sketch ‘Początki muzykologii na uniwersytetach we Wrocławiu (1910) i we Lwowie (1912)’ [Beginnings of musicology at the Universities of Wroclaw (1910) and Lviv (1912)],102 because the inaugural lecture itself took place at the beginning of the year, and the first lectures, including about ‘musical notation’ (mensural and tablature) immediately after.103 In addition, this semester was filled with lectures and exercises concerning topics that he undoubtedly considered a canon in the field of musicology: on the history of polyphonic music of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, theory of counterpoint in the sixteenth century, analysis of Beethoven’s104 sonatas.

Less than two years after the opening of the department, its development was put into question due to the progress of hostilities. As before and after Chybiński spent the vacation of 1914 in Zakopane. It was there that he received the first reports from Bronisława Wójcik, about the atmosphere in Lviv, filled with uncertainty about the future of the city, the university and the department itself: ‘The Faculty stands silent, empty, and it seems as though no one visits it besides me – I doubt that the institution at Długosza street 27 was to be used for military purposes – I think that this only applies to the main building and the government institutes … I believe, however, that you may find out more by writing to the university office – in my opinion, everything can remain as it is – and you can rest assured that books and musical items are secure.’105

The most important for the institution was to preserve the still small, yet diligently collected library books and music at Długosza street.106 Bronisława ←183 | 184→Wójcikówna was involved in the library from the beginning of her cooperation with the professor. For many following months of 1914/15, she reassured the absent boss that the collections remained in complete order in the meantime; for her herself – it seems – her working conditions could not be better. An introvert by nature, she assessed ‘internal and external conditions’ so well, ‘that it is harder to do so – since December I work every morning (10 [a.m.]–1 [p.m.]) in the library … in the afternoon, in the evenings at home…. I expect Fischer to be able to stand with his own strength.’107

It is known that, starting from the first period of hostilities, Lviv musicology classes, just like in the whole university, were suspended in the academic year 1914/15. At the end of the summer of 1915, there was hope of activating the university, and thus also of the return of the teaching staff, but Chybiński extended his stay in Zakopane. At the beginning of October, information about lectures was given, but from the sixth of this month, Wójcikówna was still by herself to welcome new students in the institute. Eventually, however, the head of the Department returned with his family to the city and to his didactic duties. Only from the academic year 1922/23 is it possible to speak of full stabilisation, when the Lviv university began to return to the ordinary mode of work, initially in the four-faculty structure (faculties of philosophy, law, theology and medicine), in the next academic year it was transformed into a five-faculty institution. The Faculty of Philosophy, as part of which the Musicology Institute functioned,108 was divided into two sections, Mathematical-Physics and Humanities, to which musicology belonged to the end of the interwar period and whose dean in the academic year 1928/29 was Adolf Chybiński, professor at this university since 1920. The department functioned in this form and within the framework of the structure described until the end of December 1939. At the beginning of 1940, the Soviet authorities incorporated it into the Lviv State Conservatoire (along with all movable property – collections, library, instruments), which in turn was created from the Conservatoire of the Polish Musical Society, the Lviv Karol ←184 | 185→Szymanowski Conservatoire of Music operating from 1931 and the Mykola Lysenko Musical Institute.

The material condition of the Musicology Department itself and its teaching staff – first of all Chybiński himself, and over the years also his assistants (nearly from the beginning – Bronisława Wójcik, in 1925/26 Fr. Hieronim Feicht, from 1926 Maria Szczepańska, later together with Jan Józef Dunicz) – was poor through most of the period of its existence. During its first few years, the Department did not receive any subsidies for its activities, and Chybiński, as a so-called private docent, did not receive a salary (which was provided only to professors), only a honorarium for conducted lectures (four hours a week, from the 1916/17 academic year – five).109 In the late autumn of 1918, Chybiński was appointed an associate professor, still without a fixed salary, and finally, from April 1921, a full professor with a designated salary. He continued to supplement the collections of the Institute’s library from private resources for years – books, catalogues, scores – using his contacts, including foreign ones, ordering review copies, sporadically making exchanges, and obtaining publications directly from the authors; he partially co-financed the purchase of the piano for the institution, he also tried to obtain subsidies for phonographs for conducting field research.

Concerning didactics, Chybiński strictly followed the patterns observed in Munich. He recalled: ‘I never allowed any literary phrases in my lectures. Contrary to the advice of my older colleagues, I chose old music to be the topic of my lectures instead of recent music. Therefore, my practical classes dealt with music palaeography and strict counterpoint …, I taught the history of music theory, and in the second year of my university work the lectures revolved around Bach.’110 Monographic lectures could be divided into two groups: those devoted to the history of instrumental forms (within different genres and in the work of various composers),111 and the history and theory of polyphonic forms (vocal and instrumental) of the baroque period.112 In addition, Edward Grieg’s ←185 | 186→compositions occupied a special place in Chybiński’s work, as did Scandinavian music in general with a special focus on Norwegian creations, subjects to which he returned several times.113 In addition to monographic lectures, exercises and seminars also took place where the students worked independently, solving analytical, theoretical and practical tasks, from palaeography, counterpoint and harmony. The titles of the works of younger groups of students of the first years cited by Hrab indicate the focus of interest on the history of Polish music from the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries (over time, the spectrum of topics grew, and the audience focussed on a wider range).114

Until 1925, Bronisława Wójcikówna was the only assistant (let’s add – as a volunteer) and the closest collaborator with the head of the Lviv department. Although she had already received her doctorate in July 1917 – as the first student of the Polish musicological centres – it was two years before her boss had the opportunity to create the post of assistant for his Department and offered her for this position.

Wójcikówna, who had earlier studied philosophy and mathematics at Lviv University, was one of the first students in the newly-created Faculty of Musicology, accompanying Chybiński nearly from the first moments of his career at her Alma Mater in Lviv; however, in contrast to her successors in the position of assistant, she shared research interests with the professor to a small extent and mainly at the beginning of her scientific career, writing her PhD dissertation on a subject chosen by her promoter – the compositions of Johann Fischer of Augsburg (Jan Fischer z Augsburga (1646–1721) jako kompozytor suit [Johann Fischer from Augsburg (1646–1721) as a composer of suites]). Chybiński, always full of new ideas, infected the young doctoral student with enthusiasm and, despite years of her own scholarly and didactic experience, she emphasised the desire to collect individual achievements on her account (this independence of thought and action in the future was to result in a fairly serious conflict between the then mature researcher and her Master115). Meanwhile, however, she wrote:

←186 | 187→

During these two months of correspondence you’ve had so many new and interesting thoughts, ideas, projects and plans for further work that even a year would not be enough to discuss them in part, and I am filled with admiration, anxiety and enthusiasm for work…. And when we get on with the planned vade mecum [?];, I will do all the dictionaries and bibliographies, so that even you – Dear Master – would not be ashamed of such pedantry – But that’s only a contribution; I need to have a share in more interesting parts – bon? – I seem to have grown fond of collective work now.’116

Together with the professor and under his guidance she taught – similarly to her successors in subsequent years – classes on analysis, counterpoint, palaeography, and mensural notation. For the next few years she supported Chybiński in teaching young musicologists in Lviv and creating a new academic community. However, at the turn of 1925 due to personal reasons she had to make the decision to give up her academic career, at least for some time.117 She knew that she also had well-prepared successors in her place – Father Hieronim Feicht and Maria Szczepańska, who in turn (in the years 1925–26 and 1926–39) took over her responsibilities. In 1926 she decided to re-engage in the Department, but only to a limited extent, for example, to undertake what she called ‘ethnophonic’118 work.

In the summer of 1929, the relations between Chybiński and his first doctoral student deteriorated significantly. The professor, due to his reservations about the student’s knowledge and skills in the fields of counterpoint and instrumentation, strongly opposed her habilitation (in any case, not in the field of full musicology), which she eventually received from UJ, while delivering a lecture Stanowisko muzykologii w systemie naukowym [The position of musicology in the scientific system] (this suggestion of the systematics of musicology evoked numerous comments not only from Chybiński, which will be mentioned later). ←187 | 188→The researcher commented on the opposition and criticism flowing from UJK in a comprehensive letter in which she defended herself with words: ‘If I were a careerist, then following the “tenor” of your letter, I would soon be choosing a topic from the history of earlier Polish music, I would be hard at work and submit a thesis that would fit your likes and wishes. But I will not do this. I do not recognise scholars “made to order,” I hold them in highest contempt, and I expect too much of myself to take the path of compromise or one of the least resistance.’ She also made an assessment of the levels of subsequent cohorts of students from the Department: ‘However, I sincerely wish you that the theses of students closer to you due to their choice of topics, achieve the best results, so as to allow you to choose your University associate from among your students. … For the time being, I still do not see any real historical talent capable of bold historical constructs.’119

She got her first experience in the field of publication even before the First World War, when – no doubt following the professor’s recommendation – she sent an article about materials for her doctoral thesis to the already-active Kwartalnik Muzyczny in Warsaw run by Henryk Opieński.120 After the war, she additionally wrote for LWML,121 the Poznań Przegląd Muzyczny and also for the capital’s cultural monthly Przegląd Warszawski and for Mateusz Gliński’s Muzyka, as well as foreign magazines – the aforementioned Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft, La Revue Musicale, Slavische Rundschau.122 In the Lviv Gazeta Muzyczna already in 1918 presented a sketch about musicology as a science within the framework of university studies123 – she returned to the considerations on the systematics of musicology after many years, preparing (and publishing) the above-mentioned habilitation lecture Stanowisko muzykologii w systemie nauk [Position of musicology in the system of sciences].124 Over the following years, she more and more devoted her works to themes involving Chopin considered in various ←188 | 189→aspects: from strictly musical issues to the presence of Chopin in literature.125 She was also very happy to accept the invitation to join the group of authors who opened the activities of Kwartalnik Muzyczny.

Despite the fact that Bronisława Wójcik opened a list of active students of Polish musicology, it turns out that she was not a pioneer among the authors of the new generation. On the pages of the Polish music journal with scientific aspirations – the first Kwartalnik Muzyczny – she was preceded by Stefania Łobaczewska, initially signing with her maiden name Gérard de Festenburg. In 1911, before she began her studies at the newly established department of musicology, she sent to the editorial office of Kwartalnik Muzyczny her article ‘Kilka słów o kulturze muzycznej XX wieku’126 [A few words about musical culture of the twentieth century] in which the history of music is presented in the context of musical culture (thus including the subject matter into the trend of articles published also at that time by Józef Reiss127 or Henryk Opieński128 amongst others), and shortly after, an essay dedicated to the questions on the origins of music.129 After a short break, in 1912, she also published a sketch in the same magazine ‘Schopenhauer o muzyce’ [Schopenhauer about music].130 All three works were so interesting that, as it turned out later, they initiated Łobaczewska’s many years of fascination with the issues of aesthetics and philosophy as well as the sociology of music.

The first materials arose while the author was studying piano at the Lviv Conservatoire, while in the area of musical knowledge she was basically ←189 | 190→self-taught. Right after the opening of the new department at the University of Lviv, she decided to attend the lectures of Adolf Chybiński. She then took part in classes as an unenrolled student, much as in the years 1914–18 in Vienna, when she explored musicology with Guido Adler in a similar manner. She returned to study at her Alma Mater in Lviv once more in the years 1925–29, this time with the intention of finishing her PhD dissertation, which, notabene, had been made impossible for some time because of her lack of school-leaving exams. Łobaczewska (who obtained general knowledge in her youth under private teachers) finally passed these exams in 1929, in order to immediately apply for doctoral examinations.

Being one of the professor’s first students, she was involved as a volunteer in the activities of the Department, including illustrating the history and music literature classes on the piano. In his memoirs from the years of Lviv, Chybiński wrote: ‘In addition to Wójcikówna, Stefania Łobaczewska and Helena Paygertówna (later Mrs. Świeżawska) deserve a mention from that time. They also participated in illustrating my university lectures.’131 At the same time, more importantly for us, almost from the beginning of the first decade of the new century, she was very active as a reviewer and promoter of music, activities about which Magdalena Dziadek devoted a broad sketch.132 Following this author, it can be admitted that in this field, the field of music criticism ‘[Łobaczewska’s] eclectic vision of creativity “beefed up” with democratic ideology has, like all of [her] pre-war writings … , many shallow waters, sometimes approaching dangerously close to naivety, but all in all, it is a document of an ideologically crystallised attitude – quite common among music critics of the interwar period, although rarely declared with such impetus and stubbornness.’133 Perhaps the rhetoric which she adopted simply fit in with the general discourse on musical culture of that time and she repeated the views held by a group of creators and publicists to whom she was ideologically close. However, she cannot be judged so harshly when it comes to her academic papers in which she followed the good example of the Lviv musicological school. In this field, in addition to the articles already mentioned, she earlier took on the subject of Chopin,134 to which she returned several times in later years, assisting, amongst others, magazines ←190 | 191→dedicated to the composer – the Lvivian Szopen and organ of the IFCh Chopin.135 However, nearly from the beginning of her activities, her main interests were in the direction of the wider context of musical function: sociology, psychology, philosophy, aesthetics. This is evident in the mentioned two texts printed by Przegląd Muzyczny (in the first, original sources of the phenomenon of music are indicated, while the second presents the history of music in the context of widely understood musical culture), as well as in an article published just a few months later in the same Przegląd Muzyczny, this time in the area of musical aesthetics,136 to which the researcher devoted many of her important works.137 What is important for our considerations, a few of them came to life – years later – in the pages of Kwartalnik Muzyczny.

It seems that it was not unusual that the editor-in-chief – Chybiński – invited his pupil to co-operate as an author; it can be often seen that he repeatedly supported his pupils and colleagues in this area.138 When it comes to Stefania Łobaczewska (and Zofia Lissa, as discussed below), this attitude could have been opposed due to the professor’s antipathy towards the research interests and academic paths chosen by the young researchers. The professor (an avid historian and archivist) did not approve of the fact that they sometimes departed from purely historical reflections and ventured on the periphery of musicology. In one of the letters to Ludwik Bronarski, we find the professor’s opinion, for example:

It is a peculiar thing: there are those, who would not want to deal with musical works or music even with my encouragement, but would rather beat around the bush, and they think that they are dealing with the ‘essence of music.’ They do not get music. They’d rather write very wise things about something that is not the fruit of creativity, but supposedly the ‘creativity itself’ which, of course, they do not deal with at all. Nerves, nerves!! Chasing after sensational news, etc., as if current affairs were excluded from the sphere of musical interests of those who also deal with music’s past. And when one starts to talk about things that are absolutely music-related, technical or stylistic, then again, ←191 | 192→the nerves of these people cannot hold out. Psychology, aesthetics, sociology, etc., everything but musicology in sensu stricto. Neither music nor musicology, but something else, brought to the sphere of music. I hunt down such individuals in the Institute.139

Chybiński, in spite of personal animosity and a critical view of his pupils’ activities (here thinking of Łobaczewska and Lissa), appreciated their writing experience and scientific potential, and he eagerly printed materials addressed to the editor of Kwartalnik Muzyczny. Łobaczewska did not share the professor’s interest in the area of musical history, at least not in reference to early music: the only text in which she discussed the main issues of Lviv musicology was her two-part article in the Kwartalnik on the works of Sebastian of Felsztyn.140 However, she was one of the forerunners of the research of (contemporary) creativity, both universal and Polish – first and foremost the works of Karol Szymanowski.141 Chybiński planned to use these interests and publish her article about the piano works of the creator of Król Roger [King Roger],142 but this idea however, was not realised. Although many of her articles about the latest music appeared in the thirties in the pages of Mateusz Gliński’s Muzyka, Muzyka Współczesna and LWML,143 for Chybiński, however, she was, above all, the author of numerous reports on the latest publications in the field of literature which she found interesting (she also constantly wrote reviews for Gazeta Lwowska).144

Unfortunately, in the middle of 1930s a bitter conflict broke out between the master and his student. It was caused by her worldview, a perception of ←192 | 193→musicology as a science which was different than that of Chybiński, and the attempt to appropriate a field of activity belonging to musicologists in Lviv, reflected for example, in the activities of the Lviv branch of TMW led by the members of the younger generation (apart from Łobaczewska, also by Zofia Lissa and Józef Koffler). According to the professor, they also sympathised with the communist movement, which disqualified them in his eyes. Until the outbreak of the war, this conflict was making it considerably more difficult for the professor and his student to engage in academic activities together. When it comes to the relationship between Chybiński and Łobaczewska in subsequent years, it needs to be noted that after the war, in the new political and scholarly reality, their conflict was completely forgotten. Chybiński began supporting the activities of his graduates who had taken over new (and old) Polish musicological establishments.

The above-mentioned Zofia Lissa first studied piano playing and theory at the Lviv Conservatoire; then after finishing the school, she began her musicology studies at the University of Lviv in 1924. One should remember that she also studied philosophy, psychology and art history at this institution, and each of these subjects (doubtlessly also due to the presence of the professors that Lissa then met – Roman Ingarden, Kazimierz Twardowski) had a significant influence on the direction of the musicology research that she later devoted herself to: she had a fascination with the sociology of music, psychology, aesthetics and pedagogy. Among the pre-war aesthetic essays, mention should be made of the text presented at the PAU forum in Cracow, O komizmie muzycznym145 [About musical comicality], which after the war became the basis of her 1947 habilitation thesis. To a much lesser degree, similarly to Łobaczewska, she was interested in historical research, and if so, regarding the latest music: in 1929 she defended her doctoral thesis O harmonice Aleksandra Skriabina [About Aleksander Scriabin’s harmony], and fragments of this work – already traditional for graduates of Lviv – appeared in Kwartalnik Muzyczny.146 She began intensely publishing ←193 | 194→around 1930, and her texts of the next nearly ten years may be divided into two thematic groups: theoretical, analytical and methodological work (and here is one of her most important pre-war essays ‘Politonalność i atonalność w świetle najnowszych badań’ [Polytonality and atonality in view of the latest research])147 as well as the already mentioned thesis bordering on musicology.

Even though Chybiński did not really value Lissa as a person (when it came to her views, he used to lump her together with Łobaczewska and pointed out her Semitic descent), he always admitted that her intelligence and erudition were remarkable. However, this was not enough to keep her in the department. In this situation, Lissa found employment at Lviv’s Szymanowski Conservatoire, and a few years later also in the local Institute of Psychology, where she continued research in the area of musicality with groups of children and youth; on topics of psychology and pedagogy she had earlier managed to publish a few texts, including amongst others in Kwartalnik Muzyczny, Muzyka Polska, Gliński’s Muzyka, LWMP and in the specialist magazine Muzyka w Szkole.148 During the period of the Soviet Union’s occupation of Lviv, she performed the function of Dean of the Theory Department at the M. Lysenko State Conservatoire, at the same time participating in Adolf Chybiński’s seminar conducted as part of the Musicology Department transferred to this institution.

In the inter-war period, Lissa was strongly interested in music in the new mass media – radio and film, which is evident in her studies and articles from this period: apart from the quite extensive dissertation Muzyka i film. Studium z pogranicza ontologii, estetyki i psychologii muzyki filmowej149 [Music and film. Study from the border between ontology, aesthetics ad psychology of film music], at that time, she published a number of articles on this subject, including ←194 | 195→the texts ‘Jak słyszymy muzykę w radio’ [How we hear music on radio]150, ‘Radio we współczesnej kulturze muzycznej’ [Radio in contemporary musical culture]151, ‘Radio a kultura muzyczna’ [Radio and musical culture].152 Above all, however, she was interested in music in a sociological context and in connection with her publications in this field she collaborated with the Lviv monthly Przegląd Społeczny (editor in chief Leon Weinstock)153 and the Poznań quarterly of the Polski Instytut Socjologiczny [Polish Sociological Institute] Przegląd Socjologiczny (editor-in-chief Florian Znaniecki). Elżbieta Dziębowska, author of the entry for Zofia Lissa in the Encyklopedia Muzyczna PWM,154 wrote that the researcher ‘treated music not as a sound phenomenon, but primarily as a cultural phenomenon, a historically-conditioned artistic creation, addressed to a specific recipient.’155 Her approach was rather detached from the nature of research conducted by the head of Lviv musicology and had nothing to do with using archives to get to know the musical culture of the past centuries. As has already been noted, Lissa did not extend her sphere of interests to the realm of music history (such as the works of Chopin and Szymanowski) until after the war.

Chybiński’s relations with Hieronim Feicht differed somewhat from those with Łobaczewska and Lissa. Through his research interests, Feicht soon became one of the students closest to Chybiński at the Institute. Similarly as with another student, Maria Szczepańska, from the beginning he tended toward research of ‘ancient’ music, especially Polish (or that connected to Polish culture), also having the solid preparation in the fields of music theory, harmony and counterpoint so desired by Chybiński.156

←195 | 196→

Feicht as a young priest, shortly after leaving the seminary of the missionary fathers, and also after music studies with Bolesław Wallek-Walewski157 (Cracow) and Mieczysław Sołtys (Lviv), began his music studies in 1922 in the Lviv department. Deeply prepared in the fields – as Zofia Lissa put it – of ‘gregorianica and liturgica,’158 interested in the music of earlier ages, mainly church, he perfectly fit in the profile of the professor’s research and personal preferences. Therefore, when in 1925 Bronisława Wójcik, the professor’s first assistant, made the decision to finish work for the department, she indicated Feicht (and Szczepańska) as her potential successors, worthy of trust and well prepared for classes with students.159 In the same year, the priest obtained a doctoral degree based on a dissertation about religious compositions by Bartłomiej Pękiel.160 He was Chybiński’s assistant in the years 1925/26, after which he went on to study musicology in Swiss Fribourg, where he attended Peter Wagner’s lectures.161 After returning to the country, obligations towards his congregation sent him to various places: in the years 1929/30 he was in Cracow, where besides his religious duties he conducted classes in music history, musical forms and Gregorian chant; later in Warsaw (where for a certain time, in the years 1930–32, he taught history and musical theory at the Conservatoire), Bydgoszcz, Łysków in the Słonim district and again in Cracow, where he took on the Chair of Church History and Patrologia at the missionary Theological Institute, again collaborating also with the local Conservatoire. In spite of these migrations, he remained one of the pillars of the ←196 | 197→Lviv musicology school, always associating himself with the research style preferred by its founder.

We can consider the year 1925162 as the actual date of Feicht’s debut in music literature. At that time his articles appeared in several periodicals: in the Warsaw Muzyka he tackled the character and creative work of Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina,163 he continued the Palestrina theme, writing about the cult of this composer in the Poznań Przegląd Muzyczny;164 he also published material on the theme of his discovery in Lviv of a version of Bogurodzica165 on the pages of Przegląd. Initially interested in Polish baroque music, he soon occupied himself with renaissance and medieval work, publishing before the war a few more articles on these periods in the Warsaw and Poznań periodicals,166 though above all with Chybiński: in Kwartalnik Muzyczny he placed the lengthy ‘Przyczynki do dziejów kapeli królewskiej w Warszawie za rządów kapelmistrzowskich Marka Scacchiego’ [On the history of the royal ensemble in Warsaw under its kapellmeister Marco Scacchi],167 as well as articles on Pękiel, Leopolita and (for the second volume of the PRM) on Gorczycki.168 He also continued to collaborate with the ←197 | 198→journals of church circles, including Muzyka Kościelna, in which he dealt with both historical and current topics.169 In the 1930s, he also began to focus his research interests towards later centuries: he discussed Stanisław Moniuszko’s170 Pamiętnik do nauki harmonii [Summary for studying harmony] and he toll an interest in Karol Szymanowski;171 this tendency persisted and even influenced the theme of his habilitation thesis from 1946 titled Ronda Chopina [Chopin’s rondos] far distant from the Gregorian chant and liturgical matters.

The contacts between Feicht and Chybiński lasted through the war years and the following period. Many people emphasise that with time the student-teacher dependency that connected them had changed into more friendly relations, which is evident in the rich correspondence maintained in the Chybiński Archives at Poznań’s University Library.

The second person that played a significant role alongside Chybiński not only in Lviv but also after the war in Poznań, was Maria Szczepańska, the next assistant professor after Feicht recommended by Bronisława Wójcik. For years she was unconditionally devoted to her Master, with whom she above all shared interests and even a fascination with the music of former centuries: ‘She examined in detail … the basic repertoire, including such important artifacts as manuscript 52 of the Krasiński Library [present sign.: BN, ref. III 8054], manuscript 378 BN in Warsaw (missing), based on which she developed the works of Mikołaja z Radomia; furthermore, the subject of her research included the sixteenth century manuscript of Cracow lute tablature … Polish sources for polyphonic Magnificat and religious polyphonic songs.’172

←198 | 199→

Due to the subjects that she studied, regarding the earliest history of music (with the often-used chronological order of articles giving it first place in the journal), and perhaps also thanks to her position in the Faculty, she received the privilege of opening the first issue of Kwartalnik Muzyczny with her dissertation on arrangements of Marian hymns, and turned out to be one of the journal’s most prolific authors (alongside Chybiński himself and Ludwik Bronarski).173

A few years ago, based on archival materials filed at the University Library in Poznań, Bożena Muszkalska devoted a broad biographical sketch to Szczepańska in connection with the International Musicological Conference organized in 2005 by the Institute of Cultural Studies of the University of Wroclaw.174 Born in 1902, Szczepańska studied piano at the Conservatoire of the Polish Musical Society. At the University of Lviv, along with musicology she also attended archaeology classes, following the interests of her father in the areas of archaeology and philology. Not much of the researcher’s pre-war correspondence has survived, but from the letters, including those mentioned by Muszkalska, it is clear that even before receiving her doctorate in 1926, she was recommended by Chybiński to befriended editors: to cite the professor’s words from a speech in Wroclaw about losing the works of Dukas ‘about which you must write an article for Przegląd Muzyczny,’175 translated into publication as ‘Paweł Dukas. (W 60-letnią rocznicę urodzin)’ [Paul Dukas. (On the 60th anniversary of his birth].176 In addition, she wrote several reviews for this Poznań magazine. In the next two years she also recorded international successes: she became a correspondent member of the Société Française de Musicologie, and her paper was received at the Beethoven Conference (although it should be noted that it was not published in the conference book, contrary to the presentations by Alicja ←199 | 200→Simon, Łucjan Kamieński, Henryk Opieński and Melania Grafczyńska).177 The decline of the twenties brought about the intensification of her contributing work. Szczepańska started to publish regularly in the recently opened Kwartalnik Muzyczny, Polski Rocznik Muzykologiczny, in the monthly Hosanna (organ of the Society of Liturgical Music), she was also the author of the article in the journal completely monopolised by Stefan Marian Stoiński (editor in chief) and Adolf Chybiński, the monthly Myśl Muzyczna.178

In the periodicals edited by Chybiński, the young musicologist presented a total of seven dissertations179 and a number of reviews and two bibliographies of Polish music literature for the years 1927–28 and 1929–30. Publications outside of the main current of Szczepańska’s work were published in studies edited by Chybiński; on the centenary of Bellini’s death, the article ‘Hexameron, Bellini and Chopin’ (Lviv 1935). All of Szczepańska’s texts, as with the priest Feicht, were characterised by the passion typical for the Lviv musicology school for using source materials and taking on discussion with the richest literature (also European), though devoid of literary rhetoric. Such methods of musicology were prone to attack, though mainly from the circle of music reviewers, not ‘academics.’ Unfortunately, Szczepańska did not avoid mistakes in her analyses. Her dissertation on the subject of Breve regnum,180 which she recognised as a song dedicated ←200 | 201→to the real king, not the briefly nominated king of Cracow students, was met with sharp criticism by part of the musicological circles, especially by Zdzisław Jachimecki, who published two brochures sharply polemicising with the author’s conclusions.181 He bluntly wrote: ‘It has been a long time since we last dealt with a “scientific” dissertation so erroneously posed, so naïvely and falsely carried out and crowned with such absurd results.’182

Printing a dissertation on the pages of a new, and at that time, only strictly academic journal, to which access was generally limited to a small circle of authors befriended with the chief editor, stirred the ire of his opponents. It also gave rise to criticism of musicology in general, in the manner in which it was cultivated by Adolf Chybiński: detailed, arduous work on composition and meticulous analysis of sources. In the Warsaw Wiadomości Literackie the Warsaw critic Karol Stromenger had a column ridiculing both Szczepańska’s achievements and the legitimacy of ‘paper’ musicology. And though Stromenger cited Jachimecki’s words (‘Kwartalnik Muzyczny devoted so much space to introduce the reader to an obviously completely mistaken use of the “strictest” scientific methodology in musicology, with the help of a number of references to professional literature to support the researcher’s arguments. … The most far-reaching meticulousness in making the various details of a musical work “book-compatible”… means nothing for a musicologist who only sees notes, without embracing their musical union’183) as a ‘the voice of reason about musicology detached from music, about musicology of the kind cultivated by Kwartalnik Muzyczny. Paper pedantry, mummification of music, … a huge machine of knowledge as an aim in itself,’184 summa summarum it neither reduced the evaluation of Szczepańska’s achievements nor changed the paradigm of the Lviv form of musicology.

A figure forgotten today, and one of the most important, when it comes to the academic potential of the students of the Lviv department, was Jerzy Freiheiter. Chybiński appreciated Freiheiter’s extremely solid preparation in theoretical ←201 | 202→terms and had a lot of appreciation for his knowledge in the field of harmony, counterpoint and compositional technique; he spoke of him as ‘a man who knows more about harmony than the entire city of Lviv.’185 And although in this case, he did not forget about the Semitic origin of his student, he wrote thus about his doctoral thesis (here we should remember that Freiheiter was one of the students who chose to write his dissertation about the work of Chybiński’s beloved composer Edward Grieg, writing about his harmony): ‘It was printed in Oslo in Norwegian, but I want to print it in Polish as well, so that the Polish bibliography does not fall out in favour of the Norwegian bibliography. The whole thing may never see the light of day, which is a pity, because it is the best work in the field of harmony I have: What other students only know some part of in the theory and practice of harmony, Freiheiter has at his fingertips.’186

Chybiński directed an abbreviated version of this work to be published in Kwartalnik Muzyczny.187 In the same year of 1932, in the Lviv magazine Szopen, among lectures given on the occasion of the local Chopin Days, there also appeared the short form of a lecture by the young musicologist.188 In general, though, he was concerned with rather ‘hot’ topics: he wrote about contemporary composers,189 cooperated in writing with the editors of Muzyka Polska, sending numerous reviews and a few articles for print, including his view on a subject often present in writing on music of the twenty-year inter-war period – the importance of radio for musical culture.190

As emphasised many times by Uljana Hrab,191 Adolf Chybiński is also treated by Ukrainians as the father of musicology. Beginning with the first classes, over ←202 | 203→his entire Lviv period he educated many Ukrainian students and – as far as we know – valued them very much for their diligence and hard work. In 1932 Borys Kudryk defended his doctoral thesis Historia muzyki ukraińskiej w latach 1829–1873 od założenia chóru katedry grecko-katolickiej w Przemyślu do śmierci J. Ławrowskiego192 [History of Ukrainian music in the years 1829–1873 from the founding of the choir of the Greek catholic cathedral in Przemyśl until the death of J. Lawrowski], in 1931 Jakiw Kozaruk completed his Masters (Początki i zakończenia utworów polifonicznych w XIII i XIV wieku [Beginnings and endings of polyphonic works in the XIII and XIV centuries]), five years later Jaroslava Kolodij (who also devoted her work to Edward Grieg, writing on the subject of Liryka fortepianowa Edwarda Griega [Edward Grieg’s piano lyrics]); the Professor’s favourite pupil, as Jurij Jasinowśkij maintained, referring to the memories of Chybiński himself quoted by Myrosław Antonowycz,193 was Nestor Nyzankivskij, who began to attend classes in the newly created department already in the spring of 1913, at the same time taking private lessons in the field of counterpoint and harmony from Chybiński;194 other students included Maria Bilynśka, Jarosław Marynowycz, Myrosław Antonowycz (about whom more below)195 began studies in 1936. And although articles sometimes appeared in the local Lviv press written by Ukrainian authors who also came from outside the circle of UJK,196 however, despite the interesting results of the work of Ukrainian ←203 | 204→students and graduates, their texts were only sporadically published in the pages of Polish music and cultural magazines, while in Chybiński’s Kwartalnik Muzyczny – almost never.197

Wasyl Barwinśki, author of the lead article in the aforementioned ‘Ukranian’ number of LWML,198 worked has a pianist, musicologist, music critic. He studied at the Lviv Conservatoire and musicology at Prague’s University under Zdeněk Nejedlý. In Lviv, he took on the position of director of the Lysenko Music Institute. He collaborated with the monthly Ukrainśka Muzyka. At the same time, another Ukrainian musicologist, Stanisław Ludkewycz (1879–1979), also a composer, conductor and folklorist, was active in the Lviv area. In the first years of the twentieth century, apart from studies in the philosophy department of Lviv University and composition studies under Mieczysław Sołtys, he was a student of Guido Adler in Vienna (where he obtained his PhD in musicology), as well as Hugo Riemann in Leipzig. In the years 1910–14 he fulfilled the function of director of the M. Lysenko Higher Musical Institute, at which, through the whole twenty-year inter-war period (under Barwinśki’s direction) he lectured in theoretical subjects. Both Barwinśki and Ludkewycz were members of the commission for the reform of musical education led by MWRiOP. In the field of publication on the pages of the Polish music and musicological press, they rather did not assimilate with the Polish community.

The only but significant exception among Rusyn students who quickly and permanently bound their scholarly path to the Polish circle of the Lviv music school, was Józef Michał Chomiński. Chybiński, despite his reservations about his origin, held high hopes for him. He wrote: ‘I am also afraid that the best of my historians will not be a Pole but a Rusyn, Chomiński.’199

←204 | 205→

Chomiński, a few years younger than the first graduates, was one of the first to be obliged to obtain a master’s degree preceding a doctoral dissertation. The essential short form of his master’s thesis on imitational technique of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries nearly completely filled the last pre-war issue of the Kwartalnik,200 after which Chomiński began preparations for a second text based on his previous research. A lengthy analysis of the organum quadruplum Sederunt by Pérotin, in which Józef Chomiński continued a presentation of his earlier interests in the history of medieval music, opened the first volume of the Polski Rocznik Muzykologiczny (pp. 1–27). As I have already mentioned in an article on the history of the magazine,201 although we have access to a fairly extensive corpus of correspondence between the professor and his recent student from before the war, the letters about work on this particular article, unfortunately, have not survived. However, we have accounts of his rather poorly progressing preparations to study the work of Karol Szymanowski, from which one may assume that Chomiński had a very critical view of his activities. The first study (and a report on work on Stilwende der Musik by Ernst Pepping, of which he informed the editors in September 1935, intending to provide the texts within a month202) was prepared for the second volume of the Rocznik,203 while the continuation was to be published in the next one. In the summer of 1936, he wrote: ‘I do not know … whether I would be able to finish the second part of the harmony (Impressionist) by September, because the material begins to resist me. These are more difficult issues, after all. What makes them all the more difficult is the fact that we do not actually have a theoretical system yet that would provide a good basis for scientific investigations in this regard.’204

←205 | 206→

He also provided the editors of Rocznik with reviews from Chopin’s Harmonics [Harmoniki Chopina] by Ludwik Bronarski, recently published by the TWMP: for Chybiński it was important to have a review worthy of the book itself, and as mentioned above, among his students he highly valued Freiheiter and especially Chomiński for their knowledge of harmony and music theory, thus the choice of reviewer. Apart from this, he did not publish much, mainly for the editors of Muzyka Polska, especially in the second half of the 1930s, when he was able to move to Warsaw and become involved in the circles of the TWMP. He was a quite frequent author on the pages of the monthly, along with his Lviv colleagues, Łobaczewska, Lissa, Freiheiter and the youngest of them, Jan Józef Dunicz.

Dunicz is one of the most prominent graduates of Lviv musicology; the professor placed high hopes in him, as in the case of Chomiński, the more so given that the student closely shared his master’s interest in the music of the Polish Baroque: ‘My second volunteer assistant, Mr. Dunicz, is starting to shape up. He goes in the historical direction, and I am glad, because a number of my students have moved away from this direction, prompted by agitation on one side, which even in its valuable work has failed to be convinced that no composer can be suspended in air, since he was not living in the Sahara from birth to death.’205 He studied violin at the local conservatoire and Polish language at UJK. He was an assistant in the Lviv Institute (initially, as the professor mentions in the letter, as a volunteer, and then in 1934 he received a full-time position), and his dissertation Adam Jarzębski i jego „Canzoni e Concerti” [Adam Jarzębski and his Canzoni e Concerti] was published as the first work in the series newly founded by Chybiński Lwowskie Rozprawy Muzykologiczne.206 Also, he wrote articles directed primarily to two editorial offices: to periodicals led by Chybiński ←206 | 207→and the sister Muzyka Polska led by a group friendly with the professor clustered around SMDM207 (he also wrote a few entries for the Polish Biographical Dictionary and a few radio programs for the Lviv station). The first of his texts in Kwartalnik was a short report about Franciszek Brzeziński’s book about Bedřich Smetana. Later, however, there were extensive material studies,208 which in terms of form duplicated good models of Chybiński’s publications and those of his favourite students – Szczepańska, Feicht. Dunicz was proud of his first achievements and grateful to the professor for his support. Unfortunately, his promising scholarly career did not have the chance to develop in the face of upcoming historical events and the musicologist’s tragic premature death.

Wójcik-Keuprulian’s earlier related evaluation of up-and-coming Lviv musicology, questioning the existence among the students of real historical talents, was certainly too harsh. While it is true that eight years had passed from her doctorate in 1917 to the closure of the next doctoral studies, from 1925 onwards nearly every diploma made an important contribution to the institution’s image. The subjects of the dissertations and master’s theses could be divided into three or four groups. The first were works concerning the history of Polish music (Maria Szczepańska on manuscript 52 of the Krasiński Estate Library, Hieronim Feicht on the religious works of Pękiel, Erazm Łańcucki on church music in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Poland, Helena Kasparek on Polish a cappella masses from the turn of the eighteenth century, Jan Józef Dunicz on Canzonie Concerti by Adam Jarzębski), the second – the work of European composers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (Zofia Lissa on Scriabin’s harmonics, Stefania Łobaczewska on Debussy’s harmonics, Anna Hornung on the solo songs of Franck, Chausson and Duparc), the third – works of Chybiński’s favourite composer, Edward Grieg (a double perspective on matters related to the composer’s solo songs – presented by Maria Ramert and Józef Chomiński, and also Jerzy Freiheiter on Grieg’s harmonies and Jarosława Kołodij on his Lyrische Stücke). In spite of Chybiński’s personal interest in folklore and matters of musical ethnography (folk art forms, matters related to folk instruments), not many diplomas in this area were obtained in the period (Dunicz’s master’s thesis on the polonaise ←207 | 208→in the nineteenth century, Tadeusz Głodziński on the krakowiak, Wilhelmina Bagarówna on the oberek).209 The others were concerned with the broadly understood subject of early music: Zbigniew Liebhardt wrote on progression in early Medieval music, Irena Spiegel on the history of the madrigal in Italy, Maria Bilińska on Bach’s sarabande, Jakiw Kozaruk on polyphonic works of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Antonina Wozaczyńska on homophony in polyphonic works of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, Anna Kolischer on the work of Gilles Binchois. Borys Kudryk wrote a dissertation on the history of Ukrainian music in the nineteenth century. However, not a single dissertation arose on the subject of German symphonics (to which Chybiński devoted a few cycles of monographic lectures from various perspectives), the work and person of Frederic Chopin (though he couldn’t imagine running his journals without material on Chopin), or the life and work of Mieczysław Karłowicz, Karol Szymanowski and other young Polish composers.

Chybiński organised the study programme so that students, on the one hand, would master the scientific canons, while on the other hand, they developed individual interests. He supported them in their choice of various paths of musicology, even when he was not in total agreement with these. Indeed, when following the department’s history and getting to know the professor’s opinions on the choices of specialisation and the mature activity of certain students, we notice that he selected the closest collaborators according to a sort of scholarly loyalty and the suitability of their interests to his. On the other hand, however, he also appreciated the potential and intellect of those students who diverted far from the main current of Lviv musicology, as was the case for example, with Zofia Lissa (with whom he was particularly professionally dependent after the war).210 In fact, although sometimes he complained about the hardships of ‘pedagogy,’ he was extremely connected with his department and its students: ‘In fact, our Lviv-based musicology has a sympathetic ambience and everyone is aware of their tasks; I support the works, sometimes bringing publications for my institute, which more closely correspond to other directions than the work I had ←208 | 209→chosen. I devote a lot of time to pedagogy and to assess the work of my pupils (even former ones), though they also help me in my pedagogical activities.’211

Similarly, his disciples were attached to the master, which they expressed by giving him a memorial book published by their own means for on the occasion of his fiftieth birthday and twenty-fifth anniversary of academic work.212 They repeated a similar gesture years later, in 1950, by preparing another congratulatory volume for the professor’s seventieth birthday.213

It should be emphasised that the new centre enjoyed great popularity. Among the twenty or thirty people who applied on enrolment days, after conversing with the professor there remained a group of several people, whose number was further reduced over the first months of study. Thanks to the strict enrolment criteria and evaluation during the course of studies, Chybiński – making use of his undoubted pedagogic and didactic talent – built an academic environment to rival the German centres, where each student, entirely devoting himself to learning, could count on the master’s support and constant contact with him. Over the years one can also follow the promotion of certain people through the publication of their achievements in journals conducted by the professor (and his acquaintances). The earlier described dramatic events that occurred in the twenties and thirties at Polish universities, fortunately, did not disturb the course of teaching in a manner that would threaten musicology – here the attitude of the professor and his assistants was helpful, as they called on their students to concentrate on their studies. However, Chybiński’s department at the University of Lviv fell under the burden of other historical events – the war’s beginning and the Soviet army’s entrance into the city. The new authorities decided to direct all the local ‘powers and funds’ in the area of higher musical education to Lviv’s State Conservatoire created on the foundation of the Conservatoire of the Polish Musical Association. The new centre was provided with part of the property and staff of the Mykola Lysenko Musical Institute and the Karol Szymanowski ←209 | 210→Conservatoire. The University structures, from then on named after Ivan Franko, were also deprived of musicology, which – on the model of Soviet schooling – was to become part of the artistic school. To the new centre, the university as an institution and Chybiński personally lost a large section of the movable property which had been gathered, often with private money, since 1913: books, musical scores, photocopies, instruments. As we know, Chybiński managed to save part of the collection as a private library and archive, which Tadeusz Ochlewski offered to help move from Lviv to Warsaw during the war; finally, however, the professor decided to transfer the materials to Cracow, where they were under the care of Chybiński’s friend, the singer Bronisław Romaniszyn.

Among the musicologists active in Lviv, a few were given administrative functions in the new Conservatoire. Let us remember that the vice-director for scientific and didactic matters as well as the Department of Composition was Józef Koffler, the dean of the Department of Conducting (and section director) – Adam Sołtys, the Department of Composition and Department of Music History – Zofia Lissa (and within it the director of the Music History section – Adolf Chybiński), while the director of the Music History section was Stanisław Ludkewycz; besides them, lecturers at the school included Seweryn Barbag, Maria Szczepańska, Jerzy Freiheiter and Borys Kudryk. The Conservatoire ceased to function at the time of German aggression against the Soviet Union. The teaching staff was scattered, and the lecturers met various fates – some, such as Łobaczewska and Lissa, left the city, while others, including Chybiński and Szczepańska, remained and occupied themselves with various jobs as office clerks or translators, sometimes giving private music lessons. After liberation, work was again undertaken in the reactivated Conservatoire by Barwinśki, Ludkewycz, Sołtys and Szczepańska, among others. Adolf Chybiński spent the last period of the war in Zakopane, from which he moved to Poznań as he accepted the offer from that university to take on the organisation and direction of the new department of musicology. He was never to return to Lviv.

* * *

Referring to the archival documents of the Jagiellonian University, Fr. Tadeusz Przybylski recalled that the first attempts to initiate classes in the history and theory of music were made by the university at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: twice, in the years 1899 and 1900, the Austrian authorities were asked to appoint Władysław Żeleński, then director of the Cracow Conservatoire,214 ←210 | 211→as honorary professor at the Jagiellonian University and twice Vienna refused. When in June 1911 the habilitation took place of Zdzisław Jachimecki, a graduate of Vienna’s musicology and student of Guido Adler, which resulted in Jachimecki as a ‘private docent of musical skills’ (Privatdozent) attaining venia legendi, the conditions had arisen to again apply to open a department of studies. This time the university authorities obtained agreement and after confirmation of this first habilitation in Polish musicology in October of that year, preparations were begun for classes conducted in the winter semester of 1911/12 by the new docent – a monograph lecture entitled Zasady i rozwój dramatu muzycznego [Principles and development of musical drama].

Just like in the soon-opened institutions in Lviv and a few years later in Poznań, at the beginning of its activity, Cracow musicology did not have the characteristics of a fully organised seminary. For a number of years, the group of students was scarce. According to Przybylski, no more than 10–12 people took part in all the classes on a yearly basis: in individual rooms of quite random locations (Institute of Zoology, Jagiellonian University Department of Chemistry), with one piano and a board with staves, with a laboriously collected library, which officially began its activity only in 1922. By around the same time, the musicological seminary saw only two people obtain a diploma: in 1921 Władysław Kalisz based on his work on multi-voice church music among Italians in Poland in the first half of the seventeenth century, and in 1923 Helena Dorabialska completed a dissertation on Józef Damse and his operatic comedies. In the following years, thanks to the didactic cooperation (though not full-time) of subsequent docents – Józef Reiss in 1922 and (considerably later, in 1934; classes in the 1935/36 academic year) Adolf Chybiński’s student in Lviv, Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian – as well as the gaining of a full-time position for the assistant Włodzimierz Poźniak215 preparing a doctorate under Jachimecki’s supervision – Cracow’s Seminary of Music History and Theory (known from 1938 as an Institute) really began to develop and in the thirties regularly promoted its subsequent graduates, some of whom made a lasting mark on the discipline’s history with their research, journalistic and pedagogic activities: Stanisław Golachowski, Aleksander Frączkiewicz, Stefan Śledziński-Lidzki, Alina Nowak-Romanowicz, Mieczysław Drobner.

Jachimecki’s monographic lectures were thematically related to his current academic interests.216 In the following years, they were classes on musical drama, history of opera from 1600 to 1750, Mozart’s operas, profiles and works ←211 | 212→of nineteenth-century Italian composers – Rossini, Bellini, Donizetti, Verdi, the creative work of Wagner, Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, Haendel.217 Gradually, although the creator of the institution was a supporter of independent education of students, he complemented the monographic presentations with course activities in harmony and counterpoint, musical forms, paleography, and instrumentation.

The analysis of Jachimecki’s enormous musicological heritage, both his monographs and contributions, would take many pages of this work; Barbara Przybyszewska-Jarmińska devoted her attention to the ‘monographic’ work of the professor during the conference on the centenary of Polish and Cracow musicology.218 Here it suffices to say that, although he just as eagerly published in the press as in monographs (he also did public readings and cooperated with radio), with regards to the frequency of announcing partial results of his own research, he was overtaken by his antagonist from Lviv. This can be seen at a glance when leafing through the pre- and interwar period Przegląd Muzyczny, the ‘first’ Kwartalnik Muzyczny, Muzyka, as well as local magazines and magazines of the milieu – Hosanna, Śpiewak, Muzyk Wojskowy. His style, heavy on literary emphasis, especially in texts from the two-decade inter-war period, in various reviews and reports from concert life, better served the popularisation ←212 | 213→of music on the pages of general culture and society magazines, such as Cracow’s Ilustrowany Kurier Codzienny and his literary-scientific section, Echo Muzyczne, Dziennik Polski, Kurier Poznański, than the documentation of musicological research.

To the lecture programme drawn out by the department head, Józef Reiss added classes in the area of aesthetics and the history of theory (ancient history and medieval music theory, theoretic-musical concepts of the Renaissance, reading of theoretical treatises, Friedrich Nietzsche’s opinions on music, and others) and the sociology of music. He gladly made use of the series of Cracow’s Akademia Umiejętności [Academy of Learning] to announce the results of his research: his first dissertation ‘Psalmic melodies of Mikołaj Gomółka, 1580’ was published in the Rozprawy Wydziału Filologicznego [The dissertations of the Philological Department] under its auspices, and in the 1920s he made use of the pages of the Sprawozdania Akademii Umiejętności [The reports of the Academy of Learning] several times, the series of which we will later mention. Before the war, he appeared several times as an author for the Warsaw Przegląd Muzyczny; after the war, Reiss’s materials appeared several times in the Poznań edition of the magazine of the same title: the many-part article ‘Stanisław Moniuszko i jego posłannictwo’219 [Stanisław Moniuszko and his mission], ‘Św. Augustyn w muzyce’220 [St. Augustine in music], he also published a reprint of his lecture on oratorio, originally printed in Muzyk Wojskowy.221 He wrote for Ilustrowany Kurier Codzienny, Orkiestra, Kwartalnik Filozoficzny. He collaborated with Mateusz Gliński, by forwarding to Muzyka amongst others, the material ‘Postacie i dzieła’ [Characters and works] to the monographic edition Romantyzm w perspektywie historycznej [Romanticism in historical perspective],222 ‘Dzieje symfonii w Polsce’223 [History of the symphony in Poland], ‘Orkiestra symfoniczna w perspektywie historycznej’224 [The symphony orchestra in historical perspective], the one-off text about Ignacy Jan Paderewski,225 and additionally, he released a number of compact publications and monographs.

After associating with the Cracow department, using her earlier research announced in the essay about Chopin’s melody, Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian ←213 | 214→prepared two series of lectures: about melodic issues (theoretical, historical, comparative) and about issues of Chopin’s style, and was the first to introduce classes in musical ethnography (general issues in this field, about Armenian folk and religious music), but this did not affect the students’ decisions about the subjects they chose for their diploma theses – no ethnomusicological thesis was written in Cracow before the war.226 Wójcik-Keuprulian’s activities in the pages of the ‘expert’ press were quite substantial (as mentioned earlier in connection with the review of achievements of the Lviv circles), but only once was she involved with the series of the academic local environment, announcing her controversial work ‘Stanowisko muzykologii w systemie nauk’227 [The position of musicology in the scientific system] in Rozprawki i Notatki Muzykologiczne (more about this below). The dissertation became the subject of harsh criticism, such as Julian Pulikowski228 placed in Muzyka Polska (signing – as he often used to do – with the monogram T.K.).

The broadening of the subjects of monographic lectures beyond the interests of the head of the seminar had no influence on the topics of research undertaken by young adepts of Cracow musicology. All diplomas were supervised by Jachimecki, whose interests were also shared by his students. Hence, a whole series of works on the history of music, mainly concerning the nineteenth century, sometimes with trips to the eighteenth century (also sporadically the seventeenth century) or the the most recent creations, and therefore the legacies of Józef Damse, Karol Lipiński, Juliusz Zarembski, Karol Kurpiński, Ignacy Feliks Dobrzyński, Antoni Stolpe, Henryk Wieniawski, Józef Elsner, Józef Brzowski, Stanisław Niewiadomski, Karol Szymanowski, Eugeniusz Pankiewicz, Władysław Żeleński.

←214 | 215→

Some of the students of the department published the results of their first research work before they received their diplomas. Marceli Liebeskind, who in 1930 defended his thesis on the work of Mieczysław Karłowicz, sent a summary of the fragments of the work he prepared for the Cracow seminar to Muzyka;229 the case was similar with Antoni Wieczorek, author of a dissertation on Karol Kurpiński’s operatic works in the years 1811–20, who published materials on the subject of Kurpiński in Mateusz Gliński’s monthly magazine two years before his diploma,230 and after receiving his doctorate he sent fragments of the dissertation to the Poznań Przegląd Muzyczny.231

The Cracow milieu, which, apart from a small group of employees and alumni of the department, was made up of local critics, publicists and musicians penning their opinions, mainly on current affairs, wrote in the pages of the magazine Czas and the monthly Muzyka i Śpiew, above all in the Ilustrowany Kurier Codzienny, in which the weekly supplement Kurier Literacko-Naukowy historical materials and reports about contemporary creations were published not only by Cracovians Zdzisław Jachimecki and Józef Reiss, but also – with particular intensity especially in the years 1933–36 – Adolf Chybiński, however, the young musicologists who tried to keep up with them writing mainly reviews and concerts – Włodzimierz Poźniak, Mieczysław Drobner, and the music populariser, organiser of musical events (such as the festival of Polish music in Prague in 1927), one of the founders of the PTM, Melania Grafczyńska. The pages of social and cultural magazines, however, could not be sufficient for strictly scholarly publications, hence the alternative to this kind of local press and nationwide music magazines in the years of establishing the first departments, both Cracow and Lviv, were the AU publications. It is worth mentioning briefly why this institution was so important for documenting musicological achievements.

Rich in centuries-old tradition, the scientific milieu of Galicia’s second city after Lviv had the potential to develop an institution covering all partitions, also open to intellectual circles abroad, on the basis of the Jagiellonian University (in the nineteenth century, the main university of a national character) and the local Scientific Society. The AU was established in these foundations in 1872 ←215 | 216→(from 1919 PAU). Its goal was to ‘support and facilitate creative scientific work in Poland, manage it and, if possible, reward, organise scientific undertakings, and also maintain communication between Polish science and the scientific communities abroad.’232

The first president of PAU after the World War was prof. Kazimierz Morawski, historian and classiscal philologist.233 Although after 1919 the Academy was closely related to the scientific policy of the new Polish state, in the interwar period it became an independent and free institution in all its aspects, and these years cover the period of its greatest prosperity. From the ideological point of view, conservatism and ideology of national democracy, popular among Cracow’s academics, dominated the present humanistic thought. Fortunately, Cracow, including its scientific-intellectual circles, did not feel the effects of the world war. Research, publishing and the whole organisation of life at the University and within the Academy continued undisturbed. This convenient situation strengthened the position of the Cracow community – and in time that of Lviv, which was also closely personally related to it – in relation to other Polish centres, and despite the declared openness, caused a kind of monopolisation and local profile of the institution: representatives of other universities and research centres on the Board of the PAU were in the minority, and this meant that the initiatives of that body played a specific and important role in the local – intellectual and cultural – life of Cracow.

In the first years of the free state, money for financing PAU was difficult to obtain. At the same time, other scholarly societies were active in the country: Lviv, Poznań and Vilnius, and TPN in Warsaw. In 1924, however, rescue arrived in the form of a donation given to the Academy by the pro-Polish Archduke Karol Stefan Habsburg. The so-called Żywiecki’s estate – 1/5 of the magnate’s wealth in the form of income-generating forests and farms – became a material guarantee for the Cracow institution. At the same time the subsidies from MWRiOP and the centrally functioning FKN increased. Although the world crisis of 1929 also affected Polish science and it was only possible to speak of financial stability around 1937, the comfortable situation associated with the Habsburg estate, around the turn of the twenties and thirties, allowed Cracow to take on the role of animator of Polish scientific life from the Warsaw Scientific Society, which, moreover, at the same time, was preparing to be transformed into a similar Cracow-like nationwide formula – Akademia Nauk [Academy of Sciences]. ←216 | 217→One of the main provisions in the draft constitution of 1924 was the statement that ‘PAU is the chief scientific institution in Poland, established to cultivate all skills.’ Finally, in the constitution approved in 1927, the Academy is defined as an ‘institution established to nurture science,’ also through the publication of research results carried out in various Polish centres.

The Academy was made up of three Faculties: of Philology, History-Philosophy, and Mathematics-Natural Sciences, and from 1930 the Medical Faculty, within which, in turn, there were Commissions and Committees. All ordinary members and correspondents (domestic and foreign), who numbered close to one hundred and twenty at the end of the 1930s, were entitled to attend meetings of all faculties and commissions, for which the scholars from beyond the Academy were also invited to present their works and research reports. In the interwar period only Adolf Chybiński was chosen from among musicologists as a correspondent member, in 1929, and Zdzisław Jachimecki a year later.234 Both of them, even before the private docenture at the Cracow and Lviv universities, had the opportunity to present their works at the meetings of the Faculty of Philology of the AU and publish them through the publishing houses of the Academy. Jachimecki was much more strongly connected with this Cracow scientific body – for him it was a natural forum for presenting the results of his research. Let us remember that on April 15, 1907, in Cracow he presented the assumptions of the dissertation Mikołaj Gomółka i jego stosunek do współczesnych kompozytorów psalmów [Mikołaj Gomółka and his relationship to contemporary psalm composers]. At the end of 1909, he presented his habilitation thesis Wpływy włoskie w muzyce polskiej [Italian influences in Polish music], published in 1911 by the Academy of Learning Publishers (a summary in German appeared in Bulletin International of the Academy in 1911). In the years 1911–14 members of the Academy had the opportunity to listen to Jachimecki several times, for the dissertations Tabulatura organowa z biblioteki klasztoru św. Ducha w Krakowie z roku 1548 [Organ tablature from the Library of the Holy Spirit Monastery in Cracow from the year 1548] and Muzyka na dworze króla Władysława Jagiełły: 1424–1430 [Music at the court of king Władysław Jagiełło: 1424–1430] were released by the ←217 | 218→AU235 publishing house; reports on these and summaries of his other works on the history of Polish music were published in Sprawozdania AU and Rozprawy Wydziału Filologicznego AU.236 Later, in the interwar period, Jachimecki gave papers about his work to PAU only twice; after the war, his ‘report’ Muzykologia i piśmiennictwo muzyczne w Polsce [Musicology and musical writing in Poland] appeared in 1948 as part of the series Historia Nauki Polskiej w Monografiach [History of Polish science in monographs].

As mentioned earlier, Chybiński’s studies on the tablature of Joannis de Lublin (which was owned by the Academy and is now in the PAU/PAN Library) were discussed on January, 10, 1910 and three more times in the years 1911–12 (he published the printed text on this subject in the pages of the ‘first’ Kwartalnik Muzyczny237); in later years, he did not feel so closely linked to the Cracow institution and its organs, although he still cooperated with the ethnographic commission238 and within the framework of Prace i Materiały Antropologiczno-Archeologiczne i Etnograficzne [Anthropological-archeological and ethnographic studies and materials] years later, he announced two texts: ‘Instrumenty muzyczne ludu polskiego na Podhalu’ [Musical instruments of the Polish people of the Podhale] (1924) and ‘Dzwony pasterskie na Podhalu’ [Podhale shepherds’ bells] (1925). He also played a large role in preparation for publication of Pieśni ludowe polskiego Śląska [Folk songs from Polish Silesia] from the collections of Jan Tacina, which was a result of the work of the Komitet Wydawnictw Śląskich [the Silesian Publication Committee], in which edition Chybiński was the music editor.239 He was also foreseen as one of the authors for entries concerning ethnographic articles in the encyclopaedia planned by PAU (vol. II dedicated to ←218 | 219→ethnography), however, this plan was not implemented due to the outbreak of World War II.

Other musicologists were also invited to cooperate with the Academy. As already mentioned before, Józef Reiss’s ‘Melodie psalmowe’ [Psalm melodies] was announced in the pages of Rozprawy Wydziału Filologicznego in 1913. In the years 1919–34 he reported his work several times at Faculty meetings; in Sprawozdania AU he published ‘Spór recenzentów warszawskich o Paganiniego w roku 1829’ [The Warsaw reviewers’ disputes about Paganini in the year 1829], ‘Wielogłosowa pieśń religijna w XVI wieku w Polsce’ [Polyphonic religious songs of the sixteenth century in Poland], ‘Jerzy Liban z Legnicy jako muzyk’ [Jerzy Liban from Legnica as a musician], the essays ‘Jan Brożek-Broscius jako teoretyk muzyki’ [Jan Brożek-Broscius as a music theorist] and ‘Pauli Paulirini de Praga Tractatus de musica (ca 1460).’240 Just after World War II, in November 1945 he presented the subject ‘O materiałach do polskiej kultury muzycznej’ [About materials for Polish musical culture], and in his plans for publication he had a translation of Plutarch’s treaty On Music and ‘a very rich collection of records and notes about music, taken out of all kinds of Polish prints and numerous manuscripts.’241 Before 1939 there were also presentations to the Cracow milieu by Stefan Śledziński (he spoke about the history of the Warsaw symphony) and Zofia Lissa (‘O komizmie muzycznym’ [About musical comicality]242).

The open and well-known conflict between the heads of the first two musicologies, practically closing the doors of Kwartalnik Muzyczny editorial office to the Cracow group, made Jachimecki seek his own possibilities for publishing the results of his seminar, in addition to the AU publishing house. Under the auspices of the Musicologists’ Club at Jagiellonian University and the Club’s curator, Jachimecki himself, two volumes of the Rozprawy i Notatki Muzykologiczne [Musicological dissertations and notes] appeared. Right in the foreword, the editor explained that its ‘modestly restricted volume’ and ‘modest external form’ were caused by a lack of subsidies and foresaw a lack of consistency in the issuing of subsequent journals. It seems, however, that he went a little too far by writing that he ‘wishes … to fill the immense gaps, appearing in all areas of – so far still very meager – Polish musicological literature.’243 After all, ←219 | 220→he wrote these words in October 1934, when the still small environment of music historians and theoreticians had already read twenty lengthy issues of Kwartalnik Muzyczny; an edition of the PRM was planned, intended for strictly scientific dissertations; for historical materials of a somewhat lighter weight, new pages of Muzyka Polska were opened. All the time Gliński’s Muzyka was in print, in which the content may have been mediocre at times, though it was well edited.244 With the conflict lasting for years between the leaders of the Lviv and Cracow centres, when one of them was linked to most of the ‘professional’ editors, the second was forced to create the next, independent title. It does not seem, however, that Jachimecki was in his element with editorial work. He had no ideas for the shape and plan of publication. In two journals, he included randomly selected texts that he happened to have available: in the first, Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian’s above-mentioned habilitation lecture (pp. 1–14), the first part of Józef Reiss’s larger dissertation on the division of the monochord (according to Euclid’s treatise, pp. 15–31245), Włodzimierz Poźniak’s article ‘Romans wokalny w twórczości Michała Kleofasa Ogińskiego’ [Vocal romance in the work of Michał Kleofas Ogiński] (pp. 32–59), and a summary of Stefan Śledziński-Lidzki’s dissertation ‘Dzieje symfonii warszawskiej w pierwszej połowie XIX wieku’ [History of Warsaw symphony in the first half of the nineteenth century] (pp. 60–66). Due to Jachimecki’s publishing initiative in the second volume of Rozprawy i Notatki in 1936, Alina Nowak was able to publish her diploma thesis on the sonatas of Józef Elsner, filling the entire issue. In view of the nearly two hundred-pages PRM, prepared and published at the same time by Chybiński, Jachimecki’s journal looks very modest and it is difficult to understand that it could be compared with the yearbook and positively evaluated by the environment, if we are to believe the words of Julian Pulikowski, who reported to Chybiński: ‘It is a pity that you did not hear what Mr. Rutkowski said about the Rocznik yesterday evening. He compared the Rocznik with Cracow “notes”! And how “serious,” how “reliable” this Rocznik is compared to the Cracow rag!’246

For a certain time, it was also possible to include Fr. Hieronim Feicht, who learned musicology in Lviv, among the Cracow community: at the turn of the ←220 | 221→twenties and thirties and in the second half of the thirties he was ‘posted’ by his order in the Cracow home of priest missionaries, on this occasion he undertook lectures on the history and theory of music at the Cracow Conservatoire.247 As far as musicological publications are concerned, he consistently cooperated, above all, with his Lviv mentor, though, as mentioned, his articles also appeared on the pages of Warsaw’s Muzyka and the Poznań Przegląd Muzyczny and in magazines for the church and catholic circles such as for example, Przegląd Teologiczny.

In the 1930s the Cracow musicological circle was formally and briefly joined by Stefan Śledziński, connected with Warsaw’s musical environment. When in connection with his planned naming as one of the lecturers of the ‘musicology department’ to be established at the capital’s Conservatoire, he was obliged to obtain a doctorate within two years, he decided to turn to Zdzisław Jachimecki as his supervisor. An abstract of the dissertation printed in Rozprawy i Notatki was the result of the successful completion of his doctoral proceedings. It seems, however, that for Śledziński this fact was more a formality than an inner need. His passion was in teaching. For years Śledziński not only worked in musical education but also fulfilled the role of supervisor of musical institutions as an officer of the MWRiOP – and although he taught music history at the Conservatoire, he was not generally involved in scholarly research.

After the war of 1914–18, there was a chance to develop a third domestic musicological centre. After obtaining statehood, in May 1919, the inauguration of the University’s activity took place in Polish Poznań. For the first three consecutive years, the programme of the Faculty of Philosophy was led by a student of Otto Kinkeldey in Wroclaw and Hermann Kretzschmar and Johannes Wolf in Berlin, Fr. Wacław Gieburowski. He gave classes in music theory and history: lectures on the origins of polyphonic music, the history of the oratorio, the history of medieval music theory. Shortly after, in a newly created institution, he would lead classes in palaeography and the history of Gregorian chant. Almost simultaneously, in 1920, in the capital of Greater Poland, the conservatoire started to operate, with Henryk Opieński, appointed earlier as director, travelling between Warsaw and Switzerland. His deputy Łucjan Kamieński was also educated by the already mentioned Kretzschmar and Wolf; the group of musicologists at the school was supplemented by another: a graduate of Berlin ←221 | 222→musicology, Wacław Piotrowski and the aforementioned Father Gieburowski.248 Despite not arranging all the formalities linked to habilitation, in the next year, Kamieński was given the task of organising the university’s Musicological Seminary, which eventually began functioning in May 1922, and after ten years was transformed into a Department. The chief of the Poznań facility was a professor from autumn 1937, in the years 1938–39 also fulfilled the function of Dean of the university’s Faculty of Humanities. At the same time that the Senate of Poznań University made the proposal, he made efforts towards attaining a position at the University of Warsaw, though this matter was unsure, as in order to take on a position there he made the problematic demand that the institution provides accommodation. Moreover, a decision had not actually been taken (and would not be for many years) to establish a musicological department in the capital. He therefore remained in Poznań: ‘Three days ago, the Poznań faculty informed me that it “entrusts” lectures to me. The dean asks for a conference regarding presenting me “as a professor of musicology at the Poznań University.” Well, let’s see what that means … It seems that they offer me a professorship – N.B. without habilitation. … Since Warsaw has not addressed me to this day, I will accept.’249 A year later he was still hoping to be called to Warsaw, even considering who could replace him in the faculty. The opinions that he expressed in one of his letters to Chybiński offer interesting evidence of his real evaluation of colleagues ‘in the business’’

Father Gieburowski, a reliable and serious employee, seems to be too one-sided to preside at the department of musicology ‘in all extent’ … There is Piotrowski, who received his doctorate only a year ago, and has yet to present a professional publication; besides, he’s a man of rather plain mind, though quite righteous and noble …. On the other hand – what do you think of – do not get scared, Wójcikówna? How is her habilitation going? … As far as I think, she, too, is not yet ripe for the department, but maybe something good will come of it in a few years. … If you had not emphasised so enthusiastically that you have to stay in Lviv, and if there were better library conditions, etc., I would most gladly – remembering your special sympathy to the Western Borderlands – invite you in the event of my resettlement to Warsaw from ←222 | 223→the Poznań ‘capital’ … What of it, if it’s not doable… And I regret passing this seminar of mine to just anyone – to you I would pass with pleasure.250

Although he did not officially resign from his efforts for Warsaw, he preferred to have support in place. In the first years of the seminar, lectures and exercises were conducted by Wacław Gieburowski, due to his interest being focused on historical and aesthetic issues while after the priest left the department, Kamieński himself continued them. From the beginning of February 1922 Kamieński began lectures (4 hours) and exercises (2 hours) and discussions about basso continuo.251 The facility was equipped very poorly; however, the new, young leader immediately displayed initiative: ‘without a seminar office, I only have a cabinet with a few books borrowed from the university’s library. But “fear not”; I have already submitted applications, I am also collecting private donations.’252

To help in the presentation of theoretical issues (harmony, counterpoint, figured bass) the head of the institution asked his colleague from the conservatoire, Wacław Piotrowski, whose duties were assumed a few years later by the first local doctoral graduate, Kazimierz Zieliński. At the turn of the 1930s, classes in the area of musical ethnology were brought in (Łucjan Kamieński); in the years 1933–35 lectures in laryngology, which were to be conducted by the eminent otolaryngologist working at the University of Poznań, prof. Alfred Laskiewicz. In the mid-thirties Zygmunt Sitowski and Marian Sobieski became assistants, having been informally connected with the department earlier, while at the end of the twenties and soon after a group of young graduates took on collaboration on a voluntary basis with the Regional Phonographic Archives,253 founded by Kamieński at the University, further discussed below. Two years before the outbreak of the war, the list of lectures was supplemented with acoustics, which was entrusted to the newly promoted Marek Kwiek, one of the six local graduates who managed to obtain his PhD in his native Alma Mater.254

←223 | 224→

The pre-war history of Poznań’s musicology includes nearly twenty master’s theses; these were all defended after 1934 (the remaining students entered in the university archives did not obtain a diploma; for some, musicology studies were only an episode, others continued their studies after the war), while until the mid-1930s only historical topics were undertaken. Kamieński, who in his own dissertation took on the subject of the oratorios of J.A. Hasse,255 mainly continued with historical subjects in his research activity until the late-1920s. Nor did he completely leave them in the following years: of particular interest to us are his polemics referring to the composer of the national anthem Mazurek Dąbrowskiego, which took place on the pages of Muzyka between him and Stanisław Zetowski,256 and also material published in 1928 on the subject of eighty-six polonaises from the second half of the eighteenth century that he had found.257

The information that we find while reading Kamieński’s correspondence with Adolf Chybiński is also of interest from the viewpoint of the history of musical writing. It is a matter of his plans related to establishing his own editorial office, or else a ‘take-over’ from the hands of Warsaw’s SMDM and co-editing Kwartalnik Muzyczny258 with the Lviv professor. However, despite many years of good contacts with Kamieński and their shared views on many issues concerning the vital problems of the musical and musicological milieu, Chybiński did not have enough confidence in him to decide on this ‘union’ between Lviv and Poznań. In this situation, he was collaborating as an author with the leading music periodicals. In his youth, during his stay in Berlin, later in Königsberg, but also in later years, he published a lot in German (in Sammelbände der ←224 | 225→Internationalen Musikgesellschaft, Archiv für Musikwissenschaft, Allgemeine Musikzeitung). When he had become immersed in Poznań’s academic environment, a few times he made use of the pages of Sprawozdania [Reports] of the local Association of the Friends of Science (TPN)259 to print his materials. However, he was above all quite a regular writer in the capital’s Muzyka, where he provided texts of a popularising, reporting or review character, as well as taking on scholarly discussion; altogether he appeared on the pages of Muzyka a dozen or so times.260 However, it is surprising how weak his contacts were with the local Przegląd Muzyczny and Życie Muzyczne i Teatralne, where his name can only sporadically be found.261

It can be seen from this that writing did not absorb him too much – it seems that he preferred to focus on his main interests and their realisation. In the second half of the twenties, he developed his second passion – researching and immortalising folk art on phonograms. Lectures given in the years 1924–25 on the morphology of folkloric songs and instruments,262 the gradual gathering of sound documentation during myriad travels around various regions of Poland, and finally the financial support of the MWRiOP allowed realisation of the idea which came when familiarising oneself with the activities of the Phonogramm-Archiv in Berlin: opening the Regional Phonographic Archives (RAF) at Poznań’s Department of Musicology. This became the primary representative of comparative musicology in Poland, and in response to Poznań’s project – let us stress that it was the only one, though there was a concept of establishing a network of such regional collections – a few years later a Central Phonographic Archive was organised by Julian Pulikowski at the National Library in Warsaw in ←225 | 226→1935. The Poznań collection, numbering about four thousand phonograms, was completely destroyed by fire during the war.263

Work on completing the sound collections affected the profile of the entire Poznań department, as its extensive research in the area of musical ethnography distinguished it from the other musicology centres where this type of activity was almost absent. Here we should remember that in Cracow musical ethnography was taught only briefly by Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian, while in Lviv it was not until the 1939/40 academic year that Chybiński – himself always passionate about folklore, author of numerous dissertations and monographs in this area – planned a lecture on the folkloric music (but also professional) of Scandinavia and precisely that of Norway.264 Thus, Kamieński was able to find a niche in musicological research, giving the Poznań centre a clear profile; unfortunately, though, he did not carry out the idea of publishing gathered materials in the form of a yearbook of Poznań’s phonographic archives.265 In a short time, however, several diplomas were created, in which the Archive’s collections were used.266 This activity, however, did not translate in any particular way into publications ←226 | 227→in the music press. Admittedly, Kamieński’s students – Hanna Rudnicka, Marian Sobieski, Zygmunt Sitowski and others – cooperated with various magazines, mainly in the area of reports and concert and publishing reviews. Among the young musicologists from Poznań, Zygmunt Latoszewski distinguished himself in this respect, who, apart from numerous accounts, published, amongst others, two historical texts in Muzyka: still before gaining his doctorate – ‘Dzieje opery polskiej’267 [History of Polish opera] and a few years later – ‘Początki opery polskiej (wiek XIX–XX)’268 [The beginning of Polish opera]. A few in Poznań were involved with Chybiński’s periodicals, Kwartalnik and PRM, but only Kamieński and Marek Kwiek published dissertations269 through their publications, while Father Gieburowski and Marian Sobieski remained with book reviews. Bożena Czyżykowska published a few texts in the Greater Poland press (‘Fonograf zbiera pieśni’ [The Phonograph collects songs],270 ‘Muzykalność ludu wielkopolskiego’ [Musicality of the Greater Poland people] and ‘Na wesele do Domachowa’271 [For a wedding to Domachów]), but they were not of an academic nature.

Over time it was clear that the most significant contribution to the continuation of Poznań’s folklore research was made by two of Kamieński’s students – Marian Sobieski and Jadwiga Pietruszyńska, after their wedding in 1936 – Sobieska. (After the war, following the assumptions of their teacher, the Sobieskis developed the All-Poland Campaign for the Collection of Folkloric Music, during which, thanks to the more modern devices available, they were able to gather incomparably more recordings, nearly fifty thousand compared to four thousand collected during Poznań’s pioneer exploration.) It was Sobieski himself who made the first field recordings in the Kujawy region with the faculty leader; Pietruszyńska went to Mazowsze, with which she had a family connection: she was from Warsaw, studied at the University there (art history) and at the Conservatoire (violin playing), though she chose the young centre in Poznań for musicology studies. In the mid-1930s, she also had a short but significant ←227 | 228→‘press’ episode: for a time she was the secretary to the editorial office of Muzyka Polska, but on account of personal plans left the team after a few months. In Adolf Chybiński’s rich ‘Cracow’ archive there are nearly fifty letters from 1936 regarding the then contacts of the professor with TWMP and Muzyka Polska signed by Teodor Zalewski and Jadwiga Pietruszyńska (Sobieska). When it comes to contributing achievements from the period before 1939, the results of the Sobieskis’ works – let us also add those that go beyond the folklore themes, such as the presentation of Cztery motety Kopernikowskie [Four Copernican Motets] op. 19 by Tadeusz Kassern272 – they jointly published many times.

Returning to the matter of the “specialisation” of Poznań’s musicology, one should indicate the second “niche” that Kamieński managed to perceive and make use of – acoustic research. This research was closely linked to developing the activities of the Regional Phonographic Archives (RAF) and the laboratory in which increasingly modern devices for recording were collected as well as for the analysis of recordings. The centre’s chief, himself highly interested in theoretical matters and modern technological capabilities for research on sound, rather quickly educated a student who was to soon become an authority in this field. Marek Kwiek, two years after his master’s degree on the subject of development paths of musical scales, obtained a PhD in 1936 based on his dissertation Zależność między własnościami fizycznymi dźwięku a jego słyszalnością [The relationship between the physical properties of the sound and its audibility]. It should be added that in this field this was pioneering work at Polish universities and, according to Kamieński’s review, cited by Helena Harajda, in general ‘Poland’s first major contribution in psychological musicology … [although research] by nature is carried out using phisico-mathematical methods.’273

(By the way, it is worth mentioning that Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian’s systematics raised the particular role of acoustics within the whole field; however, her approach to the subject was strictly theoretical and not in any way connected to the Poznań centres activities, which were oriented more towards practice than ←228 | 229→theory. As for the controversy that arose in regards to the researcher’s proposals, we will return in chapter II-3)

Certain statements suggest that in the mid-twenties an idea was born to make a kind of ‘pooling’ of the Poznań cathedral (and others?) in Warsaw, which provoked strong opposition and indignation of the head of the Wielkopolska branch. Kamieński bluntly expressed his opinion on this subject:

Every Department has its regional significance as a centre of work and of education. Lecturers visit the province, developing regional materials from Warsaw, for example, would be very troublesome. … And the students! I know you have a lot of them. Here too, activity has been growing gradually, so that I now have 23 members of the seminary and the studies … are prospering. So what will happen to my group? To Warsaw? Bah! Many can go there! In Poznań, one is staying with one’s relatives, not far from home … and before one would go to the ‘congress,’ one would rather go study law, gynecology, the devil knows what, but one will stay in Poznań. As a result, Wielkopolska would virtually be left completely stripped of musicology; the provincial musical culture would suffer a great deal.’274

In the context of music publications of the Poznań environment, it is also worth mentioning the figure Stanisław Wiechowicz, who was above all a composer and conductor but was also involved in the musical press for many years not only as an author, but also as editor. Along with reviews, he wrote articles on musical life, musical education and the dissemination of music – in Poznań’s Śpiewak (Singer), Kurier Poznański, in Muzyka Polska, and above all in Przegląd Muzyczny, where he was editor after Henryk Opieński (and the short term of Kazimierz Sikorski in this position) from 1927;275 in 1929 he also became a founding member of the ‘Professional Music Press Club.’ Intimate contacts with Adolf Chybiński dating back to the years of the magazine’s functioning, his frequent consultations regarding the shape and content of the periodical, are testimonies to Wiechowicz as a man caring not only for a high level of live music but also knowledge of music. He repeatedly sought Chybiński as an author, also when the singing community asked the editorial office to move away from the too-academic nature of the texts and was grateful for articles on topics that could be of vital interest to the environment, such as ‘W sprawie kultu dawnej muzyki polskiej chóralnej’276 [In the matter of the cult of early Polish choral music] and ‘O wyższy poziom zespołów chórowych’ [About the high level of choral ensembles].277

←229 | 230→

The panorama of musicological centres in Poland during the twenty-year inter-war period is complemented by the short history of the Warsaw department, whose development was attempted under the auspices of the Conservatoire, as well as part of the University. The controversial fate of this initiative and its realisation can be followed in Chybiński’s correspondence with Julian Pulikowski, who was engaged in the project himself; however, critical remarks were also made by other musicologists.

Although the decision to grant similar authority to musicology at the conservatoire as at universities was opposed by the deans of the Faculty of Humanities at Józef Piłsudski University in Warsaw, a section of the capital’s conservatoire circles strongly supported this project from the beginning. Mateusz Gliński even intended to devote one of the special editions of his monthly magazine to musicology; he wanted ‘to make quite a commotion in Muzyka regarding the musicology department in Warsaw’ announcing (‘for example’) a survey and commissioning special articles.278 Creating the facility was fostered, among others by Zdzisław Jachimecki, whose ‘people’ belonged to the local teaching staff – Helena Dorabialska (who received a doctoral degree at the Jagiellonian University in 1925 based on her dissertation Józef Damse i jego komedie muzyczne [Józef Damse and his musical comedies]) and Stefan Śledziński (who defended his doctoral thesis in Cracow in 1932, Dzieje symfonii warszawskiej w 1. połowie XIX wieku [Symphonic works in the first half of the nineteenth century]). The inauguration ceremony took place on February 20, 1934, noted amongst others in Muzyka Polska,279 and reports from this event were also published in the press beyond Warsaw; in the Przemyśl monthly Orkiestra (edited – let us remember – by Józef Koffler) it was written:

On the twentieth of this month [February], the Faculty of Musicology had its grand opening in the Warsaw Conservatoire of Music. The ceremony took place in the morning hours in the Barcewicz’s room, with the participation of government representatives, music and scientific communities. The president of the Council of Ministers, the Minister of WRiOP [Wacław] Jędrzejewicz also came,280 accompanied by the Deputy Minister Rev. ←230 | 231→[Bronisław] Żongołłowicz.281 … The introductory words were given by the rector of the Conservatoire, the well-known composer Prof. Eugeniusz Morawski. The Rector raised the important scientific significance of the newly created faculty, above all for the Polish musical community. Prof. Morawski announced close cooperation with the Warsaw Conservatoire and the University in the field of musicology. Then, Mr. Witold Maliszewski spoke on behalf of the Art Department of the Ministry of WRiOP, raising the importance of musicology for the development of musical culture. Professor Zdzisław Jachimecki from Cracow joyfully greeted the creation of such an important music institution. Following these introductory speeches, the head of the musicology department Prof. Dr Stefan Śledziński gave a lecture on the subject ‘Indications of Warsaw musicology.’282

Jachimecki’s speech probably aroused controversy, given that Kamieński conveyed the reports he heard about the events of the ceremony as follows: ‘if what I was told is true, namely that only one student has entered this “faculty,” then this soap bubble will probably soon burst. All the more so because the favour of the university for this compromise item has gone haywire thanks to the help of the arch-clever speech by our friend patron [Jachimecki]; you probably know about the fact that the rector left the hall ostentatiously during this speech, and that the Warsaw Senate sent a letter to J[achimecki] requesting an explanation.’283

From the beginning, the already mentioned Julian Pulikowski made strong efforts to obtain a place in Warsaw’s musicology didactic team, as after settling in the capital he sought worthy employment for himself. Born in 1908, Pulikowski grew up in Hanover, which was not without significance in the further course of his life: in Poland he was perceived as a foreigner from Germany, sympathetic to the nation, and this, combined with his complicated and controversial personality, and probably also his imperfect use of the Polish language, put him in the position of an outsider not accepted by a large part of the milieu, especially during the few years of the war, when he decided to continue his work in library structures, under the authority of the occupying forces. Under these circumstances, his death, which took place during the Warsaw Uprising during the digging of the insurgents’ fortifications, is all the more dramatic.284

←231 | 232→

Returning however to the career path of Pulikowski, one should remember that he studied philosophy, art history and musicology at the Vienna University, the latter subject under Alfred Orel, Wilhelm Fischer and Robert Lach.285 Additionally, at the beginning of the 1930s, he went to Hamburg, where had the chance to work in the phonetic laboratory of Wilhelm Heinitz, a specialist in the field of comparative musicology and psychology. When he came to Poland in 1934 and settled in Warsaw, he had already maintained contact with Adolf Chybiński for a few years, who in 1929 began sending reports from foreign publications – from the fifth issue of Kwartalnik Muzyczny his reviews appeared regularly in nearly every issue. Already then, in December 1929, he referred to his forthcoming article ‘Pieśń ludowa i muzykologia’ [Folkloric songs and musicology]286, which did not appear in print until 1936 in the second volume of the PRM. Besides, he did not publish much, and generally in magazines outside the musical trend. Although he tried at all costs to avoid becoming pigeonholed as an ethnomusicologist, he often dealt with issues in this field, but mostly in a broader context - historical, sociological, and general-cultural.287 Piotr Dahlig emphasises that Pulikowski ‘sought to coordinate historical and systematic musicology … postulated taking into account all musical culture, including folk and peasant music.’288

←232 | 233→

In July 1934 Pulikowski was given work in the Music Department of the National Library. At the same time Janusz Miketta, then a bureaucrat in MWRiOP, making use of his competences, proposed opening the Institute for the Study of Folk Songs [Instytut Badań Pieśni Ludowych], the Board of which consisted of (apart from Pulikowski) Chybiński, Kamieński, Cezaria Baudouin de Courtenay Ehrenkreutz Jędrzejewiczowa,289 Kazimierz Moszyński, Eugeniusz Frankowski, Kazimierz Nitsch, Zdzisław Stieber, Witold Doroszewski. According to the prepared statute of the Institute, CAF was to be created, which, as is known, Pulikowski successfully organised in a short time; by the outbreak of the war, about twenty thousand Polish folk songs were found in the collection of the archive. Unfortunately, they were destroyed during the war.290

In the meantime, however, he was also searching for other tasks. At that time, the ‘musicological department’ was planned at the State Conservatoire. This idea and attempts to implement it over the next few years involved some of the musicologists’ milieu, while another part (including Chybiński and his collaborators) were shocked. Talks continued about whether the course should not be run by UJP. It was unclear what kind of education and what knowledge bases would be accepted for potential students – whether the youth in the vocational school, such as was the conservatoire, would be as well educated as the students of university studies? All of the proposed lecturers had doctorates, but none of them obtained venia legendi by way of habilitation, which was a sine qua non condition for the establishment of a scientific institution. In this situation, the opinion of the musicologists’ community was unambiguous. Seweryn Barbag wrote at the beginning of 1935: ‘The latest creation of the “faculty” of musicology at the Warsaw Conservatoire speaks volumes of how even in professional areas, not everyone is aware of the seriousness of musicology. The administration of each new musicological school should be handled by outstanding ←233 | 234→and academically experienced individuals. We expected that a highly deserving professor will be appointed as head of the musicological department in Warsaw, such as Prof. Dr Reiss from Cracow, or Dr Wójcik-Keuprulian from Lviv.’291

Meanwhile, the entire teaching staff was to be based only on the conservatoire’s lecturers, but they had not followed the necessary scholarly path to be able to conduct classes of an academic nature. Indeed for this reason, it was not possible for the department to be included in the University’s structure in order, as written by Magdalena Dziadek, ‘to carry out courses on humanities and diploma exams equal in rank to university master’s degrees.’292 In relation to the conservatoire, however, plans to launch the faculty were made, and was described by Pulikowski thus: ‘The “musicological department” [of the Warsaw Conservatoire] has 13 hours allocated: 2 for Miss [Helena] Dorabialska on “the history of musical forms,” 2 for Mr. [Henryk] Rydzewski on musical aesthetics,293 5 for Mr. [Stefan] Śledziński on “the history of instruments” and “the general history of music,” and 4 for me on “ethnography.” How I fill these 4 hours, is up to me.’294

The new organisation was ceremonially inaugurated at the beginning of 1934. However, in the adopted formula, without a titled leader who could create a department, it did not meet with approval from the majority of ‘university’ musicologists and was ostracised by other centres – Lviv (with Chybiński) and Poznań (with Kamieński), except for Cracow and Zdzisław Jachimecki. Jachimecki, who – according to the words of the editorial office of the monthly Muzyka – ‘invited by MWRiOP to take care of this new music learning institution,’295 not only spiritually supported Warsaw lecturers. Years before, he had supervised Helena Dorabialska, just two years earlier, he led Stefan Śledziński’s ←234 | 235→doctorate, and also proposed the Jagiellonian University as the place of habilitation for both of them. Śledzinski also suggested to Juliusz Pulikowski to conduct the habilitation procedure there (he kept his close contact with Chybiński and the fact that he prepared the habilitation thesis somewhat under his supervision a strict secret). The Cracow professor was one of the honorary guests at the opening ceremonies of the ‘faculty,’ and fragments of the text of his speech were published by Mateusz Gliński in the pages of Muzyka.296 The didactic team of the ‘musicological department,’ as already mentioned, did not meet the university requirements, although Magdalena Dziadek maintains that ‘each of the three pedagogues lecturing at the Faculty of Musicology had several majors completed and doctoral degrees in musicology.’297 Śledziński studied Polish philology and art history at the University of Warsaw as well as conducting and composition at the Warsaw Conservatoire of Music; then, however, for a number of years, he worked mainly as a conductor (military bands, among others) and fulfilled clerical functions. Helena Dorabialska studied piano in Moscow and Warsaw, and also a composition course in Warsaw, and in 1924 she completed, as already mentioned, her doctorate in musicology in Cracow, but worked primarily as a pianist, composer and teacher. As far as academic experience is concerned, each of them had only classes with the students of the Conservatoire, which did not create any university competencies. This gave contemporaries arguments for a severe judgement of these two lecturers. We know from Pulikowski’s reports, that Rydzewski, who specialised in the field of psychology and pedagogy, and Tołwiński the acoustician did not have ‘any complaints.’ Unfortunately, concerning the others, he had the worst opinion: ‘Neither Dorab[ialska] nor Śledz[iński] have the SLIGHTEST idea about neumes, Modal notation [sic], mensural notation, about tabulature! and THIS a music historian who cannot read old texts!’298 Interested in taking a lucrative position among the staff of musicology at the Conservatoire, Pulikowski wrote further: ‘There was [on September 27, 1934] a meeting of all “musicologists” of this “Musicological Faculty” at the Conservatoire. These included: Śledziński, Dorabialska, Tołwiński, Rydzewski and myself. Dear Professor, NEVER have I seen SUCH musicologists as Śledziński and Dorabialska … and never thought that anything like this is even possible! A laity dilettante is a philosopher to them. Naturally: the “proseminar,” ←235 | 236→the “seminar,” exam this and exam that, systematics, level, etc., all this is merely “in der Luft schwirren.”’299

As far as publications are concerned, none of the mentioned persons had many scientific works to their account, although Stefan Śledziński became a faithful author for Muzyka Polska from the beginning of its activity, with the fact that the subject of his articles usually revolved around current affairs – music education and teaching methodology. or the degree of music literacy.300 Dorabialska wrote music reviews in the Warsaw Biuletyn Artystyczny, bi-weekly dedicated to art and culture, led in the years 1931–33 by the avant-garde artist Jan Dłużniewski, and the organ of the PPS, the daily Robotnik. Only sporadically do we find the names of other ‘faculty’ pedagogues in the pages of the music magazines journals: Henryk Rydzewski appears only once, in Muzyka, for which he prepared ‘Kilka słów o metodzie wykładu literatury polskiej i powszechnej na terenie gimnazjum muzycznego’301 [A few words about the method of lecturing Polish and universal literature in the music middle school], Gabriel Tołwiński, as already mentioned, appeared twice as an author in the pages of Kwartalnik Muzyczny.

To save – in his own conviction – the idea of musicology at the conservatoire, Pulikowski had his own project: ‘If I could do that, I would set up such an “Arbeitsgemeinschaft” in line with the German formula: we could take an ethnologist, a phonetician, a theatrologist, an historian – in literature and art, etc. and make various lectures touching upon the topics of Grenzgebieten.’302 He also included similar ‘revolutionary’ ideas in the article ‘Muzykologia – l’art pour l’art?’303, which was created almost in parallel to the moment of launching ‘Warsaw musicology’; in it Dziadek finds the marks of a declaration of an agenda – probably accurately, because in this essay Pulikowski repeatedly emphasises the role musicology should play in shaping the musical life of society or help in the creative work of composers, critics, teachers – and so, corresponding to the location of the ‘faculty,’ practical aspects to making use of musicological knowledge.

←236 | 237→

The prolonged shortcomings of a formal and organisational nature caused that in reference to the principles of the new institution and the decision whether it should be an entity at the Conservatoire or at the University, there was no consensus for subsequent years. On December 4, 1936, a letter signed by the dean of the Faculty of Humanities, Stanisław Wędkiewicz, in which it was stated that: ‘At its meeting of December 1, 1936, the Council of the Faculty of Humanities approved the organisation of full musicological study at the Faculty of Humanities at the Józef Piłsudski University in Warsaw.’304

Unfortunately, a few months later it turned out that instead of musicology, plans were made to establish an anthropogeography department under the direction of Bogdan Zaborski.305 At this time, Pulikowski lectured in Jędrzejewicz’s ethnography department on the systematics of musicology and an introduction to musicological literature and, hoping to lead the Warsaw department on his own,306 prepared a plan for studies, in which he did not consider it necessary to include theory, harmony, counterpoint and instrumentation, because these would be skills acquired in music schools; there would also be no need for the history of harmony and counterpoint, useful only to music historians, not for musicologists dedicated, for example, to musical education.307 Although there is no evidence for such a remark, this concept of musicological studies could not possibly have been accepted by Chybiński.

Although in 1937 and 1938 no one entered the ‘faculty’ efforts to maintain musicology within the framework of the conservatoire still continued. According to Pulikowski, neither Dorabialska nor Rydzewski had any students and to be able to satisfy the principle of ‘tres faciunt collegium,’ they organised casual listeners; Śledziński did not start courses at all.308 Finally, in the autumn of 1938, the Department of Musicology at the Faculty of the Humanities, entrusted to Pulikowski, was established at the University. However, he did not manage to fully develop the institution’s activities before the war.

←237 | 238→

Pulikowski, who was a generation younger than the other staff of the planned conservatoire faculty and, above all, a person who was new in the Warsaw and national musical world, could not win long term allies because – it must be mentioned – of his often excessive and controversial organisational and scholarly ambitions. The milieu, which, after the model of Lviv, Cracow or Poznań, was to have focused around the scholarly musicological group in Warsaw, due to its actual absence in the interwar period, did not exist. More or less educated in this direction, critics and music journalists, or writing musicians, were associated with institutions and societies operating in the capital city: the Conservatoire, WTM, SMDM and TWMP, IFCh, or with periodical editors, with Mateusz Gliński’s Muzyka at the forefront, and Warsaw episodes in the activities of some musicologists promoted elsewhere (Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian, who wanted to continue her academic career at the capital’s University and who was active in the IFCh; Father Hieronim Feicht, who in the years 1930–32 lectured on theory and history of music at the Warsaw Conservatoire; among the older generation, even Feliks Starczewski, who at the beginning of the century studied in Berlin with Oskar Fleischer and Max Friedländer, and after years of activity mainly as a musician, composer and journalist, also a writer of ‘expert’ texts, but with little experience as an academic teacher, and who was invited to the group of lecturers of musicology at the University of Warsaw in 1938) were not enough to create a platform for academic discussion here.

←238 | 239→

37 More on this subject for example, Sołtys 2008.

38 One-chamber provincial parliament operating in Galicia in 1861–1918.

39 Much detailed information on the organisation of the department in the first period of its existence (and later) can be found amongst others in the publications of Hrab 2007, Hrab 2009, Piekarski 2014, Piekarski 2017.

40 Draus 2007, 9.

41 Ibid, 31.

42 Chybiński 1959/1, 163–166.

43 The quite complicated fate of the Lviv academic milieu and activities of the University of Lviv in the months of the Polish-Ukrainian conflict and the Polish-Bolshevik war, as well as the turbulent period associated with the introduction of a government law regarding the strengthening of the role of the minister of WRiOP relating to university (1933) described by Jan Draus (op. cit.). See also Mękarski 1970.

44 Draus 2007, 60.

45 Much more on this theme ibid., 17–19.

46 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 26 X 1933, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 94.

47 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 9 XI 1937, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 162.

48 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 27 XI 1937, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 164.

49 Twenty-seven letters from Chybiński to Antonowycz from the years 1942–52 (supplemented with four letters – also additions by – Maria Szczepańska) were published by Jurij Jasinovskij, see Jasinovskij 2003.

50 MP 1935/6, 149, quote also in Sołtys 2008, 142.

51 Sołtys 2008, 52.

52 Correspondence and letters to the editor and a statement about the conductor’s role in the survey ‘Niewidzialny dyrygent’ [Invisible conductor] (Muzyka 1928/2, 70–72).

53 Already in the first he included the text ‘O solistach i o publiczności koncertowej’ [About soloists and concert audiences] (LWML 1925/1, 2).

54 This information is in Sprawozdania Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie 1937/3, amongst other sources.

55 Adolf Chybiński, ‘Sprawozdanie z badań nad instrumentami i melodiami ludu podhalańskiego w latach 1920 i 1921’ [Report on reserach into instruments and melodies of the Podhale people in the years 1920–1921] (Sprawozdania Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie 1922/3, 122–124).

56 Sprawozdania Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie 1921/3, 186. The work was published as part of the series Archiwum Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie one year later (division I vol. 1).

57 Ibid., 186–187. Similarly, this dissertation was published in Lviv in the year 1922.

58 Ibid., 1926/2, 54–55. ‘Studium o pieśniach Fryderyka Chopina’ [Study of Frederic Chopin’s songs] published in the series Archiwum Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie (Lviv–Warsaw–Cracow 1927).

59 Even so, he is a relatively unknown character today, see Bristiger 2014.

60 ‘Mnemonika muzyczna (kształcenie pamięci muzycznej)’ [Musical mnemonics (developing musical memory)] (LWML 1925–26/12, 1); ‘Żywa muzyka jako źródło wychowania muzycznego’ [Live music as a source of musical education’] (LWML 1931/5, 1–2).

61 ‘Publiczność jako problemat kultury muzycznej’ [The audience as a problem of musical culture] (LWML 1925–26/11, 2).

62 See for example, his essay about Polish artistic song (Muzyka 1927/7–9, 91–107).

63 Michał Bristiger makes the comment that in this work Barbag tackles the ‘ethical’ aspect of Chopin’s songs – a category that he considered in his future proposal of the systematics of musicology as one of the related sciences; this direction of thought is illustrated by the sentence from Studium: ‘All the songs have … an undeniable ethical value due to the pure and honest and sometimes touching reflection of personal experiences,’ see Bristiger 2014, 4.

64 Barbag 1928. The dissertation was also published in a dozen or so episodes starting with number 10. LWML from 1927. We will return to the author’s conclusions contained in this thesis.

65 ‘Radio i film – czy estrada i scena’ [Radio and film – or stage and scene] (Echo 1936/3, 7–10).

66 See amongst others published paper presented during the meeting of the Opinion Committee MWRiOP ‘Projekt reformy szkoły muzycznej niższej’ [Project of reform of music primary schools] (Muzyka 1929/2, 110–112, 1929/3, 169–170, 1929/4, 235–236), and the paper ‘Praca wyższej szkoły muzycznej’ [The work of higher music schools] (KM 1931/10–11, 208–215).

67 ‘Bojkot nowej muzyki’ [Boycott new music] (LWML 1933,79, 2); also a voice (together with Emil Młynarski, Michał Kondracki, Janusz Miketta, Stefania Łobaczewska, Józef Koffler and others) in the discussion about improving the health of the musical movement in Poland: ‘Muzyka polska w niebezpieczeństwie’ [Polish music in danger] (Muzyka 1934/6–7, 267).

68 LWML 1926/8, 1.

69 Muzyka 1935/1–2, 18–19.

70 Concerning his musical writing, see Madaj 1996; Gołąb 1995.

71 MW 1927/11, 2–3, 1928/8, 8, 1928/1, 11–12. Apart from Barbag, a permanent author working in the years 1926–29 initially a biweekly, later monthly, was also Józef Reiss, and Juliusz Adamski, the editors also frequently used translations of publications by European musicologists – Hans Mersmann, Ernst Křenek and others.

72 ‘Historia muzyki w zarysie’ [A sketch of music history] (MW 1927/4–6, 9, 14–20, 1928/2, 4, 9).

73 MW 1928/10, 12, 16, 18.

74 ‘Od Redakcji’ [Editorial] (Orkiestra 1930/1, 1).

75 Detailed information on this subject can be found in the bibliography of Józef Koffler’s studies prepared by Katarzyna Madaj (Gołąb 1995/1 268–274); see also Gołąb 1997.

76 Gołąb 1995/1, 129.

77 Orkiestra 1936/7–8, 100–103.

78 Orkiestra 1931/5, 68–69.

79 Orkiestra 1932/10, 166.

80 Amongst others ‘Ze wspomnień osobistych. O słynnych i mniej słynnych dyrygentach’ [From personal memories. About famous and not-famous conductors] (Orkiestra 1933/2, 24–25, 1933/3, 38–41, 1933/4, 59–61, 1933/5, 77–80); ‘Czy można się nauczyć dyrygować orkiestrą’ [Can you learn to conduct an orchestra?] (Orkiestra 1931/7, 102–103).

81 The sketches appeared over many years, beginning with the booklet 1930/3.

82 Orkiestra 1931/2, 22–23, 1931/3, 36–37.

83 Orkiestra 1932/10, 154–155. The correction referred to the essay ‘Muzyka polska od roku 1864 do roku 1914’ [Polish music from the year 1864 to 1914] appearing in Polska, jej dzieje i kultura [Poland, its history and culture], ed. Aleksander Brückner, Warsaw 1930 vol. III, pp. 894–924, about the influences of Beethoven p. 903.

84 Orkiestra 1934/8, 119–120, 1934/9, 134.

85 A few years earlier she commented on a similar topic in the article ‘Psychologia współczesna a wychowanie muzyczne’ [Contemporary psychology in musical education] (Muzyka w Szkole 1932/7, 137–143) and in the lengthy dissertation ‘Twórczość muzyczna dziecka w świetle psychologii i pedagogii’ [Musical creativity of the child in the light of psychology and pedagogy] (Muzyka w Szkole 1933 no. 7 pp. 141–145, 1933/8, 165–174).

86 Zofia Lissa, ‘Radio a kultura muzyczna’ [Radio and musical culture] (Echo 1936–37/2, 6–7). The role of radio as a medium in the transmission of sound recording of music and the significance of this medium for the public was already of interest to Lissa, see ‘Radio we współczesnej kulturze muzycznej’ [Radio in contemporary musical culture] (KM 1932/16, 643–659).

87 ‘Modulacja diatoniczna. Nowa metoda nauczania’ [Diatonic modulation. A new method of teaching] (KM 1931/10–11, 275–286).

88 ‘Problemy muzyczne w radio’ [Musical problems on the radio] (Muzyka 1932/1–2, 23–25); ‘Radio a kultura muzyczna’ [Radio and musical culture] (Muzyka 1935/10–11, 225–228).

89 Józef Koffler, Stefania Łobaczewska, ‘O muzyce dwunastotonowej. Dwugłos polemiczny’ [About twelve-tone music. Two-voice polemic] (Muzyka 1936/1–6, 20–22).

90 See for example, Hrab 2009, and above all, the recollections of the father-founder of the department (Chybiński 1959/1).

91 Chybiński 1959/1, 145. It is worth remembering here that already in 1903 the young Chybiński was invited by Felicjan Szopski, then professor of the Music Society Conservatoire in Cracow, to give a lecture in Lviv about Richard Strauss.

92 Ibid.

93 See Hrab 2005, Hrab 2007, Hrab 2009, Hrab 2010.

94 Hrab 2009, p. 54.

95 Beiträage zur Geschichte des Taktschlegens und des Kapellmeisteramtes in der Epoche der Mensuralmusik, 1908.

96 This activity was formally supported by the creation of a musical section within the Towarzystwo Miłośników Historii i Zabytków Krakowa [Association of friends of the history and monuments of Cracow], which included: the art historian and historic building conservator Stanisław Tomkowicz as president, the composer and conductor Bolesław Wallek-Walewski, the Cracow composer Bolesław Raczyński, and the recently graduated musicologist Adolf Chybiński as its secretary. In the chronicle in varsavian biweekly Młoda Muzyka a note appeared which read: ‘The commission is to occupy itself with forming a catalogue of all the musical works (practical and theoretical), found in private and public libraries, archives and monasteries of Cracow. The main emphasis was placed on music from the earliest times up to the nineteenth century…. After finishing this work, the collaborators intend to involve themselves with the collections of Western Galicia (monasteries, private libraries, etc.)’ (Młoda Muzyka 1909/11, 13).

97 Magdalena Dziadek wrote the following about this period: ‘At the beginning of Chybiński’s collaboration with Gazeta Lwowska, there was a cycle of his correspondence on the subject of Wagner celebrations in Munich. Soon afterwards, a number of his articles appeared in Gazeta Lwowska dedicated to the matter of modernist music – Polish and foreign. One may consider as his “keynote address” a text discussing the Berlin concert of Young Poland in 1906, in which he recognised that the achievements of Szymanowski, Różycki and Fitelberg surpass those of Debussy,’ see Dziadek 2005, 97.

98 Hrab 2007, 31.

99 In the series: Historia Nauki Polskiej w Monografiach [History of Polish science in monographs] 23 (Cracow 1948, 35).

100 Chybiński 1938, [no page numbers].

101 As mentioned above, an abbreviation of the lecture was published in PM 1913,2, 1–5.

102 Muzyka 2012/4, 6.

103 On the subject of the newly opened department, see also an enthusiastic anonymous letter, ‘List ze Lwowa’ [Letter from Lviv] (PM 1913/18, 11–14).

104 Detailed information on the activities conducted from the inauguration until 1940 will be omitted, as they can be found in at least two works: Hrab 2009, 143–158 and Ochwat 2007; see also Mazepa/Mazepa 2003, 258–269.

105 Wójcik to Chybiński from Lviv 22 VIII 1914, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/5.

106 Let us refer to the data collected by Uljana Hrab which concern the contents of this collection as of the academic year 1914/15: there were seventy titles on the history of music, thirty on aesthetics, fourteen on ethnography, fifty-five on the universal history of music, twenty-two on the history of musical instruments, thirty-eight on the history of the Eastern Orthodox Church music, sixteen on the history of opera and oratorio, and thirteen on musical paleography, in total 568 titles in 847 volumes (Hrab 2009, 58). Shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War, the catalogues listed as many as 2145 items. Hrab also mentions the donation made to the Department after the death of Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian (about 1500 books and music scores).

107 Wójcikówna to Chybiński from Lviv 30 I 1915, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/6. We should recall that during this time she was working on her dissertation about Johann Fischer from Augsburg.

108 The nomenclature related to the institution’s structure was somewhat ambiguous, as the terms ‘department,’ ‘institute’ and ‘faculty’ were all used in the same manner. Uljana Hrab noted that in the twenty-year inter-war period, it operated as a ‘department’ in the period of 1919–25 and in 1933–39, as an ‘institute’ in the years 1925–33, and proposes that musicology here be referred to synonymously with the terms ‘department’ and ‘faculty’ (see Hrab 2009, 47).

109 To supplement his household budget and a more stable, yet still rather unfavourable financial situation, from the beginning of his stay in Lviv Chybiński also taught at the Music School headed by Sabina Kasparek and, most importantly, he was very productive when it came to publishing.

110 Chybiński 1959/1, 158.

111 For example: History of the piano sonata (in the 1916/17 academic year), Theory and history of imitative forms (1920/21, 1021/22), The symphony and overture since the times of Ludwig van Beethoven (1915/16), The symphonic works of Franz Liszt and his school (1935/36).

112 Amongst others: The Organ and Piano Music of Johann Sebastian Bach and Georg Friedrich Haendel (1915/16), The history of the sonata and concerto until the mid-eighteenth century (1926/27), Instrumental works of Johann Sebastian Bach and Georg Friedrich Haendel (1936/37).

113 In the year 1934/35 he presented: Edward Grieg’s Work (with an introduction to the history of Norwegian music, in 1935/36 the second part of this lecture, and for 1939/40 a lecture on the music of the country of his beloved composer, the creator of Solveig’s Song, was announced.

114 More about the theme of Hrab 2009, 64–68.

115 For more about the relations between Adolf Chybiński and Bronisława Wójcik see Muszkalska 2012 and Sieradz 2018.

116 Wójcikówna to Chybiński from Lviv 16 IX 1916, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/33.

117 In this time, she cooperated with the Lviv branch of Książnica-Atlas. In the summer of 1924, she wrote to Chybiński: ‘Knowing how my cooperation with you at the university is supposedly something I’ve been doing “on the side” has been bothering me for a long time now, very strongly at times. Currently, the thought that in a few weeks’ time I would again be active in this “side occupation” has become unbearable to me. That’s why I decided to straightforwardly and honestly let you know of my intention to give up my assistant’s position. … Maintaining the status quo, i.e. sharing my time between my bookstore profession and my assistant duties (in relation: 80 %–20 %, hence to the detriment of the Faculty) completely prevents me from pursuing my scholarly work. … Were I to “follow my heart” – I would choose my assistant’s duties. Life is hard, however, and one needs to go on …,’ Wójcik to Chybiński from Lviv 15 VIII 1924, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/48.

118 Wójcik to Chybiński from Lviv 16 VIII 1926, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/61.

119 Wójcik to Chybiński from Lviv 8 VIII 1929, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/85.

120 ‘Tańce polskie Jana Fischera’ [Johann Fischer’s Polish dances] (KM 1914/2, 83–90). A few years later, fragments of the dissertation were also published abroad, see Bronisława Wójcikówna, ‘Johann Fischer von Augsburg als Suitenkomponist’ (Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft 1922/23, 129–156).

121 Amongst others: ‘O typowych postaciach melodii Chopina’ [About typical figures of Chopin’s melody] (LWML 1925–26/4, 1).

122 A bibliography of the researcher’s works amongst others in Dahlig 2012/1.

123 Wójcikówna 1918.

124 Lecture published in Rozprawy i Notatki Muzykologiczne 1934/1, 1–14. More concerning the views given by Bronisława Wójcik in chapter II-3.

125 See amongst others: ‘O czynnikach stylu Chopina’ [On the factors of Chopin’s style] (Muzyka 1932/7–9, 52–65); ‘Z literatury francuskiej o Chopinie’ [From French literature on Chopin] (Przegląd Warszawski 1922/7, 147–150). As a result of her research work in 1930, she published a monograph in Lviv Melodyka Chopina [Chopin’s melodics], which predated by five years the second such position in Polish Chopin literature, Ludwik Bronarski’s work Harmonika Chopina [Chopin’s harmonics] (Warsaw 1935). She also published a collection of essays Chopin. Studia – krytyki – szkice [Chopin. Studies – criticism – sketches] (Warsaw 1933). A few years later, in 1937 she became editor of the journal Chopin, which was an organ of the IFCh. Research and organisational activities were stopped her premature death in 1938.

126 KM 1911/5, 8–10.

127 ‘Kultura życia muzycznego’ [The culture of musical life] (PM 1911/8, 9–11, 1911/9, 3–4).

128 ‘Znaczenie opery dla rozwoju polskiej muzycznej kultury’ [The importance of the opera for the development of Polish musical culture] (PM 1912/7, 9–10).

129 KM 1911/11, 6–10, 1911/12, 1–4.

130 PM 1912/4, 1–5.

131 Chybiński 1959/1, 160.

132 Dziadek 2004/3.

133 Ibid., 110.

134 ‘Chopin jako muzyk i jako człowiek’ [Chopin as a musician and a man] (Lirnik 1910/9).

135 ‘Echa konkursu chopinowskiego’ [Echo of the Chopin competition] (Szopen 1932/3, 1–3); ‘Problemy wykonawcze w muzyce Chopina’ [Performance problems in Chopin’s music] (Chopin 1937/2, 82–93).

136 ‘Schopenhauer o muzyce’ [Schopenhauer about music] (PM 1912/4, 1–5).

137 Let us first and foremost recall the dissertation Ogólny zarys estetyki muzycznej [General sketch of musical aesthetics] (Lviv 1938).

138 It is worth recalling here that in an article published in the monographic journal Muzyka polska titled Z dziejów muzyki polskiej do 1800 r. [From the history of Polish music up to 1800] Chybiński repeatedly mentions the work of his students in the references: Maria Szczepańska, Hieronim Feicht, Stefania Łobaczewska, Erazm Łańcucki, Maria Ramertówna (Muzyka 1927/7–9, 31–72).

139 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 27 II 1933, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 86.

140 Stefania Łobaczewska, ‘O utworach Sebastiana z Felsztyna (XVI wiek)’ [About the works of Sebastian of Felsztyn (XVI century)] (KM 1929/3, 227–245, 1929/4, 346–365).

141 See for example, ‘Geneza stylu Karola Szymanowskiego’ [The genesis of Karol Szymanowski’s style] (Muzyka 1934/1, 8–11); ‘Twórczość pieśniarska Karola Szymanowskiego’ [Karol Szymanowski’s song writing] (MW 1937/4–5, 4–6). Research on the work and figure of Karol Szymanowski resulted in monographs written after the war in the 1940s Szymanowski. Życie i twórczość [Szymanowski. Life and work] (Cracow 1950).

142 See Chybiński do Bronarskiego from Lviv 10 II 1930, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 31.

143 See amongst others ‘Problem formy w muzyce współczesnej’ [The problem of form in contemporary music] (Muzyka 1930/5, 11–21); ‘Drogi rozwoju współczesnej muzyki polskiej’ [The course of development of contemporary Polish music] (MW 1939/3–4, 1–6).

144 On the subject of the achievements of the Lviv researcher see also Markuszewski 2005.

145 Published in Kwartalnik Filozoficzny 1938/1, 23–73.

146 1929–30/8, 320–355. One should also remember that Lissa took on historical subjects several times after the war, preparing together with Józef Chomiński the landmark volume Muzyka polskiego Odrodzenia [Music of the Polish renaissance] (Warsaw 1953), in which however, ‘the accuracy of certain observations was countered by the avoidance of facts and one-sided evaluations put forward in the language of anticlericalism and the class struggle’ (Witkowska-Zaremba 2006, 270). In the following years, dissertations were predominantly about the works and profiles of Frederic Chopin and Karol Szymanowski.

147 KM 1930/6–7, 192–237.

148 Amongst others: ‘Z psychologii muzycznej dziecka’ [From childhood musical psychology] (KM 1931/10–11, 173–207); ‘O postęp w pedagogice muzycznej’ [On the progress of musical pedagogy] (LWML 1931/4, 1); ‘Twórczość muzyczna dziecka w świetle psychologii i pedagogiki’ [Musical creativity of the child in the light of psychology and pedagogy] (Muzyka w Szkole 1933/7, 141–146, 1933/8, 165–174, 1933/9–10, 192–203); ‘Badania muzykalności a wychowanie muzyczne’ [Measuring musicality in musical education] (MP 1934/3, 216–221); ‘Cudowne dziecko w świetle psychologii’ [The wunderkind in the light of psychology] (Muzyka 1937/1, 13–16). Muzyka w Szkole was an organ of the Związek Nauczycieli Śpiewu i Muzyki [Association of Teachers of Singing and Music] in state and private schools in Katowice, published from 1929 (from 1932 in Warsaw.

149 Lviv 1937.

150 Muzyka 1936/1–6, 16–19.

151 KM 1932/16, 643–659.

152 Echo 1936–37/2, 6–7.

153 See for example, ‘O społecznym znaczeniu muzyki w historii ludzkości’ [About the collective significance of music in the history of humanity] (Przegląd Społeczny 1930/4, 128–133, 1930/5, 180–186); ‘U podstaw kultury muzycznej. Z zagadnień socjologii muzyki’ [At the core of musical culture. From the issues of music sociology] (Przegląd Społeczny 1937/9–11 and others published in this monthly).

154 Dziębowska 1997/1.

155 Ibid., 370.

156 In Chybiński’s correspondence we can find many comments concerning the level of knowledge of harmony amongst the Lviv students: ‘In fact, only two of them: Feicht and Szczepańska, have a very wide knowledge of harmony and counterpoint (and all technical aspects in general); Łobaczewska and Lissa have fairly good knowledge, while Keuprulian is quite poor in the matter; meanwhile, Freiheiter, whose short dissertation on Grieg’s harmonics is printed in Norwegian, has excellent knowledge,’ Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 5 VII 1932, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 77.

157 Let us remember that in the thirties he dedicated articles to his teacher: ‘Bolesław Wallek-Walewski jako kompozytor religijny’ [Bolesław Wallek-Walewski as a composer of religious music] (Muzyka Kościelna 1931/10–11, 132–135), ‘Requiem, kompozycja Bolesława Wallek-Walewskiego’ [Requiem, a composition by Bolesław Wallek-Walewski] (IKC 1936/303).

158 Lissa 1967.

159 ‘I decided to simply and honestly announce to the Professor my intention of resigning from the assistant position. … X. Feicht was already finishing [his PhD], Szczepańska was showing promise, so the Professor would find someone to replace me,’ see Wójcikówna to Chybiński from Lviv 15 VIII 1924, AACh-BJ, box 4, W-24/48.

160 He used the material from this work in the article ‘Bartłomiej Pękiel’ (PM 1925/1, 1–5).

161 Peter Wagner (1865–1931) was an outstanding medievalist, a specialist in the field of Gregorian chant, mensural notation, and paleography. From 1893, he conducted classes in the history of music (especially church) at the University of Fribourg, where he was a professor, and in the years 1920–21 also rector.

162 Earlier, at the beginning of the second decade of the twentieth century, in the quarterly of the missionary priests from Cracow, Meteor, he took a closer look at Haendel’s profile and oratorios and commented on the performance of Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina’s Missa ‘Papae Marcelli.’

163 Muzyka 1925/11–12, 61–66.

164 ‘Kult Palestriny u pierwszych odnowicieli polskiej muzyki kościelnej’ [The cult of Palestrina among the first restorers of Polish church music] (PM 1925/24, 4–6).

165 ‘Historyczno-muzyczne uwagi o lwowskich rękopisach Bogarodzicy’ [Historical-musical comments about the Lviv manuscript of Bogurodzica] (PM 1925/2, 10–14, 1925/3, 5–8). This publication was presented to the members of the Lwowskie Towarzystwo Naukowe [Lviv Scientific Society] by his mentor (Adolf Chybiński); Bogurodzica was published by Hieronim Feicht after the war in collaboration with Jerzy Woronczak (general editor) and Ewa Ostrowska (linguistic introduction) (Wrocław 1962).

166 See for example, ‘Wojciech Dębołęcki, kompozytor religijny pierwszej połowy XVII wieku’ [Wojciech Dębołęcki, religious composer of the first half of the seventeenth century] (Przegląd Teologiczny 1926/2, 113–143), ‘Polska muzyka kościelna w epoce barokowej’ [Polish church music in the baroque era] (Muzyka 1928/10, 437–439), ‘Źródła śpiewu gregoriańskiego w Polsce’ [Source of gregorian chant in Poland] (Muzyka 1929/11–12, 481–484).

167 KM 1928/1, 20–34, 1929/2, 125–144.

168 More on this subject in other chapters of this work. These and other texts by Feicht were published by Zofia Lissa in two volumes Opera musicologica Hieronymi Feicht: vol. I Studia nad muzyką polskiego średniowiecza [Studies about Polish medieval music] (Cracow 1975), vol. II Studia nad muzyką polskiego renesansu i baroku [Studies about Polish music of the renassaince and baroque] (Cracow 1980).

169 Amongst others: ‘Muzyka kościelna we Lwowie’ [Church music in Lviv] (Muzyka Kościelna 1926/5–6, 77–81); ‘Dzieje reformy muzyki kościelnej w Polsce’ [History of the reform of church music in Poland] (Muzyka Kościelna 1926/11–12, 190–197); ‘Znaczenie radiofonii dla propagandy liturgii kościelnej’ [The importance of radio broadcasting for the propaganda of church liturgy] (Muzyka Kościelna 1927/6, 121–123, reprint Muzyka 1927/10, 510–511).

170 PRM 1936/2, 42–52.

171 ‘Karol Szymanowski. Wspomnienia i impresje’ [Karol Szymanowski. Reminiscences and impressions] (MP 1937/4, 185–203); ‘Nad trumną Karola Szymanowskiego’ [By Karol Szymanowski’s coffin] (MP 1937/7, 219–224). A complete bibliography of the publication of Father Hieronim Feicht, prepared by Danuta Idaszak, was attached to Opera musicologica Hieronymi Feicht (vol. I, op. cit., 22–39).

172 Morawska 2007.

173 The extent to which Chybiński appreciated his pupil is evident in his words: ‘I feel quite at home in the sixteenth, the seventeenth and somewhat the eighteenth centuries; I don’t know the fifteenth century so well, less than my present assistant, with whom I’m afraid to talk on this matter. She’s well-read like some foreign musicologist. She doesn’t really show off her knowledge until the last section of “Marian hymns,” and I’m really glad of her work on Mikołaj z Radomia (in the second year of the Kwartalnik), as she’s discovered remarkably interesting things. She’s an incredibly hard-working being. As an assistant, she shames me with her dutifulness. It’s really she who directs my Institute. She’s also a very good teacher, and in some areas even excellent,’ Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 7 II 1929, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 12.

174 Muszkalska 2005.

175 Chybiński to Szczepańska from Milanówek 23 VIII 1925, AACh-BUAM, Szczepańska’s archive, fol. I, p. 112.

176 PM 1925/21, 8–10.

177 See Beethoven-Zentenarfeier Wien, 26. bis 31. März 1927. Veranstaltet von Bund und Stadt, unter dem Ehrenschutz des Herrn Bundespräsidenten Dr. Michael Hainisch. Internationaler Musikhistorischer Kongress (Vienna 1927).

178 ‚O nieznanych lamentacjach polskich z końca XV wieku’ [About unknown Polish lamentations from the end of the XV century] (Myśl Muzyczna 1928/8, 49–51).

179 ‘Wielogłosowe opracowania hymnów mariańskich w rękopisach polskich XV wieku’ [Polyphonic arrangements of Marian hymns in Polish fifteenth-century manuscripts] (KM 1928/1, 1–19, 1929/2, 107–125, 1929/3, 219–227, 1929/4, 339–345); ‘Do historii polskiej muzyki świeckiej w XV stuleciu’ [To the history of Polish secular music of the XV century] (KM 1929/5, 1–10); ‘Do historii muzyki wielogłosowej w Polsce z końca XV wieku’ [To the history of polyphonic music in Poland of the XV century] (KM 1930/8, 275–306); ‘Do historii wielogłosowego „magnificat” w Polsce’ [To the history of the polyphonic magnificat in Poland] (KM 1930/9, 6–9); ‘Z folkloru muzycznego w XVII w.’ [From musical folklore in the XVII century] (KM 1933/17–18, 27–34); ‘O dwunastogłosowym Magnificat Mikołaja Zieleńskiego z r. 1611. Do historii stylu weneckiego Polsce’ [About the twelve-voice magnificat by Mikołaj Zieleński from 1611. To the history of the Venetian style in Poland] (PRM 1935/1, 28–53); ‘O utworach Mikołaja Radomskiego (z Radomia) (Wiek XV). Wstęp’ [About the works of Mikołaj Radomski (from Radom) (XV century). Introduction] (PRM 1936/2, 87–94).

180 ‘Do historii polskiej muzyki świeckiej w XV stuleciu’ [To the history of Polish secular music of the XV century], op. cit.

181 Na marginesie pieśni studenckiej z XV wieku. Wyjaśnienie utworu „Breve regnum erigitur” z rkp. nr 52 Biblioteki Krasińskich w Warszawie [On the margins of student Songs from the XV century. Clarification of the work Breve regnum erigitur from MS no. 52 of the Krasiński Library in Warsaw]. Cracow 1930; Na drugim marginesie pieśni studenckiej z XV wieku „Breve regnum erigitur.” P. dr Marii Szczepańskiej odpowiedź rzeczowa [On the second margins of student songs Breve regnum erigitur from the XV century. Material answer to dr Maria Szczepańska]. Cracow 1931.

182 Zdzisław Jachimecki, Na marginesie pieśni studenckiej, op. cit., 7.

183 Ibid., 14–15.

184 Stromenger 1930/2.

185 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 27 II 1933, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 86. In the 1930s, Freiheiter even proposed a three-year harmony course, see ‘O umuzykalniającą naukę harmonii’ [About the musicalising science of harmony] (MP 1934/3, 222–229).

186 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 3 X 1932, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 81. See also Łopatowska-Romsvik 2016

187 ‘O harmonice Edwarda Griega (1843–1907)’ [About Edward Grieg’s (1843–1907) harmony] (KM 1932/16, 716–744).

188 Szopen 1932/3, 17–22.

189 ‘Józef Koffler’ (Muzyka” 1936/7–8, 85–86); ‘Alban Berg jako nauczyciel’ [Alban Berg as a teacher] (MW 1938/2, 1–3).

190 ‘Opera w radio – nowym polem pracy dla kompozytorów’ [Opera on the radio – a new field of work for composers] (MP 1935/1, 29–32); ‘O drogę do nowego słuchacza (z problemów socjologii radia)’ [About the road to the new listener (from the problems of the sociology of radio)] (MP 1935/4, 286–289).

191 Hrab 2009, passim.

192 At this time Kudryk was already an author of articles and reviews, mainly in the Ukrainian press, and his writing activity was continued in Polish Lviv until the war broke out. Natalia Tołoszniak, author of a text on the reporting and reviewing accomplishments of Kudryk, summarised that in his publications, along with discussing the work of Western European composers (from Haendel and Bach to Brahms and Wagner), the musicologist revealed his interest in Ukrainian church music and Ukrainian folk songs. He collaborated above all with the journals Meta, Nova Zorâ and Dilo. Unfortunately, among the over a hundred titles mentioned by the author, not a single Polish text has been found, see Tołoszniak 2008.

193 Published in J. Bułka, Nestor Niżankivśkij (Lviv 1997). Cited after: Jasinowski 2005, see footnote 4.

194 As the professor himself remembered, he was ‘most undoubtedly the most “European” and the highest-educated,’ see Adolf Chybiński, Pamiętnik z lat 1880–1944 i dziennik z lat 1944–45 [Memorials from 1880–1944 and diary from 1944–45] at AACh-BUAM, section ‘Lviv and Zakopane 1912–1944,’ c. 99.

195 See also Hrab 2010.

196 For example, the editors of LWML prepared a special ‘Ukranian’ number in 1934, for which authors of that ethnicity were the main contributors of material (1934/80, and completion of some publications 1934/81, 1934/82).

197 It should be noted, however, that Ukrainian musicologists worked extensively with the editors of Ukrainian journals, see Piekarski 2010/1, particularly pp. 93–100). Following this author, let us say that, in addition to the 174 periodicals mentioned above, published in Ukrainian there were additionally: Muzičnij Listok under the editorship of Stanisław Ludkewycz, Bojan (ed. Wołodymyr Solczanyk), the quarterly Bogolłovija (whose editor was Archbishop Josip Slipyj), Muzičnij Vistnik (edited by Ivan Hryniewecki) and Ukrainśka Muzyka, the monthly of the Związek Ukraińskich Muzyków Zawodowych [The Union of Ukrainian Professional Musicians], and other socio-cultural and educational journals.

198 Wasyl Barwiński, ‘Muzyka ukraińska’ [Ukrainian music] (LWML 1934/80, 1–2, 1934/81, 1–2, 1934/82, 2–3).

199 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 3 X 1932, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 81.

200 KM 1933/19–20, 113–157; due to the large scale of the study, the editors in the journal only further included one paper by Bronisław Romaniszyn, ‘Głos dziecka i jego kształcenie’ [The child’s voice and its education] (pp. 157–172) and reviews.

201 Sieradz 2011.

202 Chomiński to Chybiński from Werchrata 13 IX 1935, AACh-BJ, box 5, C-10/7.

203 Józef Chomiński, ‘Studia nad twórczością K. Szymanowskiego. Cz. I: Problem tonalny w Słopiewniach’ [Studies on K. Szymanowski’s creativity. Part I: The tonal problem in Słopiewnie] (PRM 1936/2, 53–86).

204 Chomiński to Chybiński from Werchrata, 24 VII 1936, at AACh-BJ, box no. 5, sign. C-10/10. It must be remembered that at exactly this time, as he was working on Szymanowski, he was finishing writing his dissertation on the subject Zagadnienia konstruktywne w pieśniach Edvarda Griega [Structural issues in Edward Grieg’s songs], which he defended in July 1936. We know that Chomiński was working earlier on another issue, which the professor appraised with enthusiasm: ‘My student, Chomiński (Rusyn) is writing a dissertation about Liszt’s harmonies, a wildly talented man, whose skill is also admirable. … I do not know how much truth there is in it, but Chomiński claims that Kurth’s work on romantic harmony [Ernst Kurth: Romantische Harmonik und ihre Krise in Wagners ‘Tristan.’ Bern 1920] is full of inaccuracies and historical errors, which he will have to hunt down one by one. Sure – whoever does not consider Chopin as harmonic (as seen in “Romantic harmony”), cannot inspire unreserved confidence. In any case, I consider Chomiński to be a very strict man who does not blab to the wind. Besides, my friend, you will have the opportunity to view his work on the development of imitation in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. There he points out a number of horrible errors to the fugue historian Müller-Blattau,’ see Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 30 XII 1933, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 96.

205 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 27 II 1933, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 86.

206 Lviv 1938.

207 There he was also the rapporteur of the musical movement in Lviv, replacing Jerzy Freiheiter in this function.

208 ‘Z badań nad muzyką polską XVIII w. Cz. I: Kasper Pyrszyński (1718–1758)’ [From research on Polish music of the eighteenth century. Part 1. Kasper Pyrszyński (1718–1758)] (PRM 1935/1, 54–75); ‘Z badań nad muzyką polską XVIII wieku. Cz. II: Jacek Szczurowski (ur. 1718)’ [From research on Polish music of the eighteenth century. Part II. Jacek Szczurowski (born 1718)] (PRM 1936/2, 122–139).

209 Chybiński planned to publish extracts from these three diploma theses in the 17–18 KM journal, along with two articles by Julian Pulikowski, dissertations by Henryk Opieński and Helena Windakiewiczowa and, perhaps, also some article by Ludwik Bronarski (see Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 24 III 1932, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 73). In fact neither in this ‘ethnographic’ edition (nor the following) none of the materials mentioned here by the young adepts of the department appeared.

210 We will return to the post-war cooperation of Chybiński and Lissa later in this work.

211 Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 28 II 1929, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 13.

212 Księga pamiątkowa 1930. From outside the strict university circle, the authors of the book were Ludwik Bronarski, Wacław Piotrowski, Witold Friemann and Julian Pulikowski. Apart from them, the following announced the results of their research here – Maria Szczepańska, Father Hieronim Feicht, Bronisława Wójcik-Keuprulian, Helena Windakiewiczowa, Stefania Łobaczewska and Zofia Lissa.

213 Księga pamiątkowa 1950. This time, the list of authors was longer, and the whole was supplemented with an article presenting the professor’s profile, a bibliography of his works and a list of graduates’ names who completed musicology studies with diplomas (master’s or doctoral) under Chybiński’s supervision.

214 For more about the history of Cracow musicology see Dziębowska 1987/2, and particularly Dziębowska 1987/1, Przybylski 1987.

215 For some time during 1934/35 this function was fulfilled by Stanisław Golachowski.

216 Przybylski 1987; Drobner 1980.

217 Włodzimierz Poźniak recalled: ‘The members of our Department were involved with both the history of old Polish music, going back as far as the eleventh century, as well as more recent and contemporary music. … They also entered into the fields of sociology, aesthetics, acoustics and, satisfying the rather modest needs of society then, published many works of popular science,’ see Poźniak 1967, 449.

Jachimecki’s interests included subjects related to antique Polish music of the sixteenth century and earlier; however, most of the work on this topic was done by around 1915. Later he returned to the theme less frequently, at times provoked by publications of other musicologists, as for example, in the case of the above-mentioned discussion aroused by Maria Szczepańska’s dissertation To the history of secular Polish music in the 15th century (op. cit.), whose mistaken theses were commented in the mentioned brochures (see note 181), or the exchange of opinions with Adolf Chybiński related to the dissertation of the Lviv professor ‘On several supposed, known and unknown Polish composers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’ (PM 1925/13–14, 1–7; Jachimecki’s correction in PM 1925/17–18, 9–10), as well as the equally emotional polemics between them on the subject of research on the legacy of Mikołaj Gomółka and Marcin Leopolita (PM 1928/9, 4–7, 1928/10–11, 13–17, 17–18, 1928/12, 10, 10–12, 192/2, 12–13).

218 Przybyszewska-Jarmińska 2016; see also Wilk 2000/4 and Wilk 2000/1, Wilk 2000/2, Wilk 2000/3.

219 PM 1928/3, 8–10, 1928/4, 8–10, 1928/5, 5–7.

220 PM 1930/9–10, 3–5.

221 PM 1927/11, 6–8.

222 Muzyka 1928/7–9, 26–50.

223 Muzyka 1927/7–9, 131–142.

224 Muzyka 1929/5, 29–40.

225 Muzyka 1935/10–12, 117–120.

226 Shortly after the liberation, still in 1945, Jachimecki was the supervisor of Piotr Świerc’s diploma thesis Najstarszy zbiór melodii śląskich pieśni ludowych Juliusza Rogera [Juliusz Roger’s oldest collection of Silesian folk songs]; Świerc, however, was not connected with Cracow musicology before the war.

227 Rozprawy i Notatki Muzykologiczne 1934/1, 1–14. The polemics around Wójcik-Keuprulian – letter to the editor of the magazine – appeared in MP 1935/5, 70–74, together with Włodzimierz Poźniak’s voice referring to Pulikowski’s criticism and also his article ‘Romans wokalny w twórczości M.Kl. Ogińskiego’ [Vocal romance in the work of Michał Kleofas Ogiński].

228 Pulikowski extensively described the details of this episode in a letter to Adolf Chybiński, see Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 3 II 1935, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/113.

229 Marceli Liebeskind, ‘Utwory fortepianowe Mieczysława Karłowicza’ [Mieczysław Karłowicz’s piano works] (Muzyka 1926/11–12, 571–576).

230 Antoni Wieczorek, ‘Karol Kurpiński. Próba charakterystyki’ [Karol Kurpiński. An attempt at characterisation] (Muzyka 1938/4–5, 147–151).

231 Antoni Wieczorek, ‘Karol Kurpiński. I. Życie, działalność, człowiek. II. Opery’ [Karol Kurpiński. I. Life, work, man. II. Operas] (PM 1931/2–3, 1–5, 1931/4–6, 1–7, 1931/7, 1–3).

232 Semkowicz 1938, 29.

233 More about PAU: Piskurewicz 1998; Rostworowski 1974; Stachowska 1974.

234 In the year 1951 Chybiński received the dignity of being made an honorary member of PAU. The third musicologist in the group of correspondents was Ludwik Bronarski in 1948, but due to the fact that he was constantly abroad, he did not actively participate in the activities of the institution. For a short history of the Academy during the difficult years after World War II, more information in chapter III-1.

235 See Rozprawy AU: Wydział Filologiczny series III vol. VIII 1916, 1–58) and Rozprawy AU: Wydział Filologiczny vol. LIV 1915; see also ‘Twórczość Marcina Mielczewskiego, kompozytora XVII w.’ [The work of Marcin Mielczewski, composer of the seventeenth century] (Sprawozdania AU 1913/6, 3–5).

236 A bibliography of the works of Zdzisław Jachimecki in: Woźna-Stankiewicz 2012.

237 See chapter I footnote 102.

238 Within the Academy, apart from the ‘faculty’ committees, there were also units independent of the faculty structure. This included amongst others the Ethnographic Commission and the Silesian Publication Committee established in 1932, with whom musicologists also cooperated.

239 About this theme first and foremost see Rostworowski 1974. The PAU Musicological Commission was established only after the war, in 1948 (practically it operated from 1949). However, it should be emphasised that from the beginning of the founding of Polish musicology within the broadly understood national culture, this field was present in the Academy’s academic and publishing activities.

240 Respectively: vol. XXIV 1919/2, 8–9, vol. XXV 1920/7, 5–10, vol. XXVI 1921/5, 5–6, vol. XXVIII 1923/8, 3–4, vol. XXIX 1924/3, 4–7.

241 Jachimecki 1948, 53.

242 Text published in Kwartalnik Filozoficzny 1938/1, 23–73, 1938/2, 95–107.

243 Zdzisław Jachimecki: ‘Od Redakcji’ [Editorial] (Rozprawy i Notatki Muzykologiczne 1934/1, no page numbers).

244 According to words from a somewhat later letter from Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 10 II 1937, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/143.

245 The expected continuation did not appear. However, Reiss took on ancient Greek treatises two more times: after the war, he published his translation of the Dialogue of Plutarch of Chaeronea on music (Cracow 1946) and the Dialogue on dance by Lucian of Samosata (Warsaw 1951).

246 Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 22 IV 1935, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/93.

247 In a letter to Ludwik Bronarski, Chybiński wrote: ‘[Feicht] pretends to be a Cracovian, born in Mogilno in Greater Poland, musically raised in Lviv and Fribourg, and residing in Cracow. There is no way!,’ Chybiński to Bronarski from Lviv 3 XI 1929, AACh-BUAM, Bronarski’s archive, p. 23.

248 The history of musicology at the University of Poznań; see Jabłoński/Jasińska/Stęszewski 1999, and especially Michałowski 1999 and Tatarska 1999. See also Muszkalska 2011/2, where the author, basing on the publications and correspondence of Kamieński, presents his then pioneering methods of ethnographic research, which allowed him as department head to create a modern centre for research on folklore, leading in the field.

249 Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 6 I 1922, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/12.

250 Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 12 IV 1923, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/19.

251 See Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 18 I 1922, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/13.

252 Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 10 II 1922, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/14.

253 Bożena Muszkalska named the whole group of ‘musicological’ youth who participated in field trips: Bożena Czyżykowska, Marek Kwiek, Roman Padlewski, Bożena Stelmachowska, Maria Pleussówna (Turczynowicz), Hanna Rudzińska (Kruszewska), Zygmunt Sitowski, Konrad Pałubicki, Jadwiga Pietruszyńska (Sobieska), Marian Sobieski, see Muszkalska 1999.

254 Kamieński spoke about Kwiek extremely flatteringly: ‘Kwiek, the most talented one, set about developing temperatures. I expect a lot from him in the area of comparative musicology. A great physicist and mathematician, who may one day push our learning into the natural sciences. That is the material for a full-on professor,’ see Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 6 IV 1934, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/72. Marek Kwiek (1913–62) was also a graduate of the Faculty of Mechanics of the Warsaw University of Technology. After the war, in 1945 he habilitated at the Faculty of Humanities of the UP, where he became an associate professor and head of the Department of Acoustics and Vibration Theory.

255 Hasses Oratorien im musikhistorischen Zusammenhange. Published with the title Die Oratorien von J.A. Hasse. Leipzig 1912.

256 Łucjan Kamieński, ‘Czy Ogiński był rzeczywiście autorem naszego hymnu narodowego’ [Was Ogiński really the author of our national anthem] (Muzyka 1934/4, 162); ‘Kto był kompozytorem naszego hymnu narodowego?’ [Who was the composer of our national anthem?] (Muzyka 1934/6–7, 245–249, 1934/10–12, 347–357); Stanisław Zetowski, ‘A jednak Ogiński jest twórcą naszego hymnu’ [But Ogiński really is the composer of our national anthem] (Muzyka 1935/1–2, 10–17).

257 Łucjan Kamieński, ‘O polonezie staropolskim’ [On the old Polish polonaise] (Muzyka 1928/3, 99–103).

258 See chapter I-2. More on this subject see also Michałowski 1979, 25.

259 Amongst others: ‘Z badań nad folklorem muzycznym Wielkopolski’ [From research into musical folklore of Greater Poland] (Sprawozdania Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk 1932/3, 52–55); ‘Diafonia ludowa w Pieninach’ [Folk diaphony in the Pieniny] (Sprawozdania Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk 1933/1, 5–7).

260 Apart from the discussion with Stanisław Zetowski about Dąbrowski’s Mazurka mentioned elsewhere, see for example, ‘O polonezie staropolskim (z nieznanych źródeł)’ [About the early Polish polonaise (from unknown sources)] (Muzyka 1928/3, 99–103); ‘Eros i Psyche Ludomira Różyckiego’ [Ludomir Różycki’s Eros i Psyche] (Muzyka 1930/2, 86–93).

261 See ‘Folklor a kultura muzyczna’ [Folklore and musical culture] (Życie Muzyczne i Teatralne 1934/2, 3–4).

262 More on this topic Tatarska 1999.

263 For the contemporaries, Kamieński’s collections were the main and the only argument that distinguished the Poznań centre from among three Polish musicologies. In the aforementioned feuilleton ‘Przykre sprawy muzykologii polskiej’ [The sad affairs of Polish musicology] Seweryn Barbag wrote: ‘Prof. Kamieński’s latest success in the recording of hundreds or even thousands of Pomeranian songs on records makes up for the long-term scientific silence of Poznań’s musicologists, especially considering how the Lviv and Cracow musicologists have been publishing a few to a dozen works per year from various fields…. Prof. Kamieński’s studies are not finished yet; the most important part will involve a synthetic and comparative study of the entire material,’ Barbag 1935.

264 Let us emphasise once again that Norway as a country, with its magnificent landscapes, with its somewhat mysterious culture, and especially Grieg’s music, was repeatedly idealised and glorified by Chybiński.

265 See Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 29 II 1930, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/65.

266 Jadwiga Pietruszyńska, Dudy wielkopolskie [Greater Poland bagpipes], 1935; Konrad Pałubicki, Monografia pieśni ludowej ‘Na Podolu biały kamień’ [Folk song monograph. Na Podolu biały kamień], 1937; Bożena Czyżykowska, Wiwaty wielkopolskie [Greater Poland salutes], 1938; Maria Turczynowicz, Metoda pracy Oskara Kolberga w pierwszych trzech tomach Wielkiego Księstwa Poznańskiego seria 9–11 ‘Ludu.’ Ankieta Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk [Oskar Kolberg’s working method in the first three volumes of the Grand Duchy of Poznań series 9–11 of the ‘Lud.’ Survey of the Poznań society of friends of sciences], 1938; Witold Kandulski, Monografia pieśni ludowej ‘Wyjechał pan z chartami w pole’ [Folk song monograph. Wyjechał pan z chartami w pole], 1939.

267 Muzyka 1927/7–9, 109–128.

268 Muzyka 1934/8–9, 7–17.

269 Łucjan Kamieński, ‘Z najnowszych badań nad fizjologią gry fortepianowej’’[From the latest research about the physiology of playing the piano] (KM 1929/5, 62–66); ‘Monografia pieśni zmówinowej z Kaszub południowych’ [A monograph of chant song from southern Kaszuby region] (PRM 1935/1, 107–131); Marek Kwiek, ‘Czynniki rezonansowe w barwie dźwięku’ [Factors of resonance in the colour of sound] (PRM 1936/2, 35–41).

270 Tęcza [Poznań] 1933/3, 50–53.

271 Both are published in Kronika Gostyńska (1934/8, 114–117, 1935/4, 49–56).

272 Muzyka Kościelna 1938/4, 48–52.

273 Harajda 1999, 103. It seems that at that time, the only partner for scholarly discussion in this area was Gabriel Tołwiński who worked in the Conservatoire in Warsaw, who in Chybiński’s Kwartalnik in the years 1928–31 published two articles in the field of acoustics. He was also a member of a group of several people, who in 1934 were entrusted with classes within the ‘musicological department’ formed at the same university (see below). He was the author of the handbook Akustyka muzyczna published by TWMP (Warsaw 1929).

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

275 See Mrygoń 1982, Mrygoń 1989.

276 PM 1930/9–10, 1–2.

277 PM 1927/9, 1–5, 1927/10, 1–5.

278 See Gliński to Chybiński from Warsaw 18 VI 1927, AACh-BJ, box 4, G-5/64. Paul Nettl’s text mentioned in this letter by ‘Musikwissenschaft und neue Musik’ was never published in Muzyka, and also Stefania Łobaczewska’s article anounced there ‘Muzykologia polska’ [Polish musicology] was published in a special number of Muzyka with the title Muzyka polska (1927/7–9, 143–151).

279 MP 1934/1, 80 (Kronika).

280 Just four days earlier, Wacław Jędrzejewicz picked up the minister’s portfolio at the WRiOP, replacing his brother, Janusz Jędrzejewicz.

281 Rev. Bronisław Żongołłowicz was a Deputy Minister at the WRiOP resort in the years 1930–36.

282 Orkiestra 1934/2, 32 (Kronika [Chronicle]).

283 Kamieński to Chybiński from Poznań 6 IV 1934, AACh-BJ, box 6, K-3/72.

284 More about Julian Pulikowski see Bartkowski 2009, Dahlig 2012/2.

285 The interests of these researchers undoubtedly influenced the future specialisation of Pulikowski: for years, Orel was the director of the music department at Vienna’s Stadtbibliothek and also worked in the library of that city’s musicology institute. Lach, apart from being in charge of the music collection of Vienna’s Hofbibliothek, was also involved in cataloguing recordings in the local Staatsbibliothek, and as far as his interests were concerned, concentrated above all on matters of musical ethnography.

286 See Pulikowski to Chybiński from Vienna 12 XII 1929, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/7. Chybiński must have had serious reservations towards this text, which may explain why its publication date was so delayed. During work on the second volume of the PRM, Pulikowski agreed to ‘stylistically concentrate’ and ‘supplement’ the article – and perhaps – to explain the difference between his use of the terms ‘volkstümlich’ (‘of the people’) and ‘volksläufig’ (‘of mass appeal’). He then asked Chybiński if he liked the article. see Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 30 XII 1934, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/79.

287 See for example, titles such as ‘Sześć polskich pieśni ludowych z roku 1819’ [Six Polish folk songs from the year 1819] (Zaranie Śląskie 1931/2, reprint in KM 1933/17–18, 34–36), ‘Zagadnienie historii muzyki narodowej’ [The issue of national music history] (Życie Sztuki 1935/2, 56–68), ‘Dlaczego zajmujemy się muzyką ludową?’ [Why do we deal with folk music?] (Gazetka Muzyczna 1937/5, 1), ‘Ratujmy pieśń i muzykę ludową’ [Let’s save a song and folk music] (Tygodnik Ilustrowany 1937/10, 196).

288 Dahlig 2004.

289 Cezaria Baudouin de Courtenay Ehrenkreutz Jędrzejewiczowa (1885–1967), ethnologist, ethnographer and cultural historian. She founded and ran ethnography departments first at the University of Vilnius (1927–35), then at the Józef Piłsudski University in Warsaw (1935–39). The author of works devoted to rituals and artistic folk art and researcher of folklore of the Vilnius Region. Privately she was the wife (from 1933) of Janusz Jędrzejewicz, the Prime Minister and almost simultaneously the minister in the department WRiOP, creator of education reform (known as the Jędrzejewicz reform). Pulikowski sought good contacts with Jędrzejewiczowa due to their similar specialisation and because of the prestige associated with the proximity of the government spheres.

290 About this subject see Dahlig 1993.

291 Barbag 1935, 19.

292 Dziadek 2011, 466, see also Dziadek 2016.

293 Magdalena Dziadek has determined that Henryk Rydzewski went to the Conservatoire under the rectorship of Karol Szymanowski together with a group of several other people (amongst others with Stefan Śledziński, Kazimierz Sikorski, Jan Maklakiewicz). At the school he conducted classes in pedagogy.

294 See Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 25 VIII 1934, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/67. The acoustician Gabriel Tołwiński complemented the didactic team of the new ‘faculty.’ We also know that Pulikowski applied for the position of assistant for Józef Chomiński, who was trying to find an opening in the capital on account of the lack of positions in UJK, amongst other places (Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 29 X 1938, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/191).

295 Note from the editor in Jachimecki 1934.

296 Ibid.

297 Dziadek 2011, 468.

298 Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 28 IX 1934, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/73.

299 Ibid.

300 ‘Szkolnictwo muzyczne’ [Musical education] (MP 1936/6, 379–382); ‘Elle parle gauloi. (O fatalnej dykcji śpiewaków)’ [Elle parle gauloi. About the terrible diction of the singers] (MP 1935/3, 224–225); ‘Dyletantyzm i amatorstwo’ [Dilletantism and amateurism] (MP 1934/4, 301–304).

301 Muzyka 1929/1, 52–54.

302 Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 28 IX 1934, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/73.

303 MP 1934/3, 201–209.

304 See Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 8 XII 1936, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/141.

305 See Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 28 IV 1937, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/146. Bogdan Zaborski (1901–85), a geographer, was a professor at Warsaw University (from 1928), after the war settled in Canada, where he lectured at the Universities in Montreal (from 1948) and Ottawa (from 1957). He conducted research in the field of social and economic geography and geomorphology.

306 He gained his habilitation in 1936.

307 Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 23 V 1937, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/150.

308 Pulikowski to Chybiński from Warsaw 4 XI 1938, AACh-BJ, box 3, P-28/193.