Biography.

Early life.

Blanka Vlašić was born on 8 November 1983 in Split, Croatia (which was then part of Yugoslavia). From a young age, she was involved in sports: her mother Venera was a seasoned amateur in basketball and cross country skiing while her father, Joško Vlašić, was an international athlete who broke the Croatian record in the decathlon. Her father brought her to the track while he practised and she dreamed of becoming a professional sprinter. As she grew up she tried a number of sports but found that the high jump was particularly well-suited to her tall and slender frame. Vlašić shunned the idea of competing in more profitable sports, such as basketball, saying that she preferred the thrill of individual sports. She reached the international standard for a high jumper at an early age, setting a personal best of 1.80 metres at fifteen years of age and quickly improving to 1.93 m at sixteen.

Junior career.

Vlašić had an early start in international competition: she competed at the inaugural World Youth Championships, finishing eighth, and represented her country for the first time at the 2000 Sydney Olympics. Although the Olympics showed that she was not ready to compete at the senior level, she proved herself to be more than proficient at the junior level by winning the 2000 World Junior Championships with a jump of 1.91 m. She was a regular competitor at senior athletics meetings and was steadily improving, qualifying for further top-level senior events. Vlašić finished sixth at the 2001 World Championships in Edmonton with a mark of 1.94 m, a result which led the IAAF's Ed Gordon to mark her out as a future star in the event. She rounded off the year by winning her first senior gold medal at an international tournament, taking first place at the 2001 Mediterranean Games.  The results of Vlašić's final year as a junior showed further development as a high jumper. She set a new indoor best of 1.92 m at the 2002 European Indoor Championships and was the favourite to win the 2002 World Juniors. She won the competition by a margin of nine centimetres, setting a new personal best of 1.96 m and attempting the symbolic two metres height. She failed to pass the bar but remained pleased with her achievements: "This was the first time I tried the 2-metre mark. That would have been a bonus. Today what matters is the gold. I am very happy I retained my world junior title". At the final major event of the season, the European Championships, she could not repeat her previous form and finished in fifth place. Nevertheless, at the end of the year she was ranked in the top ten high jumpers in the world for the season.

Rising contender.

The start to the 2003 athletics season was promising – Vlašić set a new personal best in Linz with a jump of 1.98 m and finished fourth at the World Indoor Championships ten days later, her highest finish in a major world tournament. June and July yielded further progress, jumping 1.98 m again and improving to 1.99 m to win her first IAAF Golden League event at the Gaz de France. Days later, she jumped the two metres height for the first time on home soil at the IAAF Grand Prix Zagreb. Although Hestrie Cloete won the competition overall, Vlašić's defeat of the psychological barrier and improved personal best was the highlight of the meeting and Cloete praised the young athlete's performance. Vlašić took gold at the 2003 European Athletics Under-23 Championships, and then she improved her best by another centimetre at the Zürich Grand Prix which qualified her for the World Championships and the first IAAF World Athletics Final. Despite such previous highs, her season ended on a low note as she failed to win a medal at either the World Championships (finishing seventh with 1.95 m) or the Athletics Final in Paris (ending up fourth with 1.96 m). Although she had failed to reach the podium at the major championships, only three athletes managed to jump higher than her personal and season's best of 2.01 m in 2003.

National record and health problems.

Vlasic started the season well with a bronze medal performance at the 2004 IAAF World Indoor Championships in March. She regularly reached the podium at meetings in the outdoor season and won the 2004 national championships. A Croatian record breaking jump of 2.03 m in Ljubljana put her in good stead for the 2004 Athens Olympics. However, when she competed at the Olympic high jump final she only managed eleventh place with a jump of 1.89 m. Following this, Vlašić did not compete for almost a year: she admitted that she was feeling lethargic and shortly afterwards she was diagnosed with a hyperthyroid condition.  Surgery and recovery ruled out the vast majority of the 2005 athletics season and she only managed to make two competitive appearances. A best of 1.95 m guaranteed her victory at the national championships, but her jump of 1.88 m was not enough to progress into the finals of the 2005 World Championships.  Although her poor health had spoiled her medals chances at the two major championships of 2004 and 2005, Vlašić came back fully recovered and stronger in the 2006 season. She raised her indoor best to 2.05 m (a national record) at a meet in Banská Bystrica in February, and took silver at the 2006 IAAF World Indoor Championships. Although she was beaten to the gold medal by Yelena Slesarenko, she remained positive: "Of course I wanted to win. But when I remember that I was in hospital one year ago it is great." The 2006 European Athletics Championships in Gothenburg proved to be a bittersweet experience: she cleared 2.01 m to finish in fourth place, behind Tia Hellebaut, Venelina Veneva and Kajsa Bergqvist. This was the best-ever non-medal winning jump, and bronze medallist Bergqvist had also finished with 2.01 m but had managed it in fewer attempts. Vlašić capped the season off with an appearance at the 2006 World Athletics Final but withdrew from the competition after her third jump, finishing sixth.

2007 : dominance and Croatia's first gold medal at World Championships.

Although she recorded an indoor season's best of 2.01 m in February, she failed to repeat her previous season's indoor form and finished fifth at the 2007 European Athletics Indoor Championships (later upgraded to fourth after Venelina Veneva tested positive for banned substances).  During the 2007 season, Vlašić won eighteen out of nineteen outdoor competitions, with her only loss coming early in the season at the first Golden League meeting in Oslo, defeated by Olympic champion Yelena Slesarenko. Vlašić won the World Championships in Osaka thanks to a 2.05 m jump, winning Croatia's first gold medal at the World Athletics Championships. Antonietta Di Martino of Italy and Anna Chicherova of Russia both cleared 2.03 m to share the silver medal.  In early October, Vlašić was named female European Athlete of the Year by the European Athletic Association after the combined votes of a panel of experts, a group of journalists and the public. She is the first Croatian athlete and the first high jumper to win this award.

2008 : Silver medal at the Beijing Olympics.

World indoor title in Valencia.

In March 2008, Vlašić won her first world indoor title in Valencia, Spain (2.02 m) and posted 10 days earlier an indoor national record of 2.05 m.  Coming to the 2008 Summer Olympics, held in Beijing, China, Vlašić jumped 12 times over 2.00 m outdoors, leading the world rankings with 2.06 m. Still based on the world rankings, she leads by 3 centimeters.

Beijing Olympics.

At the Olympics, Vlašić cleared all of her heights on her first attempt, from 1.89 m to 2.03 m. At 2.03 m, Vlašić, Anna Chicherova, and Tia Hellebaut, who had failures at the previous attempts, including at 2.03 for Hellebaut, remained in competition. The bar went to 2.05 m and Vlašić failed her first attempt while Hellebaut broke the Belgian record. Vlašić cleared the bar on her second jump, but lost the gold to Hellebaut on countback after neither cleared 2.07m.  Vlašić's season ended when she was again beaten on countback in the final leg of the ÅF Golden League series, which ended her chances of winning the $1,000,000 jackpot. Having won the previous five Golden League events, she finished the Memorial Van Damme meeting in second place behind Ariane Friedrich.

2009 : Second consecutive world title, second best high-jumper of all time (2.08 m).

The 2009 Indoor season saw Vlašić posting a world indoor lead of 2.05 m in Karlsruhe, equalling her own national indoor record in the process. However she failed to earn a medal at the European Indoor Championships in Torino, finishing fifth. Germany's Ariane Friedrich won the gold medal.  At the World Championships, Vlašić competed against Ariane Friedrich. During the final, the duo was joined by reigning world silver and olympic bronze medalist Anna Chicherova, who took the lead with a 2.02 m first-time clearance. Vlašić cleared on her second attempt, while Friedrich cleared on her third attempt. At 2.04 m, the Croatian is the first one to go over. Chicherova fails and Friedrich attempts 2.06 m, which she almost clears. Vlašić then raised the bar to 2.10 m, a would-be world record, but failed all three attempts.  On 31 August, at Hanžeković Memorial in Zagreb, Vlašić cleared 2.08 m. She set a new personal best, Croatian record and became the second best high-jumper of all time behind the world record of Stefka Kostadinova (2.09 m in 1987). She raised the bar to 2.10 m, but failed once again.

2010 : World indoor title and first European title.

On 6 February 2010, Vlašić cleared 2.06 m in Arnstadt, Germany. The victory at the Hochsprung mit Musik added one centimetre to her own personal best and Croatian record and brought her to third on the all-time indoor lists behind Sweden's Kajsa Bergqvist (2.08 m in 2006) and Germany's Heike Henkel (2,07 m in 1992). A month later, she retained her world indoor title in Doha with 2.00 m, winning ahead of Spain's Ruth Beitia and USA's Chaunté Lowe, both jumping 1.98 m. Through the outdoor season, she wins the first edition of the IAAF Diamond League by winning the seven meetings in the event. She and her main rival of the season Chaunté Lowe both led the circuit. Vlašić cleared 2.00 m on six out of seven occasions in the circuit.  On 1 August 2010 Vlašić won her first European title with 2.03 m, equalling the championship record set by Belgian's Tia Hellebaut and Bulgaria's Venelina Veneva-Mateeva four years earlier at the 2006 edition in Gothenburg. She beat Sweden's Emma Green (silver) and Germany's Ariane Friedrich (bronze), both jumping 2.01 m.  Vlašić was selected along with Emma Green to represent Europe at the Continental Cup on her home soil of Split. She won the event with 2.05 m and equalled Chaunté Lowe's world leading jump. She raised the bar at 2.10 m, what would be a world record, but failed to break it.  At the end of the year, Vlašić was crowned European Athlete and IAAF World Athlete of the year, succeeding to Marta Domínguez (Europe) and Sanya Richards-Ross (World).

2011 season: third world championships medal.

Coming up to the 2011 World Championships in Daegu, Vlašić wasn't the favourite at all. With 2.00 m, she wasn't leading the world rankings and Russian long time rival Anna Chicherova had all the expectations for the win, thanks to a Russian record of 2.07 m. Italy's Antonietta Di Martino is also in a good shape coming to the Worlds, having (as Vlašić) jumped 2.00 m outdoors but did better indoors with an Italian record of 2.04 m. Moreover, Vlašić was not guaranteed to show up at the championships due to a left leg injury. However, during the championships, she showed great form and managed to clear 2.03 m and earn silver medal, coming close to clearing 2.05 and creating history to become the first high jumper to win 3 consecutive world titles. But Anna Chicherova beat the Croatian on countbacks, while Antonietta Di Martino has to settle for the bronze with 2.00 m.

2012-2013: injuries.

Vlašić decided to have an operation on her left Achilles tendon in January 2012. Although the operation in itself seemed to have gone well, an infection developed and she had to have another operation in April. A slow healing process delayed her preparations for the London Olympics and she had to withdraw. Vlašić did not compete in any other event of the season, therefore missing the whole indoor and outdoor season of 2012.  20 months after her last competition, Vlašić made her comeback on May 25 in New York, taking the win with the World Championships standard of 1.94 m. Then, she jumped 1.95 m in Rome before clearing 2 meters at the end of June in Buhl while working on gaining stability in her ankle as she approached the 2013 Moscow World Championships. Unfortunately she had to withdraw due to fear that she had not yet fully recovered.

2015 World Championships.

In March 2014, Vlašić made her comeback at an international championship since the 2011 World Championships at the World Indoor Championships. She placed 6th with 1.94 m. Due to a jumper's knee injury in her left knee, she had to withdraw from the European championships in Zürich where she was one of the favorites alongside Russia's Mariya Kuchina, due to her two recent wins in Paris and London with 2.00 m.  However, she came back on the scene a week after the Europeans at the Weltklasse Zürich and placed fourth with 1.93 m. She ended her season on a good note, jumping that height again in Zagreb.  In 2015, Vlašić opened her outdoor season at the Golden Gala in Rome and placed 2nd to Spain's Ruth Beitia (2.00 m, world lead) with 1.97 m. Then she equaled that height in New York City, again beaten by the Spaniard on countbacks. However, due to her chronic foot pain, she cancelled her appearances in both Lausanne and Monaco in order to get ready for the Beijing World Championships.  The World Champs were the Croatian's first major championship outdoors since Daegu 2011. On 27 August, she made it to the finals and there, two days later, earned the silver medal behind Russia's Mariya Lasitskene (former Kuchina) who beat her on countbacks (Vlašić had one miss at 1.92 m). To her, the silver medal felt like gold after all she had to go through in the previous years, and more specifically recalling she could not walk for days in early July.

2016: Olympic bronze.

Still due to her Achilles problem, Vlašić only made one appearance in the 2016 season in Split on January 29 where she took the win with 1.95 m, jumping over the qualifying standard (1.93 m) for the 2016 Summer Olympics. On 3 February, she had surgery in Turku, Finland. Despite having not competed during the outdoor season (she cancelled her participation at the European Championships and in the London Diamond League), she was selected by the Croatian Federation alongside Ana Šimić to represent Croatia in the high jump at the Olympics.

Olympic competition.

On 18 August, Vlašić competed in the Women's high jump qualification and reached the finals, placing 1st with the qualifying height for the final, 1.94 m. Two days later, she competed in a final of 17 competitors. She cleared 1.88 m and 1.93 m on her second attempt, before clearing 1.97 m. She, Ruth Beitia, Mirela Demireva and Chaunté Lowe were the only athletes to clear the bar. Placing third behind Beitia and Demireva but ahead of Lowe, Vlašić attempted 2.00 m but failed to clear within three attempts. As no one else cleared, she earned the bronze medal behind Beitia and Demireva. This was the first time since the 1980 Summer Olympics that the winning height was below 2.00 meters. Vlašić became the seventh female athlete in the history of the discipline (since 1928) to win two Olympic medals.

Career post-Olympic season.

On 19 July 2017, Vlašić announced her withdrawal from the World Championships in London due to foot pain. She said that she had no plans to retire yet as she plans to come back for the 2018 season on the road to the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo.

Personal life.

Vlašić was named after Casablanca, a city where her father competed and won a gold medal at the 1983 Mediterranean Games around the time of her birth.  From the beginning of her career she has been coached by her father, Joško Vlašić and a former high jumper Bojan Marinović.  Her brother is current CSKA Moscow football player Nikola Vlašić.  Blanka is today a member of the 'Champions for Peace' club, a group of 54 famous elite athletes committed to serving peace in the world through sport, created by Peace and Sport, a Monaco-based international organisation. Vlašić supported the Croatian constitutional referendum in 2013 stating that marriage is matrimony between a woman and a man. She is a devout Roman Catholic.

Blanka Vlašić (; born 8 November 1983) is a Croatian track and field athlete who specialises in the high jump. She is a two-time world champion and double Olympic medallist who ranks as the joint second highest female jumper of all time with her personal best of. She is the Croatian record holder in the event, and the former indoor world champion.

Blanka Vlašić, née le 8 novembre 1983 à Split (Croatie) est une athlète croate, spécialiste du saut en hauteur. Avec 2,08 m elle détient la deuxième meilleure performance mondiale de tous les temps, à un centimètre du record du monde. Quadruple championne du monde entre 2007 et 2010, elle est également vice-championne olympique en 2008 et médaillée de bronze huit ans plus tard en 2016 à Rio de Janeiro.


History.

1985-1990 : European success.

Named after a 17th-century story titled "The Marriage of Cock Robin and Jenny Wren", the band formed in San Francisco, California and was signed to CBS Records. Cock Robin's eponymous debut album was produced by Steve Hillage. It was ignored in their native country, as with the majority of their output, but it was an overnight success in Europe, especially in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and the Netherlands, where the singles "When Your Heart Is Weak", "The Promise You Made" and "Thought You Were On My Side" became big hits (with for example the latter two singles peaking at number 1 and number 4 respectively in the Flemish-speaking part of Belgium), and the album itself a chart-topper. "When Your Heart Is Weak" was the band's only chart single in the U.S., where it reached No. 35 in the late summer of 1985. It also became a radio favorite in South Africa in early 1986.  In mid-1987, the band, reduced from the original quartet to the duo of Peter Kingsbery and Anna LaCazio, released a second album, "After Here Through Midland", produced by Don Gehman, who had previously worked with John Mellencamp, among others. As with their debut, Cock Robin's second album attracted much attention in continental Europe where it reached the Top 5 and also scored hits with the singles "Just Around the Corner" (a European Top 20 hit, from Scandinavia to Italy), "The Biggest Fool of All" and "El Norte".  Two years later, in 1989, the band released their third, and, to many critics, most accomplished album, "First Love/Last Rites", with Roxy Music veteran Rhett Davies in the role of producer. As with their previous releases, the LP fared well in mainland Europe, but, due to poor management and promotion, failed to make an impact in the USA. The duo went their separate ways shortly after the release of the album and a European Tour, with Kingsbery releasing a string of solo projects (3 albums in English, 1 in French) in France, most notably a hit single "Only the Very Best", recorded for the Michel Berger & Luc Plamondon concept musical album "Tycoon", with English lyrics by Tim Rice in 1992. Anna LaCazio recorded her own solo album ("Eat Life") circa 1992-93; but it was only officially released in its entirety for download in 2009.

Recent years.

On 20 June 2012, Peter Kingsbery announced in his blog on the official Cock Robin website Cockrobinmusic.com that "there will be a new tour next Summer 2013 with a new album".  Another Cock Robin remix by Umpff, "Extraordinary Thing", appeared on "Mixtape" from Mabel the Label in October 2012.  The November 2015 issue of the French magazine "Topo", reported that Anna LaCazio had left Cock Robin in May 2015. Kingsbery had relocated to France and LaCazio preferred to remain in the United States and be close to her family.  Peter Kingsbery announced that Coralie Vuillemin had been chosen as the new female voice in the group. The band's latest album, "Chinese Driver" was released on March 11, 2016.  A 5-track EP was released as download only in April 2017. The first track ("Roman Holiday (The Making Of)") is an original song, whereas the second one ("Just Before It Begins") is an original instrumental track. The last three tracks however ("The Long Last Second", "Thought You Were On My Side" and "White Folks") are reprises of Peter Kingsbery's solo albums or of Cock Robin songs, with new arrangements and vocals by Peter Kingsbery and Coralie Vuillemin.  With the current line up, Cock Robin has performed in France, Portugal, Iceland, Belgium, Netherland, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Luxembourg, Danemark. May 2020 : the band is currently mixing their new album.

Cock Robin is an American pop rock band, mostly popular in the 1980s, particularly in continental Europe, where it achieved major success, notably with the single "The Promise You Made". The band was founded by singer-songwriter Peter Kingsbery in 1982, disbanded in 1990, and reformed in 2006.

Cock Robin est un groupe de new wave et pop américain, fondé en 1982 à San Francisco. Il compte comme membres (et chanteurs) principaux Peter Kingsbery et Anna LaCazio. Il a été actif jusqu'en 1990, date à laquelle les membres se sont séparés. Le groupe a été reformé en 2006 lors de la sortie de son quatrième album.


Early life and education.

Thomas Müntzer was born in late 1489 (or possibly early 1490), in the small town of Stolberg in the Harz Mountains of Germany. The legend that his father had been executed by the feudal authorities is untrue. There is every reason to suppose that Müntzer had a relatively comfortable background and upbringing, as evidenced by his lengthy education. Both his parents were still alive in 1520, his mother dying at around that time.  Shortly after 1490, the family moved to the neighbouring and slightly larger town of Quedlinburg, and it was as "Thomas Munczer de Quedlinburgk" that he enrolled at the

Early employment and the Wittenberg contacts.

In May 1514, he took up a post as priest in the town of Braunschweig (Brunswick), where he was occupied on and off for the next few years. It was here that he began to question the practices of the Catholic Church, and to criticize, for example, the selling of indulgences. In letters of this time, he is already being addressed by friends as a "castigator of unrighteousness". Between 1515 and 1516, he also managed to find a job as schoolmaster at a nunnery in Frose, near Aschersleben.  In the autumn of 1517, he was in Wittenberg, met with Martin Luther, and became involved in the great discussions which preceded the posting of Luther's 95 Theses. He attended lectures at the university there, and was exposed to Luther's ideas as well as other ideas originating with the humanists, among whom was Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, who later became a radical opponent of Luther. Müntzer did not remain in Wittenberg for long, and was reported in various other locations

Zwickau.

In May 1520, Müntzer was able to capitalize on the recommendation made by Luther a year earlier, and stood in as temporary replacement for a reformist/humanist preacher named Johann Sylvanus Egranus at St Mary's Church in the busy town of Zwickau (population at that time ca. 7,000), near the border with Bohemia. Zwickau was in the middle of the important iron- and silver-mining area of the Erzgebirge, and was also home to a significant number of plebeians, primarily weavers. Money from the mining operations, and from the commercial boom which mining generated, had infiltrated the town. This led to an increasing division between rich and poor citizens, and a parallel consolidation of larger manufacturers over small-scale craftsmen. Social tensions ran high. It was a town which, although exceptional for the times, nurtured conditions which presaged the trajectory of many towns over the following two

Prague and months of wandering.

Müntzer initially travelled over the border into Bohemia to the town of Žatec (Saaz); this town was known as one of the five "safe citadels" of the radical Taborites of Bohemia. But Müntzer only used this as a stop-over en route to Prague. It was in Prague that the Hussite Church was already firmly established and Müntzer thought to find a safe home where he could develop his increasingly un-Lutheran ideas. He arrived here in late June 1521, was welcomed as a "Martinist" (a follower of Luther), and was allowed to preach and to give lectures. He also found the time to prepare a summary of his own beliefs, which appeared in a document known to posterity, slightly misleadingly, as the "Prague Manifesto". This document exists in four forms: one in Czech, one in Latin, and two in German. One of them is written on a large piece of paper, about, much like a poster, but written on both sides. However,

Allstedt.

His next post was both relatively permanent and productive. In early April 1523, through the patronage of Selmenitz, he was appointed as preacher at St John's Church in Allstedt in Saxony. He found himself working alongside another reformer, Simon Haferitz who preached at the church of St Wigberti. The town of Allstedt was small, barely more than a large village (population 600), with an imposing castle set on the hill above it. Elector Friedrich held the right to appoint to St John's, but the town council either forgot to advise him, or did not feel that his approval was necessary. Almost immediately on arrival, Müntzer was preaching his version of the reformed doctrines, and delivering the standard church services and masses in German. Such was the popularity of his preaching and the novelty of hearing services in German that people from the surrounding countryside and towns were soon flocking to Allstedt. Some reports suggest that upwards of two thousand people were on the move every Sunday. Within weeks, Luther heard of this and wrote to the Allstedt authorities, asking them to persuade Müntzer to come to Wittenberg for closer inspection. Müntzer refused to go. He was far too busy carrying through his Reformation and wanted no discussion "behind closed doors". At this time, he also married Ottilie von Gersen, a former nun; in the spring of 1524, Ottilie gave birth to a son.  It was not only Luther who was concerned. The Catholic Count Ernst von Mansfeld spent the summer of 1523 trying to

Mühlhausen and Nuremberg.

Mühlhausen was a town with a population of 8,500. During 1523 social tensions which had been brewing for several years came to a head, and the poorer inhabitants had managed to wrest some political concessions from the town council; building on this success, the radical reform movement kept up the pressure, under the leadership of a lay preacher named Heinrich Pfeiffer, who had been denouncing the practices of the old church from the pulpit of St Nikolaus Church. Thus, before Müntzer arrived, there was already considerable tension in the air. He was not appointed to any pulpit, but this did not stop him from preaching, agitating, and publishing pamphlets against Luther. His comrade-in-arms here was Pfeiffer; while the two men did not necessarily share the same beliefs (as in Zwickau with Storch) there was enough common-ground in their reformatory zeal and belief in the inspired spirit to allow them to work together closely. A minor civic coup took place in late September 1524, as a result of which, leading members of the town council fled the town, taking with them the city insignia and the municipal horse. But the coup was short-lived – partly because of divisions within the reformers

Final months.

In February 1525 Müntzer returned to Mühlhausen (via Fulda, where he was briefly arrested and then – unrecognized – released) and took over the pulpit at St Mary's Church; the town council neither gave, nor was asked for, permission to make this appointment; it would seem that a popular vote thrust Müntzer into the pulpit. Immediately, he and Pfeiffer, who had managed to return to the town some three months earlier, were at the centre of considerable activity. In early March, the citizens were called upon to elect an "Eternal Council" which was to replace the existing town council, but whose duties went far beyond the merely municipal. Surprisingly, neither Pfeiffer nor Müntzer were admitted to the new council, nor to its meetings. Possibly because of this, Müntzer then founded the "Eternal League of God" in late March (but some researchers date this League to September 1524). This was an armed militia, designed not just as a defence league, but also as a God-fearing cadre for the coming apocalypse. It met under a huge white banner which had been painted with a rainbow and decorated with the words "The Word of God will endure forever". In the surrounding countryside and neighbouring small towns, the events in Mühlhausen found a ready echo, for the peasantry and the urban poor had had news of the great uprising in southwest Germany, and many were ready to

Theology.

Müntzer's theology has been the subject of many studies over the years. Modern researchers agree that Müntzer was deeply read and that it was his theology, and not any socio-political dogma, which drove him to stand up to feudal authority. The short paragraphs below attempt to give a very brief summary of his theology.

Influences and study.

Evident from Müntzer's writings is his broad knowledge of aspects of the Christian religion. From 1514 onwards, possibly earlier, he read widely in the early Christian fathers (Tertullian and Cyprian), in the history of the early church (Eusebius and

The spirit, not the letter.

Despite the profusion of biblical quotations in Müntzer's writings, it was his doctrine that true belief was dictated by spiritual experience, not by written testimony. The Bible was for him evidence only of spiritual experiences of the past; the words of the Bible still had to be validated by the working of the Spirit in the believer's heart. "If someone had never had sight or sound of

Dreams and revelations.

Spiritual revelation came sometimes through dreams and visions and sometimes through suffering. In Zwickau, Müntzer's belief in the possibilities of revelation by dream matched the same belief in the sect of

Suffering and pain.

It was essential, in Müntzer's view, for a person to experience real suffering and pain – either spiritual or physical – in order to come to

Fear of God and man.

One of the principal dialectics in Müntzer's teaching is the opposition of the "Fear of Man" to the "Fear of God". Regardless of one's position in society, it was necessary for the true believer to have a fear of God and to have no fear of man. This was the thrust of his "Sermon Before the Princes" and

Apocalyptism.

Interwoven with Müntzer's mystical piety, as for many of his contemporaries, was a conviction that the whole cosmos stood at a tipping point. Now God would set right all the wrongs of the world, largely by destruction, but with the active assistance

In his final confession under torture of May 1525, Müntzer stated that one of the primary aims of himself and his comrades was "" – "all things are to be held in common and distribution should be to each according to his need". This statement has often been cited as evidence of Müntzer's "early communism", but it stands quite alone in

Summary.

The doctrines of essential suffering, of spiritual revelation, of denial of the fear of Man - all combined with the expectation of the Apocalypse to place the "Elect" person in total opposition to feudal authority, and to both Catholic and Lutheran teaching. However, this was no individualistic path to salvation. The importance which Müntzer laid on communal activities – the reformed liturgies

Differences with Luther.

Müntzer was one of many preachers and theologians caught up in the extraordinary atmosphere of the early Reformation. In this period, from around 1517 to 1525, Martin Luther had no monopoly of the reforms. This was the time not only of Luther, but also of Erasmus of Rotterdam and fellow-Humanists, of the alchemists Paracelsus and Cornelius Agrippa, of localized urban and rural acts of defiance. The social upheavals triggered the Reformation - or more precisely, 'the reformations', for it was above all a time of massive dissent, and indeed dissent from dissent; in turn, the reformation of thought triggered further social and political upheavals.  In this roiling pot of ideas, Müntzer quite readily respected Luther for a period and then just as readily rejected the Lutheran doctrines. Although it is clear in retrospect that Müntzer's ideas were already diverging from Luther's at least as early as the period in Zwickau, Müntzer himself may not have been aware of this. Luther, like Müntzer, had shown an avid interest in the mystic and theologian Johannes Tauler. Müntzer may even have looked at Luther's many admiring references

Legacy.

During the last two years of his life, Müntzer had come into contact with a number of other radicals; prominent amongst them were Hans Hut, Hans Denck, Melchior Rinck, Hans Römer, and Balthasar Hubmaier. All of them were leaders of the emerging Anabaptist movement, which nurtured similar reformed doctrines to those of Müntzer himself. While it is not appropriate to claim that they were all or consistently "Müntzerites", it is possible to argue that they all shared some common teaching. A common thread links Müntzer, the early Anabaptists, the "Kingdom of Münster" in North Germany in 1535, the Dutch Anabaptists, the radicals of the English Revolution, and beyond. There was a short-lived legacy even within the "official" reformed church as well; in the towns where Müntzer had been active, his reformed liturgies were still being used some ten years after his death.  Friedrich Engels and Karl Kautsky claimed him as a precursor of the revolutionaries of more modern times. They based their analysis on the

Müntzer's wife.

Very little is known about Müntzer's wife Ottilie von Gersen other than the fact that she was a nun who had left a nunnery under the influence of the Reformation movement. Her family name may have been "von Görschen". She may have been one of a group of sixteen nuns who left the convent at Wiederstedt, some miles

Further reading.

A full bibliography of articles and books on Müntzer runs to over 3000 entries - see the Dammaschke/Vogler Bibliography cited above ; and the list is growing all the time. The reading list in this Wikipedia article should therefore "only" contain works of academically accepted significance for the understanding of the historical reasons for Müntzer's actions and/or the theological background of the Reformation. Please reflect on this before adding further works; and bear in mind also Wikipedia's policy on

Thomas Müntzer ( – 27 May 1525) was a German preacher and radical theologian of the early Reformation whose opposition to both Martin Luther and the Roman Catholic Church led to his open defiance of late-feudal authority in central Germany. Müntzer was foremost amongst those reformers who took issue with Luther's compromises with feudal authority. He became a leader of the German peasant and plebeian uprising of 1525 commonly known as the German Peasants' War. He was captured after the Battle of Frankenhausen, tortured and executed.

Thomas Müntzer (souvent orthographié en français : Münzer ou Muntzer, ou encore Munzer, ou en latin : Muncerus), né en 1489 (ou 1490) à Stolberg et mort le à Mühlhausen, est un prédicateur anabaptiste et un des chefs religieux de la guerre des paysans dans le Saint-Empire au. C’est un dirigeant révolutionnaire et l’un des grands protagonistes de la Réforme, et plus particulièrement de la Réforme radicale.


Biography.

Early life.

[[Image:07.zori in Valeni.2.jpg|thumb|left|270px|Scene from Máramaros county, near Szigeti's childhood home]] Szigeti was born Joseph "Jóska" Singer to a Jewish family in [[Budapest]], [[Austria-Hungary]]. His mother died when he was three years old, and soon thereafter the boy was sent to live with his grandparents in the little [[Carpathian Mountains|Carpathian]] town of [[Sighetu Marmației|Máramaros-Sziget]] (hence the name "Szigeti"). He grew up surrounded by music, as the town band was composed almost entirely of his uncles. After a few informal lessons on the "[[cimbalom]]" from his aunt, he received his first lessons on the violin from his Uncle Bernat at the age of six.  Szigeti quickly showed a talent for the violin. Several years later, his father took him to Budapest to receive proper training at the [[music school|conservatory]]. After a brief stint with an inadequate teacher, Szigeti auditioned at the [[Franz Liszt Academy of Music]] and was admitted directly into the class of [[Jenő Hubay]], without the usual delays and formalities.  Hubay, who had been a student of [[Joseph Joachim]] in Berlin, had by that time established himself as one of the preeminent teachers in Europe and a fountainhead of the Hungarian violin tradition. Szigeti joined such violinists as [[Franz von Vecsey]], [[Emil Telmányi]], [[Jelly d'Arányi]] and [[Stefi Geyer]] in Hubay's studio. In those days, Europe produced a great many [[Child prodigy|child prodigies]], inspired by the phenomenal success of the young Czech virtuoso [[Jan Kubelík]] and formed by rigorous teaching and enthusiastic parents. The Hubay studio was no exception; Szigeti and his fellow "[[Child prodigy|wunderkinder]]" performed extensively in special recitals and salon concerts during their study at the Liszt Academy.  He went to study at the Conservateur in Budapest for 2 years before his debut.  In 1905, at the age of thirteen, Szigeti made his Berlin debut playing [[Johann Sebastian Bach|Bach's]] "[[Partita for Violin No. 2 (Bach)|Chaconne in D minor]]", [[Heinrich Wilhelm Ernst|Ernst's]] [[Concerto]] in F-sharp minor, and [[Niccolò Paganini|Paganini]]'s "Witches Dance". Despite the formidable program, the event received mention only by a photograph in the Sunday supplement of the "[[Berliner Tageblatt]]" captioned: "A Musical Prodigy: Josef Szigeti". [[File:Joseph Szigeti and Jeno Hubay c1910.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Hubay (left) and Szigeti, c. 1910]] Szigeti spent the next few months with a summer theater company in a small Hungarian resort town, playing mini-recitals in between acts of folk [[operetta]]. In that same vein, the next year he played at a circus in [[Frankfurt]], where he appeared under the pseudonym "Jóska Szulagi". Also in 1906, Hubay took Szigeti to play for Joseph Joachim in Berlin. Joachim was impressed, and suggested that Szigeti should finish his studies with him. Szigeti declined the offer, both out of loyalty to Hubay and a perceived aloofness and lack of rapport between Joachim and his students.

Broadening horizons.

Soon after the meeting with Joachim, Szigeti embarked on a major concert tour of England. Midway through the tour, in [[Surrey]], he met a music-loving couple who effectively adopted him, extending an invitation to stay with them for an indefinite length of time.  Throughout England, he gave many successful concerts, including the premiere of the first work dedicated to him: [[Hamilton Harty]]'s Violin Concerto. Also during this time, Szigeti toured with an all-star ensemble including legendary singer [[Nellie Melba|Dame Nellie Melba]] and pianists [[Ferruccio Busoni]] and [[Wilhelm Backhaus]]. [[Philippe Gaubert]], a famous French flutist of the day, as well as the young singer [[John McCormack (tenor)|John McCormack]], were also part of these tours. [[Image:Ferruccio Busoni, ca 1895.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Szigeti's mentor, Ferruccio Busoni]] The most significant of the new contacts was Busoni. The great pianist and composer became Szigeti's mentor during these formative years, and the two would remain close friends until Busoni's death in 1924. By Szigeti's own admission, before meeting Busoni his life was characterized by a certain laziness and indifference brought on by the then-typical life of a young prodigy violinist. He had grown accustomed to playing crowd-pleasing salon miniatures and dazzling virtuosic encores without much thought. He knew little of the works of the great masters; he could play them, but not fully understand them. As Szigeti put it, Busoni—particularly through their careful study of [[Johann Sebastian Bach|Bach's]] [[Partita for Violin No. 2 (Bach)|"Chaconne"]]—"shook me once and for all out of my adolescent complacency".

Illness and new beginnings.

In 1913, Szigeti was diagnosed with [[tuberculosis]] and was sent to a [[sanatorium]] in [[Davos]], Switzerland to recover, interrupting his concert career. During his stay at the sanatorium, he became re-acquainted with the composer [[Béla Bartók]], who was recovering from [[pneumonia]]. His doctor recommended to practice the violin 25 to 30 minutes a day.The two had known each other only in passing during their conservatory days, but now they began a friendship that would last until Bartók's death in 1945. He was allowed to visit to him for the last time in 1943 in the Mount Sinai Hospital with his illness worsening, reading Turkish poems while they spread out on his hospital bed.  In 1917, having by then made a full recovery, at age 25 Szigeti was appointed Professor of Violin at the [[Conservatoire de Musique de Genève|Geneva Conservatory of Music]]. Szigeti said that this job, although generally satisfying, was often frustrating due to the mediocre quality of many of his students. The years teaching in Geneva provided an opportunity for Szigeti to deepen his understanding of music as an art, along with other aspects such as chamber music, orchestral performance, music theory and composition. Also during that time, Szigeti met and fell in love with Wanda Ostrowska, a young woman of Russian parentage who had been stranded in Geneva by the [[Russian Revolution]] of 1917. They married in 1919.

American debut.

In 1925, Szigeti met [[Leopold Stokowski]] and played the Bach "Chaconne in D minor" for him. Less than two weeks later, Szigeti received a telegram from Stokowski's manager in [[Philadelphia]] inviting him to perform with the [[Philadelphia Orchestra]] later that year: it was his American debut. Szigeti had never played with an American orchestra before, nor heard one, and later he wrote of suffering [[stage fright]]. He was taken aback by the American concert scene, and the way that its publicity and popularity driven agents and managers determined much of what was heard in American concert halls. He believed they were not interested in works by the great masters, but preferred the popular light salon pieces he had left behind in his prodigy days. (To the end of his life, Szigeti loved to quote one memorable, cigar-chewing impresario who told him, with regard to [[Ludwig van Beethoven|Beethoven]]'s "[[Violin Sonata No. 9 (Beethoven)|Kreutzer Sonata]]", "Well, let me tell you, Mister Dzigedy—and I know what "I’m" talking about—your Krewtzer Sonata bores the pants off my audiences!")

Maturity.

By 1930, Szigeti was established as a major international concert violinist. He performed extensively in Europe, the United States and Asia, and made the acquaintance of many of the era's leading instrumentalists, conductors and composers.  [[Image:Bartók Béla 1927.jpg|thumb|left|170px|Béla Bartók, Szigeti's longtime friend and colleague]] In 1939, to escape the war and [[Nazi]] persecution of the Jews, Szigeti emigrated with his wife to the United States, where they settled in [[California]]. (A year later, Bartók also fled to America, and just two days after his arrival, he and Szigeti played a sonata recital at the [[Library of Congress]] in [[Washington, D.C.]])  During the 1930s, 1940s and into the 1950s, Szigeti recorded extensively, leaving a significant legacy. Notable recordings include the above-mentioned Library of Congress sonata recital; the studio recording of Bartók's "[[Contrasts (Bartók)|Contrasts]]" with [[Benny Goodman]] on clarinet and the composer at the piano; the violin concertos of [[Violin Concerto (Beethoven)|Beethoven]], [[Violin Concerto (Brahms)|Brahms]], [[Violin Concerto (Mendelssohn)|Mendelssohn]], [[Violin Concerto No. 1 (Prokofiev)|Prokofiev]] (No. 1) and [[Ernest Bloch|Bloch]] under the batons of such conductors as [[Bruno Walter]], [[Hamilton Harty]] and Sir [[Thomas Beecham]]; and various works by J.S. Bach, Busoni, [[Arcangelo Corelli|Corelli]], [[George Frideric Handel|Handel]] and [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]. One of his last recordings was of the "[[Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin (Bach)|Six Sonatas and Partitas]]" for solo violin by Bach; although his technique had deteriorated noticeably by that time, the recording is prized for Szigeti's insight and depth of interpretation.  In 1950, Szigeti was detained at [[Ellis Island]] upon returning from a European concert tour and was held for several days, officially "temporarily excluded" from the country. The reasons for his detention remain unclear. The following year, he became a naturalized American citizen.

Later years.

[[Image:Montreux 1 um 1900.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Montreux, Switzerland, where Szigeti spent his later years]] During the 1950s, Szigeti began to develop [[arthritis]] in his hands and his playing deteriorated. Despite his weakened technical mastery, his intellect and musical expression were still strong, and he continued to draw large audiences to his concerts. In [[Naples]], Italy, in November 1956, just after the Soviets crushed the Hungarian uprising, as soon as he walked onto the stage the audience burst into wild applause and shouts of "Viva l’Ungheria!" (Italian for "Long live Hungary!"), delaying the concert for nearly fifteen minutes.  In 1960 Szigeti officially retired from performing, and returned to Switzerland with his wife. There he devoted himself primarily to teaching, although he still traveled regularly to judge international violin competitions. Top-class students from all over Europe and the United States came to study under him. One of these students was [[Arnold Steinhardt]], who spent the summer of 1962 with Szigeti. He came to the conclusion that "Joseph Szigeti was a template for the musician I would like to become: inquisitive, innovative, sensitive, feeling, informed".  Toward the end of his life, Szigeti suffered from frail health. He was put on strict diets and had several stays in hospital, but his friends asserted that this did nothing to dampen his characteristic cheerfulness. He died in [[Lucerne]], Switzerland on February 19, 1973, at the age of 80. "The New York Times" ran a front-page obituary that ended with this 1966 quote from violinist [[Yehudi Menuhin]]: We must be humbly grateful that the breed of cultured and chivalrous violin virtuosos, aristocrats as human beings and as musicians, has survived into our hostile age in the person of Joseph Szigeti.

Family life.

In 1918, while teaching in Geneva, Szigeti met and fell in love with Wanda Ostrowska. She was born in Russia and had been stranded by the Russian Revolution of 1917 with her sister at a finishing school in Geneva. In 1919, Szigeti and Ostrowska decided to get married, but due to the turbulent political situation in Europe, many unexpected bureaucratic obstacles were thrown up in their path. The first problem was the impossibility of contacting Ostrowska's family, and the couple were forced to go ahead without parental consent, with the permission only of Ostrowska's sister and the headmistress of the finishing school. Further bureaucratic entanglements threatened the young couple's hopes, but eventually the officials responsible granted them a dispensation to marry. Szigeti recalls in his memoirs the words of Consul General Baron de Montlong at the critical moment: Let us not, if we can avoid it, fall victim to the dead letter of the law. I don't want to postpone the happiness of these two youngsters if we can help it. All laws have been twisted and tortured out of semblance of law, what with war and revolutions. For once let's twist and turn one for a good cause, yes?  Just before the birth of their only child, daughter Irene, Szigeti found himself stuck in Berlin during the [[Kapp Putsch]] of 1920, unable to return to Geneva. The entire city had been paralyzed by a general strike, and the trains were not running. His scheduled concert could not go on as planned, but he was forced to stay in Berlin for "interminable days" while the Putsch ran its course. Szigeti writes: "... the impossibility of communicating by phone or wire with my wife--whose condition I pictured with the somewhat lurid pessimism usual to young prospective fathers--was certainly a greater torment to me than all the other discomforts put together".  By 1940, the outbreak of [[World War II]] forced the Szigetis to leave Europe for the United States. (Irene remained in Switzerland, having married pianist [[Nikita Magaloff]] earlier that year.) They settled in California, where Wanda, always fond of nature, was delighted to be able to raise her own garden. In a letter to a friend, Szigeti describes their California life: Wanda is happy, doing wonders with her gardening, chicken and rabbit raising, preserve and pâté de foie making. She doesn't budge from our place, doesn't want to come back to New York even for a visit, which I, for one, can well understand! Two dogs, an aviary full of exotic birds, tomatoes, grapes, strawberries, asparagus, artichokes, lovely flowers (camellias too!), right in our own little world.  Szigeti narrowly escaped being killed in the plane crash that claimed the life of movie star [[Carole Lombard]] in January 1942. Szigeti, who was on his way to Los Angeles for a concert, was forced to give up his seat on [[TWA Flight 3]] at a refueling stop in Albuquerque, NM to allow the plane to take on 15 soldiers who, it being wartime, had priority. The plane, off course at night and with wartime blackout conditions in effect, crashed into a mountain cliff after take off from an intermediate stop in Las Vegas, killing everyone on board.  In 1960, the couple returned to Europe and settled near [[Lake Geneva]] in Switzerland, close to the home of their daughter and son-in-law. They remained there for the rest of their lives. Wanda died in 1971, predeceasing her husband by two years.

Reception.

Critics.

Writing in the "[[New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians]]", [[Boris Schwarz]] commented: Szigeti's performing technique was not always flawless and his tone lacked sensuous beauty, although it acquired a spiritual quality in moments of inspiration... Szigeti held the bow in an old-fashioned way, with the elbow close to the body, and produced much emphatic power, but not without extraneous sounds. Minor reservations, however, were swept aside by the force of his musical personality. This comment illustrates well the general nature of Szigeti's reception by both critics and fellow musicians: while his musical insights, intellect, and depth of interpretation were almost universally lauded, the purely technical aspect of his playing was awarded a more mixed reaction. His tone in particular seems to have been occasionally uneven from performance to performance. A 1926 recital review in "The New York Times," for example, laments that... his performance was stiff and dry in its observance of letter and its absence of spirit... Mr. Szigeti was not only inclined to dryness of tone and angularity of phrase, but there were also passages of poor intonation. In contrast, a review from the previous year in the same journal remarked after a performance of the Beethoven concerto that Mr. Szigeti has a rather small but beautiful tone, elegance, finish. He played with a quiet sincerity which grew upon the audience, though not with the virility and sweep that other violinists find... it is clear that Mr. Szigeti is a player to command esteem and respect for his musicianship, for the genuineness of his interpretations, and his artistic style.

Musicians.

Among his fellow musicians, Szigeti was widely admired and respected. Violinist [[Nathan Milstein]] wrote that Szigeti... was an incredibly cultured musician. Actually his talent grew out of his culture... I always admired him, and he was respected by musicians... in his late years, he finally got the appreciation he deserved from the general public as well. In his memoirs, published in 2004, cellist [[János Starker]] asserts that Szigeti was one of the giants among the violinists I had heard from childhood on, and my admiration for him is undiminished up to this day.  Starker then describes a recital he attended late in Szigeti's career, illustrating both the extent to which Szigeti was suffering from arthritis and his ability to still communicate his musical ideas effectively: "He invited me to his recital in Town Hall... the first few minutes were excruciating: as I saw later, his fingers had deteriorated to the point that he had almost no flesh on them. But once he loosened up a bit he produced heart-rending beauty.  Violinist [[Yehudi Menuhin]] comments at length about Szigeti in his own memoirs, remarking as many others did on Szigeti's intellectual approach to music, but in a somewhat more critical fashion: Apart from [[George Enescu|Enesco]], he was the most cultivated violinist I have ever known but while Enesco was a force of nature, Szigeti, slender, small, anxious, was a beautifully fashioned piece of porcelain, a priceless Sèvres vase. Curiously for a Hungarian, from whom one expects wild, energetic, spontaneous qualities, Szigeti travelled even farther up a one-way road of deliberate intellectualism. A young accompanist who worked with Szigeti told me that two hours concentration wouldn't get them beyond the first three bars of a sonata--so much analysis and ratiocination went into his practice... A similar persnicketiness marked his adjudication. Shortly before he died in 1973, he was a member of our jury at the City of London Carl Flesch Concours... I was struck not only by the sharpness of his intellect but also by what seemed to me the perversity of his opinions. Some particular aspect of a competitor's playing would hold his attention, and he would take violent issue with it, to the exclusion of everything else. For him a violinist was made or broken, a prize awarded or withheld, on details that to me scarcely mattered.  Nevertheless, Menuhin too referred to Szigeti as "a violinist whom I much admired and a man of whom I was very fond".

Legacy.

The writer.

During his time in America, Szigeti took to writing; his memoirs, "With Strings Attached: Reminiscences and Reflections" were published in 1947. "[[The New York Times]]" reviewed it favorably: although in their description the book was "constructed along utterly anarchistic lines, with each episode and anecdote left pretty much on its own", they asserted that "It also has the flavor of life in it, and it is marked by an exhilarating revolt against the custom of arranging catastrophes and triumphs under neat chapter headings".  In 1969, he published his treatise on violin playing, "Szigeti on the Violin". In it Szigeti presents his opinions about the then-current state of violin playing and the various challenges and issues facing musicians in the modern world, as well as a detailed examination of violin technique as he understood it.  A recurring theme in the first part is the changing nature of violinist's lives during Szigeti's later years. In his youth, concert artists relied primarily on recitals to establish themselves and attract critical attention and acclaim; by the time of Szigeti's writings, the recital had been eclipsed in importance by the competition. Szigeti was dismayed by this trend, especially since he considered the fast-paced and intense preparation necessary for high-level competitions to be "...incompatible with the slow maturing either of the performing artist or of the repertoire." Szigeti believed that such accelerated development of a musician led to performances that "lack(ed) the stamp of authenticity, the mark of a personal view evolved through trial and error." In a similar vein, he was skeptical of the effects produced by the recording industry on the culture of music-making. In Szigeti's opinion, the allure of the recording contract and the instant "success" that it implied led many young artists to record works before they were musically ready, and thus contributed to the problem of artificially fast development and resulting musical immaturity.  Szigeti also offers a lengthy and detailed explanation of his approach to violin technique. He believed that a violinist should be concerned primarily with musical goals, rather than simply choosing either the easiest or most impressively virtuosic way to play a certain passage. He was particularly concerned with [[timbre|tone color]]: he advised that "The player should cultivate a seismograph-like sensitivity to brusque changes of tone colour caused by fingerings based on expediency and comfort rather than the composer’s manifest or probable intentions." Other topics prominently discussed include the most effective position of a violinist's left hand, the violin works of [[Béla Bartók]], a cautionary list of widely accepted misprints and editorial inaccuracies in the standard repertoire, and most notably, the vital importance of [[J.S. Bach]]'s Six Sonatas and Partitas for any violinist's technical and artistic development.

New music.

Szigeti was an avid champion of new music, and frequently planned his recitals to include new or little-known works alongside the classics. Many composers wrote new works for him, notably [[Béla Bartók]], [[Ernest Bloch]], and [[Eugène Ysaÿe]], along with lesser-known composers such as [[David Diamond (composer)|David Diamond]] and [[Hamilton Harty]].  The reason for Szigeti's appeal to composers was articulated by Bloch upon completion of his Violin Concerto: the concerto's premiere would have to be delayed a full year for Szigeti to be the soloist, and Bloch agreed, saying that Modern composers realize that when Szigeti plays their music, their inmost fancy, their slightest intentions become fully realized, and their music is not exploited for the glorification of the artist and his technique, but that artist and technique become the humble servant of the music.  Szigeti was also the dedicatee of the first of [[Eugène Ysaÿe]]'s [[Six Sonatas for solo violin (Ysaÿe)|Six Sonatas for Solo Violin]]; in fact, Ysaÿe's inspiration to compose the sonatas came from hearing Szigeti's performances of [[Johann Sebastian Bach|J.S. Bach]]'s [[Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin (Bach)|Six Sonatas and Partitas]], to which they are intended as a modern counterpart.  Perhaps Szigeti's most fruitful musical partnership was with his friend Béla Bartók. The first piece Bartók dedicated to him was the [[Rhapsody No. 1 (Bartók)|First Rhapsody for violin and orchestra]] (or piano) of 1928; the rhapsody, based on both Romanian and Hungarian folk tunes, was one of a pair of violin rhapsodies written in 1928 (the other being dedicated to [[Zoltán Székely]].) In 1938, Szigeti and clarinetist [[Benny Goodman]] teamed up to commission a trio from Bartók: originally intended to be a short work just long enough to fill both sides of a 78 rpm record, the piece soon expanded beyond its modest intent and became the three-movement "[[Contrasts (Bartók)|Contrasts]]" for piano, violin and clarinet. In 1944, by which time Szigeti and Bartók had both fled to the United States to escape the war in Europe, Bartók's health was failing and he had sunk into depression. He was in dire need of money, but felt no inspiration to compose and was convinced that his works would never sell to an American audience. Szigeti came to his friend's aid by securing donations from the American Society of Composers and Publishers to pay for Bartók's medical treatment, and then, together with conductor and compatriot [[Fritz Reiner]], persuaded [[Serge Koussevitzky]] to commission from Bartók what eventually became his much-beloved [[Concerto for Orchestra (Bartók)|Concerto for Orchestra]]. The work's success brought Bartók some measure of financial security and provided him with a much-needed emotional boost.  As well as performing new works dedicated to him, Szigeti also championed the music of other contemporary composers, notably [[Sergei Prokofiev]] and [[Igor Stravinsky]]. He was among the first violinists to make Prokofiev's [[Violin Concerto No. 1 (Prokofiev)|First Violin Concerto]] a standard part of his repertoire, and frequently performed and recorded works of Stravinsky (including the Duo Concertante, recorded with the composer at the piano in 1945.) The [[Alban Berg|Berg]] [[Violin Concerto (Berg)|Violin Concerto]] he even recorded twice, under the baton of [[Dimitri Mitropoulos]]. Most famously, Szigeti recorded the Bloch concerto, a premier recording made in 1939 with the Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire conducted by Charles Munch (originally released on Columbia LP and reissued on Membran CD).  "Joseph Szigeti." Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians, Centennial Edition. Nicolas Slonimsky, Editor Emeritus. Schirmer, 2001.

External links.

[[Category:Hungarian classical violinists]] [[Category:Male violinists]] [[Category:Jewish classical violinists]] [[Category:Hungarian Jews]] [[Category:Musicians from Budapest]] [[Category:1892 births]] [[Category:1973 deaths]] [[Category:20th-century classical violinists]] [[Category:20th-century male musicians]]

[[File:Szigeti.png|thumb|Joseph Szigeti]] Joseph Szigeti (, ; 5 September 189219 February 1973) was a Hungarian [[violin]]ist. Joseph Szigeti (, ; 5 September 189219 February 1973) was a Hungarian [[violin]]ist.

Joseph Szigeti, né József Singer le à Budapest et mort le à Lucerne (Suisse), est un violoniste américain d'origine hongroise et juive, ardent défenseur de la musique de son temps.


History.

Commission.

After the success of an experimental classical-jazz concert held with the Canadian singer Éva Gauthier at Aeolian Hall in New York City on November 1, 1923, the bandleader Paul Whiteman decided to attempt something more ambitious. He asked George Gershwin to contribute a concerto-like piece for an all-jazz concert he would give in Aeolian Hall in February 1924. Whiteman became interested in featuring such an extended composition by Gershwin in the concert after he had collaborated with Gershwin in the "Scandals of 1922", impressed by the original performance of the one-act opera "Blue Monday", which was nevertheless a commercial failure. Gershwin declined on the grounds that, as there would certainly be need for revisions to the score, he would not have enough time to compose the new piece.  Late on the evening of January 3, at the Ambassador Billiard Parlor at Broadway and 52nd Street in Manhattan, while George Gershwin and Buddy De Sylva were playing billiards, his brother Ira Gershwin was reading the January 4 edition of the "New York Tribune". An article entitled "What Is American Music?" about the Whiteman concert caught his attention, in which the final paragraph claimed that "George Gershwin is at work on a jazz concerto, Irving Berlin is writing a syncopated tone poem, and Victor Herbert is working on an American suite."  In a phone call to Whiteman next morning, Gershwin was told that Whiteman's rival Vincent Lopez was planning to steal the idea of his experimental concert and there was no time to lose. Gershwin was finally persuaded to compose the piece.

Composition.

Since there were only five weeks left, Gershwin hastily set about composing a piece, and on the train journey to Boston, the ideas of "Rhapsody in Blue" came to his mind. He told his first biographer Isaac Goldberg in 1931:  Gershwin began his work on January 7 as dated on the original manuscript for two pianos. The piece was titled "American Rhapsody" during composition. The title "Rhapsody in Blue" was suggested by Ira Gershwin after his visit to a gallery exhibition of James McNeill Whistler paintings, which bear titles such as "" and "Arrangement in Grey and Black", better known as "Whistler's Mother". After a few weeks, Gershwin finished his composition and passed the score to Whiteman's arranger Ferde Grofé, who orchestrated the piece, finishing it on February 4, only eight days before the premiere.

Premiere.

"Rhapsody in Blue" premiered in an afternoon concert on Tuesday, February 12, 1924, held by Paul Whiteman and his band, the Palais Royal Orchestra, titled "An Experiment in Modern Music", which took place in Aeolian Hall in New York City. Many important and influential musicians of the time were present, including Sergei Rachmaninoff, Igor Stravinsky, Fritz Kreisler, Leopold Stokowski, John Philip Sousa, and Willie "the Lion" Smith. The event has since become historic specifically because of its premiere of the rhapsody.  The purpose of the experiment, as told by Whiteman in a pre-concert lecture in front of many classical music critics and highbrows, was "to be purely educational". It would "at least provide a stepping stone which will make it very simple for the masses to understand, and therefore, enjoy symphony and opera". The program was long, including 26 separate musical movements, divided into 2 parts and 11 sections, bearing titles such as "True form of jazz" and "Contrast: legitimate scoring vs. jazzing". Gershwin's latest composition was the second to last piece (before Elgar's "Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"). Many of the numbers sounded similar and the ventilation system in the concert hall was broken. People in the audience were losing their patience, until the clarinet glissando that opened "Rhapsody in Blue" was heard.  The rhapsody was performed by Whiteman's band, with an added section of string players, and George Gershwin on piano. Gershwin decided to keep his options open as to when Whiteman would bring in the orchestra and he did not write down one of the pages for solo piano, with only the words "Wait for nod" scrawled by Grofé on the band score. Gershwin improvised some of what he was playing, and he did not write out the piano part until "after" the performance, so it is unknown exactly how the original rhapsody sounded.  The opening clarinet glissando came into being during rehearsal when, "... as a joke on Gershwin, [Ross] Gorman (Whiteman's virtuoso clarinettist) played the opening measure with a noticeable glissando, adding what he considered a humorous touch to the passage. Reacting favourably to Gorman's whimsy, Gershwin asked him to perform the opening measure that way at the concert and to add as much of a 'wail' as possible."  The first British performance of "Rhapsody in Blue" took place at the Savoy Hotel in London on 15 June 1925. It was broadcast in a live relay by the BBC. Debroy Somers conducted the Savoy Orpheans with Gershwin himself at the piano. The piece was heard again in the UK during the second European tour of the Paul Whiteman Orchestra, most notably on 11 April 1926 at the Royal Albert Hall, with Gershwin in the audience. The concert was recorded (though not issued) by HMV.

Responses.

By the end of 1927, Whiteman's band had played "Rhapsody in Blue" 84 times, and its recording sold a million copies. To get the whole piece onto two sides of a 12-inch record it had to be played at a faster speed than usual in a concert, which gave it a hurried feel and some rubato was lost. Whiteman later adopted the piece as his band's theme song and opened his radio programs with the slogan "Everything new but the "Rhapsody in Blue"."  The piece received mixed reviews from mainstream critics. Olin Downes, reviewing the concert in "The New York Times": Another reviewer, Lawrence Gilman, a Richard Wagner specialist who later wrote a devastating review of Gershwin's "Porgy and Bess", commenting on the rhapsody in the "New York Tribune" on February 13, 1924, said: Some critics described the piece as formless, and claimed that Gershwin only glued his melodic segments together into one piece. Pitts Sanborn wrote that the music "runs off into empty passage-work and meaningless repetition". In an article in "The Atlantic Monthly" in 1955, Leonard Bernstein, who nevertheless admitted that he loved the piece, wrote:

Orchestration.

Gershwin had agreed that Ferde Grofé, Whiteman's pianist and chief arranger, was the key figure in enabling the piece to be successful, and critics have praised the orchestral color. Grofé confirmed in 1938 that Gershwin did not have sufficient knowledge of orchestration in 1924. After the premiere, Grofé revised the score and made new orchestrations in 1926 and 1942, each time for larger orchestras. Until 1976, when Michael Tilson Thomas recorded the original jazz band version for the very first time, the 1942 version was the arrangement usually performed and recorded.  The 1924 orchestration was developed for solo piano and Whiteman's band, which consists of three woodwind players doubling one oboe, one clarinet, one sopranino saxophone in E, two soprano saxophones in B, two alto saxophones in E, one tenor saxophone in B, one baritone saxophone in E; two trumpets in B, two French horns in F, two trombones, and one tuba (doubling on double bass); a percussion section that includes a drum set, timpani, and a glockenspiel; one piano; one tenor banjo; and violins.  Grofé's familiarity with the Whiteman band's strengths is a key factor in the scoring. This original version, with its unique instrumental requirements, had lain dormant until its revival in reconstructions beginning in the mid-1980s, owing to the popularity and serviceability of the later scorings, described below.  An arrangement for theatre orchestra, also prepared by Grofé, was published in 1926. It is an adaptation of the original for a more standard "pit" orchestra, which includes one flute, one oboe, two clarinets, one bassoon, three saxophones; two French horns, two trumpets, and two trombones; as well as the same percussion and strings complement as the later 1942 version.  The orchestration published in 1942 for full symphony orchestra is scored for solo piano and an orchestra consisting of two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets in B and A, one bass clarinet, two bassoons, two alto saxophones in E, one tenor saxophone in B; three French horns in F, three trumpets in B, three trombones, one tuba; a percussion section that includes timpani, one suspended cymbal, one snare drum, one bass drum, one tam-tam, one triangle, Glockenspiel, and cymbals; one tenor banjo; and strings.  Grofe's other settings of the piece include those done for Whiteman's 1930 film, "King of Jazz", and the concert band setting (playable without piano) completed by 1938 (published 1942).  The prominence of the saxophones in the later orchestrations is somewhat reduced, and the banjo part can be dispensed with, as its mainly rhythmic contribution is provided by the inner strings.  Gershwin also made versions of the piece for solo piano as well as two pianos. The solo version is notable for omitting several sections of the piece.  Gershwin's intent to eventually do an orchestration of his own is documented in 1936–37 correspondence from publisher Harms ("reissuance of "The Rhapsody in Blue" re-scored by yourself for large symphony orchestra").

Recordings.

Two recordings exist of Gershwin performing an abridged version of the work with Whiteman's orchestra: an acoustic recording made for the Victor Talking Machine Company on June 10, 1924, and running 8 minutes and 59 seconds (this recording includes the original clarinetist, Ross Gorman, playing the glissando) and a Victor electrical recording made April 21, 1927, running 9 minutes and 1 second (about half the length of the complete work). This 1927 version was also dubbed onto an RCA Victor -rpm Program Transcription in 1932. The latter version was actually conducted by Nathaniel Shilkret after an argument between Gershwin and Whiteman. A 1925 piano roll captured Gershwin's performance in a two-piano version. Whiteman's orchestra also performed a shortened version of the piece in the 1930 film "The King of Jazz" featuring Roy Bargy on piano. Whiteman re-recorded the piece for Decca on a 12-inch 78 rpm disc (29051) recorded on October 23, 1938. The first complete recording, with pianist Jesús María Sanromá and Arthur Fiedler conducting the Boston Pops Orchestra, was issued by RCA Victor in 1935.  Since the mid-20th century, the 1942 version has usually been performed by classical orchestras playing the expanded arrangement. In this form, it has become a staple of the concert repertoire. It has direct popular appeal while also being regarded respectfully by classical musicians.  On August 21, 1945, a recording by Oscar Levant with the Philadelphia Orchestra (conducted by Eugene Ormandy) entered at its peak position of number 23 on the Cash Box survey (Columbia Masterworks 251).  In 1973, the piece was recorded by jazz-rock artist Eumir Deodato on his album "Deodato 2". The single reached Billboard peak positions number 41 Pop, number 10 Easy Listening. A disco arrangement was recorded by French pianist Richard Clayderman in 1978 and is one of his signature pieces.  In the late 1970s, interest in the original arrangement was revived. On February 14, 1973, it received its first performance since the 1920s: Kenneth Kiesler secured needed permissions and led with work with pianist Paul Verrette on his University of New Hampshire campus. Reconstructions of it have been recorded by Michael Tilson Thomas and the Columbia Jazz Band in 1976, and by Maurice Peress with Ivan Davis on piano as part of a 60th-anniversary reconstruction of the entire 1924 concert. André Watts (1976), Marco Fumo (1974), and Sara Davis Buechner (2005) released recordings of the work for solo piano as did Eric Himy (2004) in a version that featured the uncut original short score. Meanwhile, such two-piano teams as José Iturbi and Amparo Iturbi, France Veri and Michael Jamanis, and Katia and Marielle Labèque, also recorded the piece. Michel Camilo recorded the piece in 2006, winning a Latin Grammy award.

Analysis.

Paul Whiteman asked Gershwin to write a "jazz concerto", which became the "Rhapsody in Blue"; like a concerto, the piece is written for solo piano with orchestra: a rhapsody differs from a concerto in that it features one extended movement instead of separate movements. Rhapsodies often incorporate passages of an improvisatory nature (although written out in a score), and are irregular in form, with heightened contrasts and emotional exuberance; Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" is typical in that it certainly has large contrasts in musical texture, style, and color. The music ranges from intensely rhythmic piano solos to slow, broad, and richly orchestrated sections.  The opening of "Rhapsody in Blue" is written as a clarinet trill followed by a legato, 17 notes in a diatonic scale. During a rehearsal, Whiteman's virtuoso clarinetist, Ross Gorman, rendered the upper portion of the scale as a captivating (and fully trombone-like) glissando: Gershwin heard it and insisted that it be repeated in the performance. An "American Heritage" columnist called it the "famous opening clarinet glissando... that has become as familiar as the start of Beethoven's Fifth". The effect is produced primarily using the tongue and throat muscles to change the resonance of the oral cavity, thus controlling the continuously rising pitch. Many players also gradually open the left-hand tone-holes on the clarinet during the passage from the last concert F (or earlier if possible, thus employing the right hand as well) to the top concert B as well. This effect has now become standard performance practice for the work.  "Rhapsody in Blue" displays both rhythmic invention and melodic inspiration, and demonstrates Gershwin's ability to write a piece with large-scale harmonic and melodic structure. The piece is characterized by strong motivic interrelatedness. Much of the motivic material is introduced in the first 14 measures. David Schiff identifies five major themes plus a sixth "tag". Of these, two appear in the first 14 measures, and the tag shows up in measure 19. Two of the remaining three themes are rhythmically related to the very first theme in measure 2, which is sometimes called the Glissando theme (after the opening glissando in the clarinet solo) or the Ritornello theme. The remaining theme is the Train theme, which is the first to appear (at rehearsal 9) after the opening material. All of the themes rely on the blues scale, which includes lowered sevenths and a mixture of major and minor thirds. Each theme appears both in orchestrated form and as a piano solo. There are considerable differences in the style of presentation of each theme.  The harmonic structure of the rhapsody is more difficult to analyze. The piece begins and ends in B major, but it modulates towards the sub-dominant direction very early on, returning to B major at the end, rather abruptly. The opening modulates "downward", as it were, through the keys B, E, A, D, G, B, E, and finally to A major. Modulation through the circle of fifths in the reverse direction inverts classical tonal relationships, but does not abandon them. The entire middle section resides primarily in C major, with forays into G major (the dominant relation). Modulations occur freely and easily, though not always with harmonic direction. Gershwin frequently uses a recursive harmonic progression of minor thirds to give the illusion of motion when in fact a passage does not change key from beginning to end. Modulation by thirds was a common element of Tin Pan Alley music.  The influences of jazz and other contemporary styles are certainly present in "Rhapsody in Blue". Ragtime rhythms are abundant, as is the Cuban "clave" rhythm, which doubles as a dance rhythm in the Charleston jazz dance.  Gershwin's own intentions were to correct the belief that jazz had to be played strictly in time so that one could dance to it. The rhapsody's tempos vary widely, and there is an almost extreme use of rubato in many places throughout. The clearest influence of jazz is the use of blue notes, and the exploration of their half-step relationship plays a key role in the rhapsody. The use of so-called "vernacular" instruments, such as accordion, banjo, and saxophones in the orchestra, contribute to its jazz or popular style, and the latter two of these instruments have remained part of Grofé's "standard" orchestra scoring. Gershwin incorporated several different piano styles into the work. He utilized the techniques of stride piano, novelty piano, comic piano, and the song-plugger piano style. Stride piano's rhythmic and improvisational style is evident in the "agitato e misterioso" section, which begins four bars after rehearsal 33, as well as in other sections, many of which include the orchestra. Novelty piano can be heard at rehearsal 9 with the revelation of the Train theme. The hesitations and light-hearted style of comic piano, a vaudeville approach to piano made well known by Chico Marx and Jimmy Durante, are evident at rehearsal 22.

Legacy and influence.

As early as 1955, "Rhapsody in Blue" served as the inspiration for a composition by the noted accordionist/composer John Serry Sr. which was subsequently published in 1957 (see "American Rhapsody").  "Rhapsody in Blue" has been interpreted as a musical portrait of New York City; it is used in this context in a segment from the film "Fantasia 2000", in which the piece is used as the lyrical framing for a stylized animation set drawn in the style of famed illustrator Al Hirschfeld. It was also used in the opening sequence of Woody Allen's 1979 film "Manhattan".  Brian Wilson, leader of The Beach Boys, has said on several occasions that "Rhapsody in Blue" is one of his favorite pieces. He first heard it when he was two years old, and recalls that he "loved" it. It was also a heavy influence on his "Smile" album. He also came to think of "Good Vibrations" as "a smaller, psychedelic version of "Rhapsody in Blue"".  "Rhapsody in Blue" was played simultaneously by 84 pianists at the opening ceremony of the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. The piece appears briefly towards the end of the 2000 Danish film "Flickering Lights". Herbie Hancock and Lang Lang performed "Rhapsody in Blue" at the 50th Grammy Awards on February 10, 2008. Since 1980, the piece is used by United Airlines in their advertisements, in pre-flight safety videos, and in the Terminal 1 underground walkway at O'Hare International Airport.  "Rhapsody in Blue" inspired a collaboration between blind savant British pianist Derek Paravicini and composer Matthew King on a new concerto, called "Blue" premiered at the South Bank Centre in London in 2011. "Rhapsody in Blue" was used to dramatically introduce the first appearance of Jay Gatsby in the 2013 film "The Great Gatsby".

Preservation status.

On September 22, 2013, it was announced that a musicological critical edition of the full orchestral score will be eventually released. The Gershwin family, working in conjunction with the Library of Congress and the University of Michigan, are working to make these scores available to the public. Though the entire Gershwin project may take 30 to 40 years to complete, the "Rhapsody in Blue" edition will be an early volume.  "Rhapsody in Blue" entered the public domain on January 1, 2020, although individual recordings of it may remain under copyright.

Rhapsody in Blue is a 1924 musical composition by the American composer George Gershwin for solo piano and jazz band, which combines elements of classical music with jazz-influenced effects.

Rhapsody in Blue est une œuvre pour piano et orchestre ou harmonie composée par George Gershwin en 1924, qui combine des éléments de musique classique et de jazz.


Military education under the Ancien Régime.

Born and raised at Fort-Dauphin, Saint-Domingue (now Fort-Liberté, Haiti), into an aristocratic family from Bourgogne, he was the eldest son of Vivant-François Viénot de Vaublanc, commanding officer of Fort Saint-Louis in Fort-Dauphin. He saw Metropolitan France for the first time at the age of seven.  After military education at the "Prytanée National Militaire" in La Flèche, and at the "École Militaire" in Paris from 1770 to 1774, he was decorated with the Order of Saint Lazarus (before he had even set foot outside the school) by the Comte de Provence, the future Louis XVIII, Grand Master of

Political career during the French Revolution.

Convocation of the French States-General (1789–1791).

Seduced at first by the new ideas of the Revolution, he threw himself into a political career by becoming an aristocratic member of the "bailliage" of Melun in 1789. He was elected secretary of this assembly, under its president M. de Gouy d'Arcy, "grand bailli" of Melun, a fellow member of the famous explorer Louis Antoine

Losing ground to the Jacobins under the Legislative Assembly (1791).

After the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, the electoral colleges reconvened to elect new deputies. Vaublanc was elected president of that of Seine-et-Marne. On 1 September 1791, he was elected deputy of Seine-et-Marne at the

A leader of the Club des Feuillants (1791–1792).

From this point on, he took the name of Viénot-Vaublanc, which he retained until the end of the First Empire in 1814.  From the very moment of his appearance, he made himself conspicuous by delivering a speech which denounced the humiliating terms on which Louis XVI was to be received by the Assembly the next day. As a result of these statements, he was elected president from 15 November to 28 November 1791 by the assembly, the majority of whom were royalist.  On 29 November, Vaublanc was assigned the task of composing a message to the King, asking him to withdraw his veto of the decree of 9 November, a decree designed to slow the massive emigrations (then encouraged by the priests and the nobility) by threatening reprisals against German princes who continued to offer refuge to the armies of French noblemen (such as those of the Comte d'Artois, and of the Prince of Condé). The assembly was so pleased with his work that they asked him to read it to the

The fall of the monarchy (1792).

In 1792, he defended the Comte de Rochambeau before the Assembly and obtained his acquittal. Following the majority of the Assembly who sought to abolish slavery in the Antilles, he nevertheless took aim in a speech of 20 March at those hardline abolitionists like Brissot who knew little of life in the colonies and of the risks of civil war given the diversity of ethnicities and social conflicts in Saint-Domingue. He supported the law of 4 April 1792 which granted citizenship to all "coloured men and free Negroes". At the meeting of 10 April, he declared himself in favour of the progressive abolition of the

The defence of La Fayette.

Following the events of 20 June 1792, La Fayette arrived in Paris on 28 June, hoping to convince the King to leave in order to head the armies assembled in the north. At the head of the National Guard, he tried to close down the political "clubs", but his attempt failed, partly because of the Court's refusal to support him. In reaction to this, the left wing of the Assembly decided to charge Lafayette with treason.  On 8 August 1792, ill at ease and shocked by the course of events, Vaublanc delivered a speech before the Assembly, in which he defended, vigorously, and courageously, against the lively opposition of the Jacobins who dominated the Assembly and of the man in the street, General La Fayette, who stood accused

August 10.

On 10 August 1792, the day that marked the downfall of the Legislative Assembly and the Monarchy at the hands of the Paris Commune, he witnessed from his carriage the toppling of the statue of Louis XIV in what is now the Place Vendôme. He enjoined the Assembly to leave Paris for royalist Rouen to escape the revolutionary pressures, and he avoided an assassination attempt when he was narrowly saved from a sabre cut by a young officer of genius, Captain Louis Bertrand de Sivray, who was to make a name for himself as general.  He was one of the eyewitnesses of the arrival of the Royal Family, who, after the March on the Tuileries, placed themselves under the protection of the Legislative Assembly at the "Place du Carrousel". The incident is described in his memoirs.

Exiled during the Convention and the Reign of Terror (1792–1795).

The second volume of his memoirs provides insight into the general atmosphere at the time of the Terror, as felt by an aristocratic royalist, who was at risk of being arrested at any moment and finishing up on the scaffold, and yet forced to travel back and forth over the territory of the brand new French Republic.  On the evening of 10 August he was obliged to take refuge at the home of Armand-Gaston Camus, the Assembly's archivist. Several days later he moved to the Hotel Strasbourg, on the rue Neuve Saint Eustache. On 3 September 1792, hearing a commotion in the courtyard, he thought himself betrayed; but it was in fact the passage of a rabble brandishing the head of the Princesse de Lamballe on a pole.  The Committee of Public Safety, newly established, published a decree in which it was revealed that he was on the list of outlaws drawn up by the Municipality of Paris. This forced him to leave the city, first for Normandy, where he reunited with his family, then for his country house at Bélombres near Melun. He lived in hiding

A counterrevolutionary activist under the Directory (1795–1799).

On his return to Paris in the spring of 1795, he published his "Reflections on the foundations of a constitution" ("Réflexions sur les bases d'une constitution"), under the pseudonym of L.-P. de Ségur, tabled by his friend Bresson, then a deputy at the National Convention. In this work, he advocated the creation of two parliamentary chambers instead of one (as was the case under the Convention), in the belief that having only one chamber had been one of the causes of the Terror. He also advocated the installation of a single person as head of the Executive, for the sake of efficiency, as opposed to the Directory's five.  After the appearance of this book, the committee entrusted with the drawing up of the Constitution of Year III (comprising Daunou and François-Antoine de Boissy d'Anglas) invited him to elaborate on his theories, but he refused. His ideas were nevertheless

Under Napoleon.

The coup d'état of 18 Brumaire VIII (10 November 1799), and the accession to power of the "Consulat", which gave amnesty to the proscribed, permitted him to return to France, where he was presented to Bonaparte.

Deputy to the Corps législatif (1800–1805).

In 1800, Vaublanc was elected by the conservative Senate to be deputy for Calvados, one of 300 members of the Legislature ("Corps législatif"), and to fulfil the duties of "questeur" for a five-year term. Among those duties was that of issuing regular reports on the Consulate for the rest of his life.  The admiration and respect which he felt towards Napoleon for having "reestablished order in France and put an end to the persecution of priests" can be seen in several of his speeches at this time: for example

Prefect of Moselle (1805–1814).

At the end of his term as deputy, in 1805 the electoral college of Seine-et-Marne put him up as a candidate for the Senate, but he was not retained. Interested by the administrative and territorial reorganisations that were taking place, he managed to obtain a prefecture, and on 1 February 1805 at Metz he was named "préfet de la Moselle" (prefect or chief administrator of the département of Moselle). He became known for his activism and for his habit of roaming his département on horseback and not by stagecoach as was customary

Under Louis XVIII.

For the First Restoration and against the Hundred Days (1814–1815).

Maintained as Prefect of Moselle after the First Restoration, he was made an "officier" of the Legion of Honour on 23 August 1814. After the return of Napoleon he kept Metz loyal to Louis XVIII and, with Marshal Oudinot, the military governor of Metz, he attempted to hinder any Bonapartist rallies. An "ordre d'arrestation", published by Marshal Davout in "Le Moniteur Universel", forced him to flee towards Luxembourg, joining Louis XVIII at Ghent.  It is said that, on meeting the officer assigned to arrest him, he said: "Do not worry about me. Better worry about your own self; no-one must see you leaving by the large courtyard", and led

Ultra-royalist Minister of the Interior (1815–1816).

Wishing to live down his Bonapartist past, he became known as one of the most fervent leaders of the party of "Ultras", even going so far (while Minister of the Interior) as to remove the letter N from the bridges of Paris.  On 26 September 1815, thanks largely to the support of his friend the Comte d'Artois, the King named him Minister of the Interior and of Public Instruction. The new President of the Council, the Duc de Richelieu, who had been forced to nominate him, had a ruling on his nomination suspended, but he was not quick enough and on hearing the good news Vaublanc wasted no time in establishing himself firmly in his new ministry.  This nomination demonstrates the influence that the Comte d'Artois exercised over the governments of his brother. He kept a rival court at the Marsan Pavilion and sought to restore Absolutism by rolling back the innovations that had been ushered in by the Revolution.  Rudolf von Thadden, a contemporary German historian, summed up the comments of Martignac on 2 April 1829 by saying that his nomination was due more to his background than to his talents.

Breathless devotion.

Vaublanc, at the head of his ministry, engaged immediately in Counter-Revolutionary activity that was so frenetic that even the King was to be describe it as "breathless devotion". On the tabling by the Keeper of the Seals of a law that would reestablish "cours prévôtales" or "special courts" before the Chamber of Deputies (nicknamed the "Chambre introuvable"), Vaublanc shouted out: "France wants its King!" To great applause, both the deputies and the public gallery rose to their feet and repeated "Yes, France

Fall from grace.

In his capacity as Minister of the Interior, he had to draft a new electoral law. Vaublanc proposed, without much enthusiasm (and with the precedent of Article 37 from the Charter of 1814), an annual re-election of one fifth of the Chamber according to a two-tier system aimed at keeping the Chamber in Royalist hands. This proposal was rejected by the Chamber of Deputies, on 3 April 1816, by 89 votes to 57. Hoping to stay in power as long as possible, the Chamber tabled a counter-proposal involving a general election every five years, which in turn was rejected by the Government. As a result of the impasse, France briefly had no electoral law.  On 10 April 1816, to a full house, the Police Minister Decazes heckled him: "You are nothing more than the Minister of the Comte d'Artois and you want to be more powerful than the Ministers of the King!" Vaublanc responded scathingly: "If I were more powerful than you, I would make full use of those powers to have you charged with high treason for you are, M. Decazes, indeed a traitor both

Deputy of the chamber (1820–1827) and afterwards.

On 13 November 1820 he was elected to the Chamber as deputy for Calvados. He was re-elected on 10 October 1821, became a vice-president of the Chamber during the 1822 session, was re-elected again on 6 March 1824, but lost in 1827.  He was at the same time selected to be deputy for Guadeloupe, where he was the co-proprietor of a sugar plantation in the parish of Basse-terre. In this capacity he recommended several changes in the judiciary and in the administration of the colonies, including the construction of storehouses.  With two of his colleagues in the chamber, Comte de la Breteche and Baron de Vitrolles, he oversaw some ultra-royalist periodicals, starting with "La Quotidienne" and "Le Drapeau Blanc".  In January 1823, he came out in favour of the Spanish Expedition, and was named a member of the board of inquiry, presided over by Marshal Macdonald.  He had just been reappointed to the State Council (on 25 July) with the written promise of a peerage, when the statues of July 1830 deposed Charles X. He retired from public life after the accession of Louis-Philippe and worked on his memoirs until his sight failed. He died at the age of eighty-nine, on 21 August 1845, in Paris at his house on the rue du Bac.

Vincent-Marie Viénot de Vaublanc baron of the Empire as known as "count de Vaublanc"'(2 March 1756 – 21 August 1845) was a French royalist politician, writer and artist. He was a deputy for the Seine-et-Marne "" in the French Legislative Assembly, served as President of the same body, and from 26 September 1815 to 7 May 1816, he was the French Minister of the Interior.

Vincent-Marie Viénot de Vaublanc, dit le comte de Vaublanc, baron de l'Empire (né le à Fort-Dauphin à Saint-Domingue, aujourd’hui Fort-Liberté, à Haïti, et mort le à Paris), est un homme politique, écrivain français, catholique et de tendance royaliste.