At the beginning of the 1820s, a man in his seventies, with clear senile dementia, proclaimed from the rooftops that he had poisoned Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart many years before. This poor old man was none other than the composer Antonio Salieri (1750-1825) who, with his words, only spurred the legend (increasingly widespread) that between him and his colleague there had always existed a fierce rivalry.
In fact, rumors of the alleged poisoning were spreading in Vienna long before the Italian composer’s controversial statements. Shortly before dying, and feeling very bad, Mozart had confessed to his wife that he believed he was being poisoned. And later, once the Austrian had died, rumors spread that they had finished him off by tofana wateran original poison from Naples, which aimed directly at Salieri and his clique…
What is true in all of this? Can we consider as true the statement of a senile Salieri who, in a moment of lucidity, firmly retracted his words? Were Mozart and Salieri really enemies? In today’s article, we trace possible clues about this alleged rivalry and analyze whether the legend of the poisoning of the Austrian composer has any real basis.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Antonio Salieri: irreconcilable enemies?
In the final decades of the 20th century, the rumor acquired notable dimensions with the premiere, first, of the play Amadeusby the playwright Peter Shaffer, and, second, with the film version that Milos Forman made in 1984. In the film we had a splendid F. Murray Abraham in the role of Antonio Salieri and an excellent Tom Hulce as WA Mozart . After watching the film, many had no doubt about the existence of a bitter rivalry between both composers.; although, in this case, the one who felt an obsessive animosity was the Italian.
Not only this. Although no poisoning appears in the film, it does show how Salieri, maddened by jealousy, commissions Mozart to write his famous Requiemunder an anonymous identity, so that the composer dies of pure exhaustion. Very romantic and turbulent.
But is there any truth to this story, beyond mere plot appeal? Currently, historians believe that the enmity that the legend proclaims and materializes in the film never existed, although it is true that there may have been some occasional friction between the two musicians, which was not at all strange in a world where the competition was very tough. Of course, what is categorically ruled out is the murder hoax. But let’s take a closer look at each aspect and come to our own conclusions.
In Forman’s film it is implied that Salieri is jealous of his colleague’s greater talent and that Mozart becomes more famous than him at times. The reality was quite different.
In 18th century Vienna, Antonio Salieri was the musician par excellence coveted by the aristocracy and monarchy and, probably, the best paid. Born in 1750 in Legnago, in the Veneto region, he was six years older than Mozart and had been the first to achieve public recognition; especially, with his famous opera Armida (1771), which had tremendous success. In fact, the Italian was named director of the Italian opera in Vienna and master of the Habsburg imperial chapel, which was an indisputable honor (and tremendous fees, it must be said).
Is it possible that such a famous and applauded musician, who could afford a good life, could be jealous of that boy who was still taking his first steps in the imperial city?
Let us remember that Mozart came from Salzburg, where he had fled from the tyrannical oppression exercised over him (and his art) by Archbishop Hyeronimus von Colloredo (1732-1812). Mozart was not precisely characterized by having a submissive and peaceful character, and, furthermore, his relations with the Church were always strained. He soon rebelled against the overly stifling authority of his patron and attempted to try his luck, alone, in imperial Vienna.
That is to say, that While Antonio Salieri was already a renowned composer, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart fought tooth and nail to gain a foothold. among the list of musicians who roamed the city and competed for positions as teachers of the sons and daughters of the wealthy families of the nobility.
A documented mutual admiration
Milos Forman’s film also features an exultant Salieri whom everyone praises. On the other hand, Mozart becomes poorer as he loses the favor of the emperor and the elite, ending up dying in poverty. However, Amadeus’s Salieri is fully aware of the creative superiority of his colleague; He knows, with his innate musical instinct, that Mozart is a misunderstood genius who, in time, will far surpass him.
This is the explanation for the corrosive jealousy that the Italian feels towards the Austrian. A jealousy so aggressive that it leads him to conceive a sadistic plan to end what he considers his rival, the only one capable of overshadowing him. In fact, at several points in the film, Salieri acknowledges his mediocrity while praising the genius of his enemy.
But let’s get back to the facts again. What relationship exactly did these two characters have, in light of historical testimonies? His contemporaries insist that Salieri never showed signs of envy towards Mozart, quite the opposite. These testimonies even mention that, on the night of the premiere of The Magic FluteSalieri was more than delighted with the opera and stood up on several occasions to applaud and shout: “Bello, bello…!” His enthusiasm for what was to be Wolfgang’s last opera was, therefore, more than evident.
In truth, and as Isabel Margarit and Ana Echeverría maintain in their magnificent analysis of the relationship between both artists, This does not seem like an attitude typical of someone consumed by jealousy. On the other hand, it is known that both composers collaborated on some occasions, as many musicians of the time used to do (Mozart composed several pieces for Caterina Cavalieri, a soprano who loved Salieri), which gives us to understand that, in principle, Mozart did not either. He ignored his partner’s musical talent.
A musical tug of war
However, and to be objective, we must note that there were some tensions between the two. Some friction that, on the other hand, was not unusual in the musical troupe based in Vienna, where the competition was very high. We know, for example, that, on one occasion, Salieri “took” the position of music teacher from the Princess of Württemberg from her colleague. But, to be fair, we must add that Mozart did not like teaching at all, since he lacked patience with his disciples; a profession that, on the other hand, Salieri enjoyed and in which he was also extraordinarily good.
In 1786, the premiere of The Marriage of Figarowhich would be one of the Salzburg composer’s most famous operas, received very bad reviews and little success with the public. Leopold Mozart, Wolfgang’s father, accused the Italian musicians of Vienna, led by Salieri, of having carried out a full-fledged boycott against the work of his son. However, this does not seem very likely, since, at the time of the premiere, Salieri was not in Vienna, or even in Austria.
The enigmatic Requiem
And we finally arrive at the enigmatic commission of the Requiem, which, in truth, was not enigmatic at all. It is true that the person who requested the work from Mozart did not give his name at first, but it was not, at all, Antonio Salieri, but rather an aristocrat (Franz von Walsegg), an opportunist and amateur musician who wanted to make pass the Requiem as his own. In any case, the strangeness of the order only fueled the legend.
The story is complicated by the statements of Constanze, Mozart’s wife, who stated that, during a walk through the Prater (when the composer had a few weeks to live) her husband confessed to her that I believed I was being poisoned. Constanze maintained this version until the end of her days (as did her second husband, Georg Nikolaus von Nissen), which did nothing to help clarify her facts.
Had Mozart really been poisoned? Or was it simply the composer’s paranoia, disturbed by exhaustion and illness? Did Constanze invent the Prater scene…? In reality, the mystery is more difficult to clarify due to the impossibility of knowing what exactly the musician died of. His death certificate states that death was caused by “acute miliary fever,” but the symptoms described by those closest to him point to several possibilities.
His son Karl stated that, in the days before his death, he was tremendously swollen, and one of his biographers (precisely, the one who would be his wife’s second husband) stated that he could barely move and was a victim of a lot of vomiting. The malaise had already overtaken him in Prague, at the end of the summer of 1791. From then on, his condition only worsened, with brief episodes of apparent recovery. Mozart continued working, especially on the famous Requiem. According to some witnesses, on the eve of his death she was rehearsing some passages in his Vienna home.
Had Mozart been poisoned? No historian accepts this theory today. Since the composer’s health had never been optimal (he had suffered from countless illnesses since childhood), Scholars believe that death could have been a consequence of some illness that he had had since childhood, such as, for example, acute rheumatic fever. However, there is still (nor does it seem that there ever will be) anything clear.
In any case, it was not Antonio Salieri who killed Mozart with poison. Nor was he the one who commissioned the Requiem that, according to Forman’s film, took him to his grave. Nor, of course, do there seem to be any serious signs of a serious enmity, beyond certain residual frictions. The legend was forged after the death of the Austrian, and was encouraged, already in the midst of Romanticism, by artists such as Aleksander Pushkin (1799-1837), who wrote a play about the supposed rivalry of the two composers.
I’m Emily Williams Jones, a psychologist specializing in mental health with a focus on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and mindfulness. With a Ph.D. in psychology, my career has spanned research, clinical practice and private counseling. I’m dedicated to helping individuals overcome anxiety, depression and trauma by offering a personalized, evidence-based approach that combines the latest research with compassionate care.
