Remembering César Franck’s Organ Class at the Paris Conservatory: His Impassioned Quest for Artistic Beauty, Part 2

Carolyn Shuster Fournier

 A French-American organist and musicologist, Carolyn Shuster Fournier studied piano and violin before taking organ lessons at the age of thirteen with Gary Zwicky. After obtaining her bachelor’s degree from Wheaton College Conservatory, Wheaton, Illinois, with Gladys Christensen, and a master’s degree from New England Conservatory, Boston, Massachusetts, with Yuko Hayashi, she continued her organ studies in Paris with Marie-Claire Alain, André Isoir, and Michel Chapuis. During the summers of 1976 and 1977, she studied organ with Wolfgang Rübsam at Northwestern University. She received Premiers Prix in organ at the conservatories in Rueil-Malmaison and Boulogne-Billancourt, a master’s degree in music education with highest distinction at the Sorbonne in Paris, and a Ph.D. in musicology with honors at Tours University for her doctoral thesis on Aristide Cavaillé-Coll’s secular organs. Organist at the American Cathedral in 1988 and 1989, she was then appointed titular of the Cavaillé-Coll choir organ at the Church of the Holy Trinity, where she founded a weekly noontime concert series. After thirty-three years of faithful service, she was named Honorary Choir Organist.

An international concert organist, in 2007 the French Cultural Minister awarded Shuster Fournier the distinction of Knight in the Order of Arts and Letters. In 2022 Delatour France Editions published the English translation she made with Connie Glessner of Helga Schauerte’s book, Jehan Alain, Understanding His Musical Genius. She has made recordings and contributed to specialized reviews and to Fugue State Films Documentaries.

César Franck: a worthy heir to François Benoist and Alexis Chauvet in promoting Johann Sebastian Bach’s organ works

César Franck (1822–1890) taught organ at the Paris Conservatory for eighteen years, from 1872 to 1890. François Benoist preceded him as organ professor from 1819 to 1872, and Charles-Marie Widor succeeded him from 1890 to 1896. What were the circumstances that led to Franck’s nomination to this institution sponsored by the French government? Who were his students? What were his pedagogical principles? How did they differ from those of his successor? Did he leave a legacy?

Much is known about the life of this child prodigy whose authoritarian father, Nicolas Joseph Franck (1794–1871), a modest bank employee and an amateur musician, had exploited his talents and those of his younger brother Joseph (1825–1891) after their musical education at the Royal School of Music in Liège, Belgium.¹ It is certainly thanks to Pauline García that César Franck came to Paris to study privately with her professor, Anton Reicha.² They met in Brussels on April 25, 1835. She highly appreciated his agile and energetic musicianship when accompanying her sister Maria Malibran. From June 24, 1835, to May 11, 1836,³ like Pauline García, Franck embraced Reicha’s free spirit, his vast Germanic cultural outlook, his interest in the writings of Kant and Aristotle, his faithfulness to past German masters, and his love of architectural compositional structure and canonic writing manifest in his 36 Fugues (1805).

Equipped with this musical baggage, César Franck studied at the Paris Conservatory, where he won a first prize in piano in 1838, a first prize in counterpoint and fugue in 1840, and a second prize in organ in 1841. This sufficed for his shrewd father, who made him leave the conservatory on April 22, 1842, to earn his living as a music professor and concert artist. In October 1838 at the age of sixteen, Franck began teaching piano and harmony with his brother, Joseph, from their home at 22, rue Montholon in the New Athens neighborhood. The brothers were inspired by Anton Reicha’s visionary pedagogy.⁴ He then gave music lessons at the Collège Rollin (now the Jacques-Decour High School [Collège-Lycée]), at the Augustinian College of the Assumption (234, Faubourg Saint-Honoré), at an Institution for Young Girls in Auteuil, and in the autumn of 1852 at the Jesuit High School [Collège] of the Immaculate Conception in Vaugirard, where Henri Duparc and Arthur Coquard experienced his “musical rhetoric:”⁵

renown as “a nearly mysterious” professor . . . who was at once ingenious, with a peculiar face and a delightfully pleasant and a comical manner of dressing. He seemed to have the piety of a saint, and that filled us with an artistic awe . . . whose expression, really exuded a gentle manner, happiness, honesty, which were hardly terrestrial.⁶

César’s assiduous teaching enabled him to escape his father’s exploitation of his talents. He married one of his students, Félicité Desmousseaux, on February 22, 1848, at Notre-Dame de Lorette Church, where he had been the choir organist since 1845. His son Georges was born at the end of the year. Franck felt very comfortable in this New Athens neighborhood where cosmopolitan artists such as Frédéric Chopin, Charles-Valentin Alkan, Franz Liszt, Chevalier Sigismund Neukomm, and his piano professor, Pierre Zimmermann, played J. S. Bach’s music.

On May 15, 1851, the year Franck was appointed titular organist of the Cavaillé-Coll organ at Saint-Jean-Saint-François Church, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll installed his first organ with a thirty-note German-style pedalboard in Pauline García-Viardot’s home at 48, rue de Douai. Nine months later, on January 16, 1852, these musicians all attended a performance by Jacques-Nicolas Lemmens of Bach’s works on the Cavaillé-Coll organ at Saint-Vincent-de-Paul Church. Following this concert, François Benoist wrote to Aristide Cavaillé-Coll:

That which especially struck me was this calm and religious greatness and this severe style which is so appropriate to the majesty of God’s temple. . . . It is a great merit, in my viewpoint, to rest faithful to the traditions of the grand masters who, in the past century, had founded the true art of the organ.⁷

Franck had lived at 69, rue Blanche, in the same building as Adèle Blanc, who married Cavaillé-Coll on February 4, 1854, in the second chapel of Sainte-Trinité Church.⁸ On December 19, 1859, Franck became titular organist of the new Cavaillé-Coll organ at Sainte-Clotilde Church, located in the Faubourg Saint-Germain. In 1862 when his melody Souvenance [Remembrance] was published, Franck thanked Pauline Viardot by dedicating it to her.⁹

In 1868 when Franck’s Six Pièces, composed between 1858 and 1862, were published, they were dedicated to his close friends: Alexis Chauvet, Camille Saint-Saëns, Charles-Valentin Alkan, Louis James Alfred Lefébure-Wély, François Benoist, and Aristide Cavaillé-Coll. One must remember that Alexis Chauvet had been destined to succeed François Benoist as organ professor at the Paris Conservatory. An extremely talented organist, composer, and professor, Chauvet had won first prizes in organ, fugue, and composition at the Paris Conservatory, where he had assisted Ambroise Thomas in teaching his class. His Twenty Pieces for organ, published in 1862 and dedicated to François Benoist, manifest the influence of Bach and the French Classical composers; like Alexandre Boëly’s music, his works are linked to the German and French schools.

Chauvet’s and Franck’s collections greatly assisted the resurrection of the great art of the organ in France.¹⁰ Both of them had performed in Cavaillé-Coll’s workshops and inaugurated his organs, those at Notre-Dame Cathedral on March 6, 1868, and at Sainte-Trinité Church on March 16, 1869, where Chauvet was appointed titular organist on March 24. Thanks to Chauvet’s highly esteemed advice, Cavaillé-Coll’s great organ and choir organ at Sainte-Trinité Church both had thirty-note pedalboards. Nicknamed “little Father Bach,”¹¹ Chauvet’s Fifteen Preparatory Studies to the Works of Bach (1867) had initiated his students to this great master’s polyphony.

The Leipzig Bach Society published the Bach Gesellschaft between 1851 and 1899. Bach’s organ works became available in 1864 to Parisian subscribers such as Alkan, Chauvet, Viardot, and Saint-Saëns. In 1865 E. Repos published Joseph Franck’s editions of twenty-two Bach preludes and fugues. Unfortunately, the Paris Conservatory’s organ students were not able to acquire an excellent pedal technique necessary for performing Bach’s organ works, simply because its 1819 Grenié studio organ only had a twenty-note pedalboard that was “too large and disproportionate.”¹²

In 1853 Pierre Érard constructed concert pianos with a thirty-two-note pedalboard, with a ravalement that began at A, using a system that was coupled to the low notes of the piano. In 1855 both Pauline Viardot’s organ and Érard’s piano-pédalier were promoted at the World’s Fair. On the piano-pédalier, Alkan performed Bach’s virtuosic Toccata in F Major, which highlighted two pedal solos. In this same year Bach’s Fugue in E Minor was a required work for the Paris Conservatory’s organ competition. In 1858 the Niedermeyer School imposed Bach’s Passacaglia at its final organ exam. Cavaillé-Coll had applied a pedalboard to an upright piano¹³ and Franck had purchased a Pleyel vertical pedalboard (N° 25 655),¹⁴ which, “instead of merely coupling the piano keys to the pedals, was completely independent, with its own strings, hammers, and mechanism.”¹⁵ Chauvet had installed one in a painting studio where he taught. At the Collège in Vaugirard, Franck gave his lessons on a piano with a pedalboard in a small room with stained glass windows.¹⁶

In 1870 the conservatory ordered two Cavaillé-Coll organs,¹⁷ one with three sixty-one-note manuals and seventeen stops for the Société des Concerts Hall, contracted on September 26, 1870, and the other one with three fifty-six-note manuals and twenty-six stops, contracted on November 5, 1870, to replace the inadequate Grenié studio organ. Chauvet advised that these organs should possess thirty-note pedalboards. Unfortunately, he died of a lung infection on January 29, 1871, during the Prussian siege of Paris, just one week after the death of Franck’s father in Aix-la-Chapelle and three days after the armistice had been signed. Charles Gounod lamented his death on March 13 in London:

In London, I learned at this very instant through one of my friends of the death of poor Chauvet, organist of the Great Organ of our parish. This is a great loss! There are few Chauvets, unfortunately.¹⁸

Esprit Auber, director of the Paris Conservatory, died on May 5, 1871, during the revolutionary government that had been instituted on March 18. Ambroise Thomas succeeded him, after Gounod had refused to become director of the conservatory. Twenty-three days later, a week of bloody violence ended the Commune. Franck, a “moderate Republican” (Républicain modéré),¹⁹ had remained in Paris during this difficult period. On February 25, 1871, he contributed to the founding of the Société national de musique, which aspired to give birth to new French music.

How did Franck succeed François Benoist? It is well known that Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, Camille Saint-Saëns, and Théodore Dubois supported his nomination as organ professor at the Paris Conservatory. On August 21 Franck had written to Charles Blanc, director of fine arts, to notify him that he could replace François Benoist.²⁰ On October 1, 1871, his friend Pauline Viardot was appointed voice professor at the Paris Conservatory. Charles Blanc and his brother Louis, a socialist and Republican politician, were both friends of Pauline’s husband, Louis Viardot, an eminent art collector. The Viardots and Louis Blanc had just seen each other in London. On November 12, 1871, a decree by the president of the Republic granted Franck the rights to reside in France.²¹ On January 31, 1872, Jules Simon signed a decree for the General Secretary of the State Department of Public Instruction of Worship and the Fine Arts, which stipulated that Franck would be appointed as organ professor there.²² Benoist retired on the next day, February 1. However, Ambroise Thomas only officially appointed Franck to succeed him after he had received on February 17, 1872, the official letter from Charles Blanc indicating César Franck’s appointment as organ professor. Then forty-nine years old, Franck had been nominated for this eminent post in spite of the fact that he had only received a second prize in organ there, unlike his brother Joseph, who had received a first prize in Benoist’s class in 1852.

Two new Cavaillé-Coll organs at the Paris Conservatory

Unfortunately, the violence in the capital had drastically reduced the conservatory’s funds. Constructing two new organs was out of the question. Since the Grenié studio organ was unplayable, the conservatory had asked Cavaillé-Coll to revise it and to construct another one for the conservatory’s Société des Concerts Hall, using elements from Sébastian Érard’s 1830 Château de la Muette organ, which his daughter-in-law, Madame Pierre Érard, had given to the conservatory in 1863. The construction of the seventeen-stop concert hall organ was delayed—it began on August 31, 1871, but was not finished until October 5, 1872.

Cavaillé-Coll encountered some difficulties installing this organ. Constructed in a parallelogram shape of wood covered with painted canvases, the concert hall had an excellent acoustic. However, in 1866 Alexis-Joseph Mazerolle had redecorated it by placing irremovable panels in the Pompeian style of the Second Empire that were eight and a half meters high at the back of the stage. This stage was reserved for the declamation classes, and the only possible place to install the organ without bothering the scene shifters

was behind the decorative panels at the back of the stage, where an insufficient opening was found that would allow it to be seen as a half-length portrait, as in a Guignol theater.²³

According to Jules Lissajous, the organ was placed in a limited space, on the axis with the stage at the height of the first balcony, and the access to its pipework and mechanics was difficult since

the instrument was entirely separated from the Hall by a rotunda that formed the stage and that encircled the amphitheater where a notable part of the Orchestre Société des Concerts was placed; the sound not coming from this side, resounds from the openings on the upper sides of the stage and is lost in the ceilings and in the hallways and, to make these circumstances worse, a ceiling sagged in two [sections] is suspended at a rather short distance in front of the organ and immediately blocks the sound waves that emanate from the expression box.²⁴

A vintage drawing of the console is illustrated in Example 1.²⁵

Due to the unmovable panels, the sound of the organ was insufficient to accompany singers. Cavaillé-Coll was very disappointed, especially since he was then building a monumental sixty-four-stop concert organ for the city of Sheffield in England, installed in 1873. Unfortunately, due to the violent Commune, the French government had to wait until 1878 to finance the construction of the organ for the concert hall of the Trocadéro festival hall. In the meantime, Cavaillé-Coll observed that

the delay justified by the extent of the work on the grand orgue nevertheless would not have resulted in any loss to the administration, since in this manner, the organ class was able to use the former studio organ until the installation of the grand orgue on which the students may continue to work during the repairs of the studio organ.²⁶

Example 2 of the organ room located just behind the stage of the concert hall illustrates this situation, “Salle d’Orgue.”

After his appointment to the conservatory in 1872, Franck taught on the concert hall organ from February to June and began teaching on the studio organ in October, since it was reconstructed beginning February 23 with reinstallation completed on October 7 in the organ room,27 a small eighteenth-century Rococo-style theater where Benoist had taught. Its pipes were placed in an expressive box to protect them from accumulating dust often found in theaters. It had new mechanical-action keyboards, but its former windchests and nine and a half of its sixteen stops, excluding free reeds, had been retained:

Grand-Orgue (enclosed, 54 notes)

8′ Flûte

8′ Dessus de Flûte Harmonique (30 notes)

8′ Bourdon

4′ Dessus de Prestant (30 notes)

4′ Flûte

8′ Trompette

Récit (enclosed, 54 notes)

8′ Principal

8′ Flûte Traversière

8′ Voix Céleste

4′ Flûte Octaviante

8′ Trompette

8′ Basson and Hautbois

Pédale (enclosed, 30 notes)

16′ Soubasse

8′ Flûte

4′ Flûte

8′ Basson

Pédales de combinaison

Tirasse Grand-Orgue

Tirasse Récit

Copula Récit sur Grand-Orgue

Expression

This “wretched cuckoo of an organ”²⁸ was activated by pulling a stop labeled Sonnette (Bell), and one stop remained Tacet. Its expression was activated by a hitch-down pedal with two notches located on the lower right side of the console as shown in the console layout diagram.²⁹

Each of these organs was equipped with a thirty-note pedalboard. On December 29, 1872, Franck had performed Bach’s Prelude and Fugue in E Minor on the new concert hall organ for the Société des Concerts. He had already performed “Adagio” and “Finale” from Hummel’s Fantaisie in E-flat Major on the piano in this hall on March 24, 1839. Performing at the organ this time, he was hidden from the auditors. Alexandre Cellier wrote about this concert hall organ in 1927:

In the hall of the former Conservatory, it’s the poor old instrument with 16 stops placed too high and muffled by an imposturous décor, which must struggle against 70 to 80 musicians. If the disproportion is less grand elsewhere, it does not place the organ in such a position of inferiority with the orchestra.³⁰

Unfortunately, both organs have been removed and have disappeared.

César Franck’s approach to teaching: the technique should serve artistry and musicality

Franck, “a model functionary” (fonctionnaire modèle),³¹ punctually³² taught organ at the Paris Conservatory on the rue Bergère for six hours each week, during two hour-long sessions on three days.³³ These collective lessons with male and female students mirrored the ones he had given in his home in 1838, which enabled students to listen to each other and to their professor. As in the past under François Benoist, his students took two semester exams, at the end of January and June, during which they accompanied a plainchant in four parts, improvised a four-part fugue and a free piece in sonata form—both based on themes chosen by the examiners—and played “a classic piece” of their choice by memory. In 1852 this memorized piece was a fugue; in 1867 it became a Bach fugue; in 1872 a Classical-era piece.³⁴

Franck’s duty was to prepare his students to pass their exams. Prior to these exams, Franck received a report that indicated each student’s name, age, year of study, and previous awards in the class, on which he briefly evaluated, in a blank space that measured one and a half by four and a half inches, the student’s progress and indicated the piece he or she would play during the exam, in order to prepare the scores for the jury members. If they approved a student’s progress, they could award either a second or first accessit (certificates of merit). After each year’s final exam, a competition was held for advanced students, who could obtain either a second or first prize. Although these exams and competitions were closed to the public, their results could have a meaningful impact on the future career of each student.

While much has been said about Franck’s students who won first or second prizes, little is known about the rest of his class. Following is a list of students who enrolled in his class, their dates of participation, the period they were enrolled, and their awards:

Franck’s enrolled students at the Paris Conservatory³⁵

Abbreviations: 1A (first accessit), 2A (second accessit), 1P (first prize), 2P (second prize)

Students who began with Benoist and continued with Franck:

Georges Deslandres (1849–1875), 1868: 1A/1868, remained until 1872

Paul Rougnon (1846–1934), 1868–1872

Paul Wachs (1851–1915), 1869: 2P/1870, 1P/1872

Bazile Benoît (1847–after 1900), 1868: 2A/1872, remained until 1873

Samuel Rousseau (1853–1904), 1871: 2A/1872, 1A/1875, 2P/1876, 1P/1877

Francis Thomé (1850–1909), 1871–1873

Students who studied entirely with Franck:

Jean Tolbecque (1857–1890), November 21, 1872: 1A/1873

Joseph Humblot (born in 1845), 1872: 1A/1873, 2P/1874

Marie-Antoinette [nicknamed Thérèse] Gaillard (1850–after 1900), November 9, 1872–June 7, 1873

Adèle Billault (1848–after 1900), December 20, 1872–June 11, 1875

Amédée Dutacq (1848–1929), January 1874–October 12, 1874

Vincent d’Indy (1851–1931), studied privately with Franck beginning October 13, 1872, and was an auditor in his class before officially enrolling January 14, 1874: 2A/1874, 1A/1875

Léon-Gustave-Joseph Karren (1854–1920), February 1875–1876

Georges Verschneider (1854–1895), 1873: 2A/1874, 1A/1875, remained until 1879

Marie Renaud [Madame Maury] (1852–1928), January 1874: 2A/1875, 1A/1876, remained until June 1877

Louise Genty (born in 1850), January 1875: 2A/1876

Camille Benoît, 1875–1876

Marie-Anne Papot (1855–1896), January 1876: 2A/1876, 1A/1878, 2P/1879, remained until December 1880

Clément Jules Broutin (1851–1900), October 1877–June 1878

Georges Hüe (1858–1948), December 1878–June 1879

Henri Dallier (1849–1934), November 1876: 1P/1878

Georges Marty (born in 1860), December 1878–June 1879

Auguste Chapuis (1858–1933), December 1878: 1A/1879, 2A/1880, 1P/1881

Jean Louis Lapuchin (1850–1895?), December 1878–January 1879

Théophile Sourilas (1850–1907), January 1880: 1A/1880, remained until July 1881

Gabriel Pierné (1863–1937), December 1880: 2P/1881, 1P/1882

Louis Ganne (1862–1923), December 1880: 1A/1882

Paul Jeannin (1858–1887), auditor/1880, December 1881: 1A/1882

Lucien Grandjany (1862–1891), December 1881: 2P/1882, 1P/1883

Henri Charles Kaiser (1861–1920?), December 1881: 2A/1882, 2P/1883, 1P/1884

Frédéric Duplessis (born in 1858), December 1881

Marcel Rouher (1857–1940), November 1882–1885

Léonie Guintrange [Madame E. Rouher] (1858–1900), December 1883–January 1885

Louis Landry (born in 1867), November 1882: 1A/1884, remained until June 1886

Carlos Mesquita (born in 1864), December 1883: 2A/1884, 1A/1885, remained until January 1886

François Pinot (1865–1891), November 1884: 1P/1885

Aimé Féry (born in 1862), December 1885–June 1887

Émile Fournier (1864–1897), October 4, 1885–June 1886

Louis Frémaux (born in 1867), December 1885

Dynam-Victor Fumet (1867–1949), December 1885

Georges Aubry (1868–1939), December 1885: 2A/1888, remained until July 1889

Henri Letocart (1866–1945), December 1885: 2A/1887, remained until June 1890

Alfred Georges Bachelet (1864–1944), December 1885–1887–1888

Louis d’Arnal de Serres (1864–1942), October 1885–1888

Albert Pillard (1867–1943), December 1886–June 1888

Édouard Bopp (born in 1866, Switzerland), December 1887–January 1888

Jean-Joseph Jemain (1864–1954), January 1885: 2A/1886, 1A/1887

Adolphe Marty (1865–1942), December 1886: 1P/1886

Hedwige Chrétien [Madame P. Gennaro] (1859–1944), December 1886–January 1887

Georges Bondon (1867–after 1900), December 1885: 2P/1887, 1P/1889

Cesar[ino] Galeotti (Italy 1872–Paris 1929), December 1885: 1P/1887

Joséphine Boulay (1869–1925), December 1887: 1P/1888

Marie Prestat (1862–1933), December 1887: 2A/1888, 1A/1889, 1P/1890

Jean-Ferdinand Schneider (1864–1934), December 1887–June 1889

Bruno Maurel (1867–after 1900), December 1887–January 1889

Albert Mahaut (1867–1943), December 1888: 1P/1889

Students who began with Franck and continued with Widor:

Achille Runner (1870–1938?), December 1888: 2P/1893, remained until June 1895

Paul Ternisien (born in 1870), December 1888–June 1892

Georges Guiraud (1868–1928), December 1889–June 1891

André-Paul Burgat (1865–1900), December 1889–June 1891

Jules Bouval (1867–1914), December 1889: 2A/1891, remained until June 1894

Henri Büsser (1872–1974), December 1889–January 1893

Henri Libert (1869–1937), December 1889: 2A/1892, 1P/1894

Charles Tournemire (1870–1939), December 1889: 1A/1889, 1P/1891

[Louis Vierne (1870–1937), auditor 1889, enrolled on October 4, 1890, or January 16, 1891: 2A/1891, 2P/1892, 1P/1894]36

In 1872 the six students enrolled in his class had studied with François Benoist. For the next thirteen years his class fluctuated from two to eight students. Just six years after he began to teach organ, he applied to teach composition instead of organ and had hoped to succeed François Bazin, who died on July 2, 1878. However, Jules Massenet was appointed as Bazin’s successor and Franck continued to teach organ. Franck was naturalized as a French citizen on March 10, 1873, yet his teaching would cross the fraternal bridge linking French and German music.³⁷ In the autumn of 1885, his class had grown from four to twelve students and leveled off to about ten pupils per year. Franck’s initial salary of 1,500 francs rose to 2,400 francs.³⁸ This increase was partially due to his successful organ recital³⁹ on October 1, 1878, at the monumental 5,000-seat Trocadéro festival hall during the World’s Fair, which had reaffirmed his reputation as “an artist at the forefront of organ teachers in France.”⁴⁰ Foreign organists entered his class: Carlos Mesquita of Brazil, Édouard Bopp of Switzerland, and Cesarino Galeotti of Italy, his favorite and youngest student, who won his first prize in organ at the age of sixteen.

Seven of Franck’s students—Paul Wachs, François Pinot, Émile Fournier, Georges Guiraud, Henri Letocart, and Henri Büsser—previously received a complete musical training in the Niedermeyer School of Classical and Religious Music, a boarding school located at 10, rue Neuve-Fontaine-Saint-Georges (today rue Fromentin). Founded in 1853 it thoroughly trained church musicians, offering courses in solfège, piano, organ, plainchant, harmony, counterpoint, fugue, accompaniment, music history, and vocal ensemble. These students had acquired the eight volumes of the Peters Edition of J. S. Bach’s organ works and played them daily,⁴¹ as well as great classical works by Palestrina, Handel, Mendelssohn, Saint-Saëns, etc.⁴² When Clément Loret, a former Lemmens student in Brussels, began to teach there in 1858, his Cours d’orgue had appeared in the school’s journal, La Maîtrise. It included exercises in manual substitutions and glissandi as well as the use of both toes and heels in order to play legato. According to Lemmens, “a good method for pedaling was as necessary as good fingering to properly play the organ.”⁴³ Loret’s method explained how an organ functioned and taught students to transpose, accompany plainchants, and improvise.

Students could practice on small Cavaillé-Coll organs, fifteen pianos, and even a piano with a pedalboard, as well as in Cavaillé-Coll’s workshops, where they occasionally gave concerts.⁴⁴ At the end of the 1880s, Loret’s student Aloÿs Kunc taught students in Toulouse who then entered Franck’s class—Dynam-Victor Fumet, Henri Büsser, Georges Guiraud, and Jules Bouval. In 1889 when Büsser went to meet Franck at Sainte-Clotilde Church to show him his recent exams in harmony, fugue, and composition at the Niedermeyer School, Franck told him,

Young man, you seem to be very talented, come tomorrow morning to my class at the Paris Conservatory and, without doubt, I will make something of you.⁴⁵

The next day, Büsser played a Mendelssohn sonata, a Bach fugue, and then improvised on a free theme that Franck had given him. Franck then told him, “I think that you may enter my class as a student, after the examination in January.”⁴⁶

Four of Franck’s students—Adolphe Marty, Albert Mahaut, Joséphine Boulay, and Louis Vierne—had studied at the National Institute for Blind Youth⁴⁷ with Louis-Bon Lebel (1831–1888), who used Lemmens’ École d’Orgue to teach pedal technique. Around 1875 Franck became the inspector of musical studies there and the president of the final exams at the end of each year.⁴⁸ Students worked rigorously and practiced four or five hours each day on their two Cavaillé-Coll studio organs, one in the boys’ quarters and the other in the girls’ quarters. In 1883 Cavaillé-Coll built a three-manual, thirty-six-stop organ for their chapel, decorated by the painter Henri Lehmann, a friend of Franz Liszt. The chapel also served as a concert hall when movable panels enlarged the room. For this organ’s inauguration on March 17, 1883, Franck had composed his Psalm CL for choir, organ, and orchestra, for which Louis Vierne played timpani.

Some of Franck’s students came from musical families. Paul Wachs’s father was a composer and choirmaster at Saint-Merri. Georges Deslandres’s father Laurent and his brother Adolphe were musicians at the Sainte-Marie-des-Batignolles Church; his brother Jules-Laurent was a bass player, and his sister Clémence was a singer. Samuel Rousseau’s father was a harmonium manufacturer in Paris. Georges Verschneider came from a family of three generations of organ builders active from 1760 until 1900 in Moselle. Hedwige Chrétien was the granddaughter of the violinist J. Ternisien. Jean Tolbecque came from a family of French-Belgian musicians. His father Auguste was a cellist and composer who taught at the Marseille Conservatory from 1865 until 1871; a friend of Camille Saint-Saëns and Ambroise Thomas, he had acquired an organ for his early instrument collection installed in the Fort-Foucault in Niort in 1875.⁴⁹ Henri Letocart’s father Joseph was a music professor.

Among Franck’s sixty-three enrolled students, seventeen were awarded first prizes; two received second prizes; ten, first accessits; four, second accessits, and twenty-nine received no awards. Those who received no award had not studied harmony or counterpoint and could not improvise (Léon Karren, Clément Broutin, Jean Lapuchin, Émile Fournier, Amédée Dutacq, Georges Deslandres, Louis Landry, and Henri Letocart). These students could escape to a small room situated underneath the organ to help Jean Lescot, the conservatory’s janitor, pump the organ’s wind bellows.⁵⁰ Some became ill (Albert Pillard, Jean-Ferdinand Schneider, Georges Aubry, Georges Verscheider, Louis de Serres, and Léonie Guintrange). Others were talented, conscientious, and had studied accompaniment or composition, but were too busy to practice (Alfred Bachelet, Francis Thomé, Aimé Féry, Louis Frémaux, Paul Ternisien, Louis Ganne, and Paul Jeannin). Some students specialized in other instruments, such as the pianist Bazille Benoît and the cellist Jean Tolbecque. Joseph Humblot was his only organ student who improvised very well but he had difficulty performing. Other excellent students with high-level musical intelligence worked hard, interpreted well, but had difficulty improvising, such as Louise Genty, Marie Renaud, Théophile Sourilas, Georges Verschneider, and Vincent d’Indy. Both Vincent d’Indy and Marie Renaud had received only a first accessit. D’Indy was very bitter about this and spoke rather unkindly about his fellow students in his Journal.⁵¹ He left Franck’s organ class but continued to study composition privately with him. Marie Renaud, one of Franck’s ten female students, was the first woman to win a first prize in counterpoint and fugue (1876) at the conservatory. Unfortunately, she could not compete for the Grand Prix de Rome because it was forbidden for women to do so until 1903. She was also the first woman to be a member of the Société nationale de musique.

Those who had successfully won a first prize in organ had also studied harmony, counterpoint, fugue, and composition in order to become complete musicians. All of Franck’s students who had studied at the National Institute for Blind Youth had won a first prize in organ: Adolphe Marty, Albert Mahaut, and Joséphine Boulay quickly received it due to their excellent training. In 1888 Boulay was Franck’s first female student to win a first prize in Franck’s organ class. Marie Prestat was the first woman to obtain five first prizes at the conservatory (in harmony, accompaniment, composition, fugue and counterpoint, and organ). Henri Dallier also earned his first prize very quickly, because he had studied at the Reims cathedral choir school and had been choir organist there.

To prepare his students for their exams, Franck taught them to accompany plainchants given in whole notes with very free developments in four-part florid counterpoint, with the cantus firmus placed in the bass and three voices above it.⁵² The suppleness of the chants, such as Stabat Mater, Dies irae, or Jesu Redemptor, gave birth to beautiful improvisations and compositions in all forms. Franck desired that the embellishments of these admirable melodies be musically expressive, in order to bring them to life.⁵³ When the organ room was occupied by exams, he taught the accompaniment of plainchant on a piano in another room.

With indulgence, patience, severity, and austerity, Franck taught improvisation five out of the six hours of his organ class each week,⁵⁴ according to the conservatory’s imposed strict regulations. To improvise a four-voice fugue d’école, students had to listen carefully to Franck’s severe advice in order to strictly follow a set architectural plan and construct fugues solidly and harmoniously with an absolute pureness of style. After exposing the theme in four voices, they chose a countersubject with entries in the outer voices and developed a stretto toward the end. The free improvisations used a one-theme exposition, which after a bridge subtly introduced a new element during the transition to the dominant, which could later serve during the development, before the recapitulation in the tonic.

As in François Benoist’s class, the themes provided during Franck’s class were sometimes taken from Haydn’s and Mozart’s symphonies, but during their exams students improvised on popular tunes from operettas. However, from January 1879 to June 1887, fugue subjects and modern themes were composed specially for the exams⁵⁵ by Auguste Bazille, Jules Cohen, Léo Delibes, Théodore Dubois, Henri Fissot, Alexandre Guilmant, and Ambroise Thomas.⁵⁶

Franck encouraged his students to improvise with “melodic invention, harmonic discoveries, subtle modulations, and elegant figurations:⁵⁷

He did not stop the student who was developing a Gregorian theme or another free or imposed one, a fugue, a sonata movement with florid counterpoint, but gave several interjections, launched with a vibrant loud bursting voice, sometimes with a tremendous crescendo to impose the order of a development, a tonality, a modulation, to prevent the apprentice organist from getting lost in the contrapuntal plan, to proclaim criticism or praise: “Modulate! . . . Some flats!!! Some sharps!!! E in the bass, in the tonal key. . . . Something else! I don’t love that! I love that!”⁵⁸

According to Maurice Emmanuel, he gave his students practical principles with severity and sweetness and encouraged them to listen to the beautiful Cavaillé-Coll organ at Sainte-Clotilde:

One should see one of Franck’s lessons in this small half-obscured theater, where the master’s beautiful voice resonated like a deep bell, at one moment detailing the exercise underway, and at another moment expressing, with general ideas, the preference of the musician. Severe when supervising the construction of a fugue, he wanted this rhetoric to be as worthwhile as possible. “First search for a beautiful countersubject,” he said. . . . And the student, invited to discover one on his own, was not always able to invent one. Then Franck took his place on the oak bench and demonstrated one in grand style—“And here’s a second one! And a third one! . . . And yet another one!” The students were confounded. . . . The same tactic for the “divertissements.” Those which the young beginning “fugue improvisers” came up with were not always to his liking: therefore, his hands ran to the keyboards, substituting an example for the precept. This pedagogical method was perhaps insufficient for many students, who had only applied, desired, or were waiting for precise recipes. This eloquent persuasive model was addressed to the worthy disciple who could understand it and who was capable of becoming inspired by it.

It is especially while exercising free improvisation that Franck applied this method. It was as good as any other. He created in front of his students a “verse” or a more developed piece in order to enable them to succeed in the double exam on the day of competition. He gave his students practical precepts and was very strict concerning the choice and order of modulations. He had magistral ideas concerning them. But all things considered, “Listen to me,” he cried; or even, unsatisfied with the resources that the small old organ in the class offered him, he said to his students: “Come to Sainte-Clotilde on Sunday. I will demonstrate this to you.”⁵⁹

Gabriel Pierné, Louis de Serres, and Louis Vierne observed that “no form of teaching could be livelier: his playing was magnificent, seductive, leading the student to his utmost potential. . . .” [nulle forme d’enseignement ne pouvait être plus vivante: c’était un jeu magnifique, séduisant, entraînant à l’extrême. . . .].⁶⁰ Franck did not need to resort to words to express his thoughts, which he could more fully express by music.⁶¹ Therefore, he played various solutions to show them how to develop a good fugue.⁶² According to Augusta Holmès, who studied composition with him beginning in 1875, “He never substituted his own manner of thinking for that of his students. After having opened the way, he let them entirely follow their own initiative.”⁶³ Maurice Emmanuel emphasized, “As necessary as it may be, the form is not sufficient. It only constitutes a framework. And the most beautiful technique in the world can remain a dead letter if it is not used to serve an idea.”⁶⁴

Franck’s three primary maxims were:

Don’t try to do a great deal, but rather seek to do well no matter if only a little can be produced. Bring me the results of many trials that you can honestly say represent the very best you can do. Don’t think that you will learn from my corrections of faults of which you are aware unless you have strained every effort yourself to amend them.⁶⁵

Louis de Serres, whose expressive delicateness Franck particularly appreciated, confirmed that, “No one better than he knew how to make his students understand a strictly severe organ style . . . at the same time deeply felt and expressive.”⁶⁶

Franck did not use a particular method or follow any strict rules, but orally gave each student personal advice. According to Albert Mahaut, “He spoke little, in small phrases, but we sensed the deepness of his soul, his greatness, his energy, at the same his penetrating sweetness.”⁶⁷ His innate, perceptive intuition enabled him to understand each student’s personality, temperament, capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses. Whatever their level, Franck deeply loved teaching and instilled in each student his impassioned ardor and love of musical beauty. As Charles Tournemire expressed, “Never did one leave this seraphic musician demoralized; but certain observations, said in a few words, generally gently and penetrating, striking and exact, enlightened the soul and warmed the heart.”⁶⁸ “César Franck had a great influence on my artistic philosophy. I owe him the calm and the courage that strengthens artists. . . . If he lived for transcendent art, he knew how to help those who came to him.”⁶⁹

Extremely generous, Franck did not accept any payment from talented students who needed money more than himself, such as Henri Büsser, whom Franck asked to substitute for him at Sainte-Clotilde.⁷⁰ His class was like a family reunion. Léonie Guintrange met her husband, Marcel Rouher, there. His lack of pride and his joy of accomplishing his everyday tasks with “constant optimism emanated from his perfect kindness, his incapacity to experience any resentment or jealousy; his ongoing cheerful nature”⁷¹ was a consolation and encouragement to all his students, who deeply respected him.

According to Joël-Marie Fauquet and Rollin Smith, the following musicians were auditors in his organ class:⁷²

Ca. 1870 (?): Camille Rage

Ca. 1872: Maurice Cohen-Lânariou (from Romania)

Ca. 1875: Georges Bizet⁷³ (1839–1875), Henri Kunkelmann (1855–1922), Albert Renaud (1855–1924)

1876: Julien Tiersot (1857–1936)

1879: Ernest Chausson (1855–1899)

1880: Paul Vidal (1863-1931)

1880–1881: Herman Bemberg (1859–1931, from France and Argentina), [first name?] Bessand, Claude Debussy (1862–1918), Fernand Leborne (1862–1929), Jules-Gaston Melodia

1880–1885: John Hinton⁷⁴ (1849–1922, from England) [organ], Paul Dukas (1865–1935)

1888: Anne-Berthe Merklin (Mme. Lambert des Cilleuls, daughter of Joseph Merklin) (1866–1918) [piano and organ], Raymond Huntington Woodman (1861–1943, his only student from the United States, a private organ student for three months)

1889: Mlle. De Mailli [harmonium and organ], Louis Vierne

It is likely that some of his other private organ students attended his organ class, such as Charles-Auguste Collin⁷⁵ (1865–1938) and Saint-René Taillandier (who died in 1931). Many of his composition and piano students during these years could have attended his courses:

1872: Alexis de Castillon (1838–1873), Albert Cahen d’Anvers (1846–1903)

1872–1875: Henri Duparc (1848–1933), one of his most talented students [ca. 1863–ca. 1875], Urban Le Verrier (1811–1877)

1873: Arthur Coquard (1846–1910), Mlle. de Jouvencel [piano]

Ca. 1875: Edmond Diet (1854–1924), Marguerite Habert [piano], Augusta Holmès (1847–1903), Henri Kunkelmann (1855–1922), Charles Langrand (1852–1942) [piano and composition?]

1876: Mel-Bonis, Mélanie Bonis (Mme. Albert Domanche) (1858–1937) [piano]

1878: Mme Charles Poisson [piano]

Ca. 1880: Raymond Bonheur (1861–1939), Paul Braud [piano], Laure Fleury [piano, year uncertain], Joséphine Haincelin [piano], Marguérite Hamman [piano], Léon Husson, Mlle Javal [piano], Henry Lerolle (1848–1929), ? Fernand Fouant de La Tombelle (1854–1928), Léo Luguet (1864–1935), H. Kervel [organ and piano?], Georges Rosenlecker, Gustave Sandré (1843–1916) [composition, piano, and organ?, year uncertain], Alice Sauvrezis (1866–1946) [piano, year uncertain], Gaston de Vallin [piano?], Paul de Wailly (1856–1933)

1881–1887: Pierre de Bréville (1861–1949)

Ca. 1885: Charles Bordes (1863–1909), Cécile Boutet de Monvel (1864–1940) [piano], Paul Carré de Malberg [composition?], Paul Dukas (1865–1935), Henri Expert (1863–1952), Marie Fabre, Mme Soullière [piano and composition], Henry Huvey (died 1944) [organ], Sylvio Lazzari (1857–1944) [born in Austria], Mme Édouard Lefébure [piano], Charles Pierné [harmonium], Henri Quittard (1864–1919), Guy Ropartz (1864–1955), Georges Saint-René Taillandier (1852–1942) [year uncertain], Théophile Ysaye (1865–1918) [piano, brother of Eugène]

1887: Stéphane Gaurion [a private organ student?]

1887–1890: Erik Åkerberg (1860–1938) [Swedish], Jules Écorcheville (1872–1915)

1888: Mlle Olympe Rollet [piano]

1889: Charlotte Danner [piano], Mme Saint-Louis de Gonzague [piano], the Argentinian Alberto Williams (1862–1952)⁷⁶

Ca. 1889–1890: Guillaume Lekeu (1870–1894)

Ca. 1890: Clotilde Bréal (1870–1947) [one of Franck’s favorite piano and organ students, to whom he dedicated his Choral in E Major, in the copy that belonged to her second husband, Alfred Cortot], Frank [Franz] Godebski (1866–1948).

Franck understood each student’s capacities and needs, which often led to liberal conclusions that were quite different from the formalism of other professors at the Paris Conservatory. In 1880 and 1881, when Claude Debussy attended his class as an auditor for six months to obtain his advice in composition, Franck had confided to him, “The fifths, there are some nice ones. . . . At the Conservatory one does not allow that. . . . But I myself, I love it well!”⁷⁷

As Erik Kocevar indicated, Gustave Derepas understood Franck’s teaching when he confirmed that instead of imposing his own musical ideas on his students, he let each follow their own paths:

Radically setting aside a personal and intolerant biased opinion, the master penetrated with a rare sagacity his students’ thoughts. . . . How remarkable! Musicians trained in his school of thought all possessed a solid science that can be qualified as profound; but each maintained his own personality. The master was so respectful of the inspiration of others!⁷⁸

To thank him, Franck’s students wholeheartedly supported him. They deeply respected their master, referred to him as a Pater Seraphicus, and developed a doctrine known as “Franckism.”⁷⁹ Many of them contributed to the fact he received the Légion d’honneur on August 6, 1885, during the distribution of prizes at the conservatory, in gratitude for his fifteen years of service there.⁸⁰ In spite of his Germanic origins, many of them revered him as a true renewer of French music, labelled as ars gallica, according to the motto of the Société nationale, which Franck presided over in 1886. Just to give one example, in 1879 Camille Benoît encouraged him by publishing several articles on his works in the Gazette musicale and the Guide musical. His students organized and paid for a Festival Franck, which was given at the Cirque d’Hiver on January 30, 1888.

Franck was not responsible for his students’ complaints to Ambroise Thomas that he had not been appointed as a composition professor at the Paris Conservatory. Unfortunately, this created considerable hostility.⁸¹ Also, Vincent d’Indy had interpreted Franck’s noble character as a sort of religious absolutism that “obeyed the three theological virtues known as Faith, Hope, and Charity,”⁸² to which Franck’s son Georges was totally opposed. According to Maurice Emmanuel, “Franck was never pious, and he was not a practicing Christian.”⁸³ One of his favorite books, which had inspired his Beatitudes,⁸⁴ was The Life of Jesus (published in 1863)⁸⁵ by Ernest Renan, a close friend of Pauline Viardot. César Franck had meditated and was “guided”⁸⁶ by Christ’s Beatitudes since 1845; he had completely set them to music thirty years later. However, although art goes hand in hand with religion, due to its essentially noble character, Franck’s teaching was not religious in nature, but it was deeply spiritual. He simply desired to mold his students’ capacities to express themselves musically, with noble grace, in order to enable them to become genuine artists.

To be continued.

Notes

1. Léon Vallas, La véritable histoire de César Franck, 1822-1890 (Paris, Flammarion, 1955), page 10, and Joël-Marie Fauquet, César Franck (Paris, Arthème Fayard, 1999), page 42.

2. Fauquet, page 54.

3. Vallas, page 19.

4. Fauquet, page 120.

5. Fauquet, page 464. This college was located on the rue de Vaugirard. According to Rollin Smith, Playing the Organ Works of César Franck (Stuyvesant, New York: Pendragon Press, 1997), page 25, in 1860, Hippolyte Loret built an organ for their chapel. Franck taught beside another Belgian, Father Louis Lambillotte, who participated in the movement to restore Gregorian chant. In 1856, Adrien Le Clère published César Franck’s Organ Accompaniments of Gregorian Chant, restored by Father Lambillotte.

6. M. Louseau, “Souvenirs de Collège,” Le Gaulois, November 23, 1903, published in Franck Besingrand, César Franck, Entre raison et passion (Brussels, Peter Lang, 2002), pages 165, 167. Carolyn Shuster Fournier translated the original French citations in this article.

7. Cécile and Emmanuel Cavaillé-Coll, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll (Paris, Fischbacher, 1929), page 92.

8. This chapel was located at 12, rue de Clichy. Lefébure-Wély and Pierre Érard were witnesses at this ceremony. In addition to the other addresses mentioned in this article, Franck also lived at 6, rue de Trévise beginning in the spring of 1841 and at 43, rue Lafitte in the autumn of 1842. In 1865, his family moved to 95, boulevard Saint-Michel.

9. Composed in 1846, it was originally intended for his future fiancée, Félicité Desmousseaux. Fauquet, page 54.

10. Félix Raugel, “La Musique religieuse française de l’époque révolutionnaire à la mort de César Franck,” La Revue Musicale, No. 222, 1953–1954, page 119.

11. Henri Maréchal, Souvenirs d’un musicien (Paris, Hachette, 1907), page 171.

12. Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, “Description de l’orgue actuel du Conservatoire impérial de musique,” March 12, 1864, A. N. [Archives Nationales de France], F21 1037.

13. Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, “Letter to Eugène Gautier,” January 29, 1858, published in Fenner Douglass, Cavaillé-Coll and the Musicians (Raleigh, North Carolina, Sunbury Press, 1980), vol. II, page 997.

14. Vallas, page 142.

15. Smith, page 16.

16. M. Louseau/Besingrand, page 165.

17. See A. Cavaillé-Coll, Traité propose à Monsieur le Ministre des Cultes de l’Instruction publique, des Cultes et des beaux arts, November 5, 1870, A.N. AJ37 82, 4, and Jesse Eschbach, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, A Compendium of Known Stoplists, vol. I (Paderborn: Verlag Peter Ewers, 2003), pages 726–727.

18. Charles Gounod, “Autograph letter to Monsieur le Curé,” London, March 13, 1871, private collection; published in Shuster Fournier, Un siècle de vie musicale à l’église de la Sainte-Trinité à Paris (Paris, L’Harmattan, 2014), page 42.

19. Fauquet, page 406.

20. Fauquet, page 466.

21. Fauquet, pages 471 and 834.

22. See Jules Simon, “Arrêté pour le Secrétaire Général du département de l’Instruction publique des Cultes et des Beaux Arts,” Janvier 31, 1872, A. N., AJ37, 69, 2, n° 7, and Charles Blanc, “Le Directeur des Beaux-Arts, Membre de l’Institut, Lettre au Monsieur le Directeur [du Conservatoire National de Musique & de Déclamation],” Février 17, 1872, A. N., AJ37, 69, 2, n° 4.

23. Albert Dupaigne, Le Grand Orgue de la nouvelle salle de concert de Sheffield (Paris, Plon et Cie., 1873), page 48.

24. Jules Lissajous, “Rapport sur l’orgue établi par Mr. Aristide Cavaillé-Coll dans la grande salle du Conservatoire de Musique de Paris,” A. N., AJ37 82, 4d.

25. A. Cavaillé-Coll, “Mémoire général des travaux du grand orgue de la salle des Concerts du Conservatoire de Musique de Paris,” January 12, 1872, A. N., AJ37 82, 4d, stoplist also published in Eschbach, page 338. According to Gilbert Huybens, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, Opus List, page 22, this organ was delivered on January 29, 1872.

26. A. Cavaillé-Coll, “Letter to Monsieur Ambroise Thomas, Director of the Paris Conservatory,” December 5, 1871, A. N., AJ37 82, 4.

27. A. Cavaillé-Coll, “Mémoire general des travaux de reconstruction et de perfectionnement effectués à l’orgue d’Étude du Conservatoire de Musique à Paris,” October 24, 1872, A. N., AJ37 82, 4d, included in Carolyn Shuster’s doctoral thesis, “Les Orgues Cavaillé-Coll au salon, au théâtre et au Concert,” delivered in 1991 at the François-Rabelais University in Tours.

28. Louis Vierne, “Mes Souvenirs,” In Memoriam Louis Vierne (Paris, Les Amis de l’Orgue, 1939), page 21.

29. Jules Lissajous, “Rapport sur l’orgue d’étude du conservatoire national de musique, reconstruit et perfectionné par Mr. A. Cavaillé-Coll,” October 25, 1872, A. N., AJ37 82, 4d. The stops on the Grand Orgue keyboard, Eschbach, page 349, indicate that the 8′ Flûte and 4′ Prestant have 30 notes without specifying that they are the upper 30 notes; Rollin Smith, page 31, and Orpha Ochse cite Louis Vierne, who mentioned, in Mes Souvenirs, an 8′ Dessus de Montre without indicating the Dessus of Flûte Harmonique and Prestant stops.

30. Alexandre Cellier, L’Orgue Moderne (Paris, Delagrave, 1927), page 106.

31. Vallas, page 316.

32. Albert Mahaut, “Souvenirs personnels sur César Franck,” Musique et musiciens (Paris, l’Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles, 1923), page 586.

33. Louis Vierne, in his Journal II (Cahiers et Mémoires de L’Orgue, No. 135 bis, 1970), page 162, mentions that his courses took place on Mondays and Thursdays at 2:00 p.m. and on Saturdays at 11:00 a.m., but in Mes Souvenirs II (Cahiers et Mémoires de L’Orgue, No. 134 bis, III, 1970, page 22), he indicates that they took place on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays from 8:00 to 10:00 a.m.

34. A. N., AJ37 251.

35. Prepared with: A. N., AJ37 283; Fauquet, pages 960–964.

36. Vierne, in Mes Souvenirs, page 24, mentions that he was admitted as an organ student at the Paris Conservatory on October 4, 1890. According to Widor’s report, January 24, 1891, A. N., AJ37 292, 54, he enrolled on January 16, 1891.

37. See Fauquet, pages 408 and 471.

38. Vallas, page 174.

39. See Eugène Gigout, “Concerts et Soirées,” Le Ménestrel (XLIV), N° 45, October 6, 1878, page 363.

40. See Smith, page 37, who quotes “Nouvelles diverses,” Revue et Gazette musicale de Paris, November 10, 1878, page 367.

41. Henri Letocart, “Quelques Souvenirs,” L’Orgue, No. 36, December 1938, pages 2–7; 37, March 1939, pages 4–6.

42. Orpha Ochse, Organists and Organ Playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1994), page 209, quoting Gabriel Fauré, “Souvenirs,” La Revue musicale, No. 3, October 1922, pages 3–9.

43. Jacques-Nicolas Lemmens, École d’Orgue basée sur le Plain-Chant Romain (B. Schott’s Söhne, 1862), page 2.

44. Marie-Louise Boëllmann-Gigout, “L’École Niedermeyer,” in Histoire de la musique 2, under the direction of Roland-Manuel, Encyclopédie de la Pléiade (Paris, Gallimard, 1963), page 854.

45. Henri Büsser, “La classe d’orgue de César Franck en 1889–1990,” L’Orgue, No. 102, 1962, page 33.

46. Ibid.

47. It was founded by Valentin Haüy in 1794 and was located on the boulevard des Invalides. Louis Briaille (1809–1852), organist and professor at this institute, had developed the musical writing for the blind in 1829. Its organ class had been founded in 1826.

48. Had Franck recalled that forty years previously his first music teacher, Dieudonné Duguet, had become blind in 1835, the year Franck had left the Liège Conservatory?

49. Alban Framboisier, “The compositions of Auguste Tolbecque (1830–1919),” text of the CD jacket in Homage to Auguste Tolbecque (Netherlands, Passacaille, 2019), pages 19–22.

50. See Fauquet, page 475.

51. Vincent d’Indy, Ma Vie (Paris, Séguier, 2001).

52. Odile Jutten, “L’Évolution de l’enseignement de l’improvisation à l’orgue au Conservatoire,” in Anne Bongrain and Alain Poirier, eds., Le Conservatoire de Paris: Deux cents ans de pédagogie, 1795–1995 (Paris: Buchet/Chastel, 1999), page 83.

53. Vallas, pages 327–328.

54. Vierne, Mes Souvenirs, page 23.

55. Jutten, page 85.

56. Théodore Dubois, themes used during organ exams at the Paris Conservatory from January 1879 to June 1887, A. N., AJ37 237, 3.

57. Smith, page 41.

58. Vallas, page 319.

59. Maurice Emmanuel, César Franck (Paris, Henri Laurens, 1930), pages 106–108.

60. Vallas, page 319.

61. Emmanuel, page 106.

62. Vierne, Mes Souvenirs, page 45.

63. J. Bernac, “Interview with Mlle. Augusta Holmès,” The Strand Musical Magazine, 1897, Vol. 5, page 136, quoted in Florence Launay, Les Compositrices en France au XIXe siècle (Paris, Arthème Fayard, 2006), page 56.

64. Emmanuel, page 113.

65. John W. Hinton, César Franck: Some Personal Reminiscences (London, William Reeves, n.d.), page 43, quoted in Smith, page 43.
66. Louis de Serres, “Quelques souvenirs sur le père Franck, mon maître,” L’Art musical, November 29, 1935, page 68, quoted in J.-M. Fauquet, page 477.

67. Vallas, page 329.

68. Tournemire, page 70.

69. L’Orgue, Nos. 321–324, 2018—I–IV, LXX and 8.

70. Büsser, page 34.

71. Emmanuel, pages 15–16.

72. Fauquet, pages 960–964, and Rollin Smith, “César Franck’s Metronome Marks: from Paris to Brooklin,” The American Organist, September 2003, page 58.

73. This laureate of a first prize in organ in 1875 came to listen to Franck’s class and distributed tickets to his students who were lucky enough to attend the premiere of Carmen on March 3 at the Opéra-Comique.

74. According to Ochse, page 159, John Hinton studied privately with Franck in 1865 and 1867 and was an auditor in his organ class in 1873.
75. See Charles Augustin Collin, “César Franck et la musique bretonne,” Le Nouvelliste de Bretagne, August 1912.

76. The author thanks Vera Wolkowicz who kindly communicated this to her.

77. Vallas, page 322.

78. Gustave Derepas, César Franck/Étude sur sa vie, son enseignement, son œuvre (Paris, Fischbacher, 1897), page 27; quoted in Erik Kocevar, “Ses élèves et son enseignement,” in César Franck (1822–1890), Revue Européenne d’Études Musicales, No. 1, 1991, Paris, Éditions Le Léopard d’Or, pages 41–42.

79. Vallas, page 341.

80. Vallas, page 234.

81. Vallas, page 323.

82. Fauquet, page 22.

83. Emmanuel, page 12.

84. Vallas, page 306. In Louis Vierne’s “Choral,” number 16 of his 24 Pièces en style libre, opus 31, the second half of the choral theme is very similar to the theme of the baritone solo (the voice of Christ) in Franck’s third Beatitude, “Blessed are those who mourn.”

85. Fauquet, page 315.

86. Emmanuel, page 12.

Editor’s note: an earlier version of this article, “César Francks orgelklas aan het Parijse conservatorium, zijn gepassioneerde zoektocht naar artistieke schoonheid,” appeared in Orgelkunst, issue 179, pages 168–191, 2022.

John Joseph Mitchell

John Joseph “JJ” Mitchell is a musician and scholar from Arlington, Virginia. He is director of music at Saint John Neumann Catholic Church in Reston, Virginia, where he oversees several musical groups and accompanies liturgies. JJ graduated summa cum laude from Westminster Choir College with a bachelor’s degree in sacred music. He then earned his Master of Sacred Music degree in organ performance from the University of Notre Dame, where he attended on a full-tuition scholarship. He also studied at the Conservatoire à Rayonnement Régional de Toulouse, France, where he practiced and studied on the organs of the Puget family. JJ then earned his Doctor of Musical Arts degree in organ performance from the University of Houston (UH). During this time, he worked as a teaching assistant in the UH Music History Department and served as musician in multiple churches. The article published in this magazine is a cut of his dissertation on the Puget family, which was finished in May 2023.

JJ has served as organist on the music staff of churches such as Christ Church Cathedral, Houston, Texas; the Cathedral of Saint Thomas More, Arlington, Virginia; and the Basilica of the Sacred Heart, South Bend, Indiana. He has performed in these churches and various other churches and concert halls in the United States, Canada, France, and England. In July 2024, JJ will give a lecture recital on the Puget family at the location of one of their instruments in Sydney, Australia. He is the winner of the Nanovic Grant for European Study for Professional Development and was a finalist for the Frank Huntington Beebe Grant. He also won second prize in the graduate division of the Hall Pipe Organ Competition in 2022. JJ’s research on César Franck and his musical influences was published in the Vox Humana organ journal. In September 2020 he was a guest on Jennifer Pascual’s Sounds from the Spires SiriusXM Radio program in which his organ recordings were broadcast. He has played liturgies and concerts for international television audiences on the Salt + Life and EWTN networks. JJ is a member of the American Guild of Organists (AGO) as well as the National Association of Pastoral Musicians (NPM), from which he has received several scholarships. A leader in the field, he has served on NPM’s national publications committee and will serve on the board of the Northern Virginia AGO chapter beginning later this year. He is a member of The Diapason’s 20 Under 30 Class of 2021. JJ’s career goal is to teach sacred music to the next generation. For more information: 
jjmitchellorganist.com.

Editor’s note: Part 1 of this series appeared in the May 2024 issue, pages 12–18.

The progressive era, 1892–1922: Jean-Baptiste Puget

Unlike his older brother Eugène, Jean-Baptiste, the youngest of Théodore’s children, was more interested in science and technology than musical aesthetics. He was a gifted visual artist who designed organ façades such as that of Notre-Dame de la Dalbade and the choir organ of Notre-Dame du Taur, both in Toulouse. He was also different from Théodore and Eugène because he did not study music and had not been tasked with voicing pipes.¹⁰³ Though Jean-Baptiste’s skills were a major asset to the family, he did not have much authority until he assumed leadership of the business following Eugène’s sudden passing in 1892.¹⁰⁴ He married Zélie-Augustine Raynaud, and together they had three children: Maurice, Louis, and Germaine.¹⁰⁵

Enamored with innovation, Jean-Baptiste introduced progressive changes to the company’s organ building style. For example, he favored zinc bass pipes instead of tin due to practicality and low cost.¹⁰⁶ This choice in materials, which was controversial at the time, resulted in a robust sound without having to use as much metal.¹⁰⁷ The use of zinc reflects Jean-Baptiste’s knowledge of English organs, particularly the work of Henry Willis. Eugène’s metal pipes were mostly constructed with tin.¹⁰⁸

Another significant change under Jean-Baptiste’s tenure was the shift from mechanical action to tubular-pneumatic action.¹¹⁰ Organbuilders of the Romantic era through the early twentieth century wanted to modify actions to make their instruments easier to play, employing wind-based solutions to do so.¹¹¹ The Barker lever, which was common on French symphonic organs, was a wind-activated mechanism to lighten mechanical action. Eugène and Jean-Baptiste used Barker levers when building their instruments. The two brothers traveled together to London to study tubular-pneumatic action, in which a pneumatic tube connection takes the place of a tracker in conveying the key action from console to windchest, thereby lightening the key action.¹¹² Eugène typically maintained the status quo of mechanical action with Barker levers, but Jean-Baptiste embraced the new tubular-pneumatic technology.¹¹³

Jean-Baptiste’s professional connections attracted new attention from the scientific community. One prominent ally of the company during Jean-Baptiste’s reign was Dr. Gabriel Bédart, a medical doctor who had an advisory role at the Puget company.¹¹⁴ Penning an opinion in a Toulousian newspaper in 1895, Bédart discussed the benefits of turn-of-the-century advances in organ technology and advocated for the implementation of tubular-pneumatic systems. He praised the work of Jean-Baptiste by citing recently constructed Puget organs.¹¹⁵ Much of what is known about Jean-Baptiste’s organbuilding philosophy comes from Bédart’s writings.

Jean-Baptiste connected with other professionals differently than Eugène, whose relationships with masterful Parisian organists had elevated the family’s status. Jean-Baptiste maintained these connections while devoting much attention to fostering friendships with other organbuilders around the world. At a conference of organbuilders held in 1895 in Paris, Jean-Baptiste established professional relationships with other prominent constructors of the time, including Henry Willis, Samuel Casavant, and Charles Mutin. In 1899 Jean-Baptiste became a member of the jury of the Exposition Internationale Paris-Neuilly.¹¹⁶ Through his professional correspondences and promotion from colleagues, Jean-Baptiste elevated the reputation of the Puget family both nationally and internationally.¹¹⁷ This fame was expanded further when the Pugets constructed an organ at la Cathédrale de Sainte-Cécile d’Albi, hereafter referred to as Albi Cathedral.¹¹⁸

La Cathédrale de Sainte-Cécile d’Albi

Albi is located about fifty miles northeast of Toulouse on the Tarn River. This picturesque city, the home of painter Henri Toulouse-Lautrec, has a distinguished artistic history.¹²⁰ The cathedral, considered to be the largest brick building in the world, is easily identifiable in Albi’s cityscape. The fortress-like structure was constructed in the thirteenth century to suppress the Albigensian heresy and assert the Catholic Church’s dominance. Albi Cathedral’s thick walls, buttresses, and tall windows tower over the surrounding streets.¹²¹

The 1736 Moucherel instrument that preceded the Puget organ at Albi Cathedral had been in disrepair for decades.¹²² In 1841 the Claude brothers, two organbuilders from Mirecourt, tried to romanticize this French Classical organ cheaply. The result was described as a “mutilation” upon its reception, according to one listener.¹²³ Jean-Baptiste was familiar with this instrument since the Puget family had repaired it and made slight adjustments to its specifications in 1875.¹²⁴ In 1902 Jean-Baptiste wrote to the rector of the cathedral and described a proposal for a new instrument. Jean-Baptiste was both persuasive and persistent, arguing for his project to clergy members in Albi four times within one year.¹²⁵ The clergy signed a contract for a new Puget organ in March 1903 and amended it in October of the same year, paying the Pugets 31,650 francs.¹²⁶

Jean-Baptiste designed a gargantuan organ with four manuals and seventy-eight ranks for Albi Cathedral.¹²⁷ He preserved some of the existing pipework while adding much of his own.¹²⁸ Forty-two of the stops were placed behind shades, making it the only organ in France to have so many pipes under expression.¹²⁹ The tonal scheme was diverse, featuring orchestral stops such as a Euphone.¹³⁰ There was also a Clarabella, an English stop that was unusual for a French symphonic organ.¹³¹ The Great division boasted seven stops speaking at 8′ pitch, which provided a plethora of foundational tone for the upperwork. Upon completion, Albi Cathedral contained the largest French symphonic organ outside of Paris. Only two organs exceeded its size in France at the time: the Cavaillé-Coll instruments of Notre-Dame de Paris and l’Église Saint-Sulpice.¹³²

Jean-Baptiste and his team of technicians devised solutions for the challenges of making an instrument of such magnitude to function. Three enormous bellows and four pairs of blowers installed in the cathedral tower powered the Albi organ.¹³³ The entire organ was on tubular-pneumatic action.¹³⁴ This manner of construction allowed the resistance in the keyboards and pedalboard to remain consistent regardless of how many manuals were coupled.¹³⁵ This instrument also featured a crescendo pedal with a dial that indicated which stops were added based on the position of the shoe.¹³⁶ Though the Pugets did not invent tubular-pneumatic action or the crescendo pedal, the builders demonstrated originality in applying these innovations to such a large organ. There was no existing prototype or precedent for constructing a French symphonic organ of this size with these technological innovations.

Adolphe Marty, who was the organ instructor at Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles in Paris at the time, dedicated the instrument on the feast of Saint Cecilia, November 22, 1904. The performance date was significant as Saint Cecilia, the namesake of the cathedral, is also the patron saint of music.¹³⁹ This premiere program by Marty, a former student of César Franck, included works by Bach, Buxtehude, and a new composition of his own specifically for the inauguration of the organ. It was called Sonate héroïque Sainte Cécile and had four movements: “Extase,” “Chant d’Hyménée,” “Entretien et Conversion,” and “Triomphe et Apothéose.”¹⁴⁰ This piece is significant as it represents a contribution to the French symphonic organ repertoire inspired by a Puget organ.

The organ in Albi Cathedral was judged to be the Puget family’s masterpiece. In a review of this concert, the cathedral rector wrote the following week in a local publication that only two organs exceeded the greatness of that in Albi: Notre-Dame de Paris and l’Église Saint-Sulpice.¹⁴¹ A prominent Parisian organist of this era, Albert Perilhou, echoed the sentiment of this review with even more praise. He declared in a message to Puget that the Albi organ was a “deserving rival” of the two massive Paris organs.¹⁴² These testimonies demonstrate awe and respect for Jean-Baptiste’s work ranging from local members of the Albi religious community to two of the most distinguished French musicians at the turn of the century.

In addition to pleasing mid-career professionals at the turn of the century, the Albi instrument also inspired young organists. Léonce de Saint-Martin was born in Albi in 1886 and was the deputy organist at the church by age fourteen in 1900. Four years later, while he still served in this position, the cathedral organ was inaugurated by his teacher, Marty.¹⁴³ In the years after Saint-Martin had moved to Paris, Jean-Baptiste received a letter from him. He described that he spent his holiday vacations playing the Albi organ and told the builder: “I bless the Lord one hundred times to have been so well privileged.”¹⁴⁴ Saint-Martin went on to succeed Louis Vierne as the organist of Notre-Dame de Paris in 1937.¹⁴⁵

For fifty years, the Puget organ filled the expansive nave of Albi Cathedral with music and rarely required maintenance. However, the instrument did not survive into the modern age. Following a recital given by André Marchal in May 1954, musicologist and organist Norbert Dufourcq, who was in the audience, declared that the organ was in disrepair. Speaking metaphorically, he described the organ as having a “vocal illness” and in dire need of a “remedy.”¹⁴⁶ He was describing problems in the instrument’s winding system and the failing tubular-pneumatic action. Dufourcq also bemoaned the organ’s tonal palette, crying for more mixtures and upperwork rather than reeds and 8′ tone.¹⁴⁷ He was a major proponent of Victor Gonzalez’s neo-Classical organs and tended to besmirch the Pugets.¹⁴⁸

A restoration of this instrument would have involved hundreds of hours of meticulous work on the organ’s tubular-pneumatic systems. This type of organ technology had fallen out of style by the 1930s because the thin leather membranes had aged and needed to be replaced.¹⁴⁹ Air leaks that had developed over time impaired the pneumatic system. In 1971 the Puget organ was dismantled and would ultimately be replaced by 1981 with an organ in the neo-Baroque style.¹⁵⁰

The Puget instrument of Albi Cathedral represents both desirable and unpreferable aspects of organbuilding at the turn of the century. One could perceive Jean-Baptiste poorly for choosing low quality materials that risked unsustainability over time. Others may be tempted to pass judgment on Dufourcq’s criticism and Albi Cathedral’s governance for choosing not to restore the Puget organ in the latter part of the twentieth century. Regardless of opinions, the organ of Albi Cathedral was ultimately a product of its time.¹⁵² Jean-Baptiste could not have known the long-term sustainability problems of tubular-pneumatic systems because his decisions were cutting-edge at the time of the organ’s construction. The French Culture Ministry and its commission of Albi Cathedral acted practically when electing to replace the Puget organ.¹⁵³

The neo-Classical era, 1922–1960: Maurice Puget

During the tenures of Théodore, Eugène, and Jean-Baptiste, the family business operated under a rapidly changing French political landscape. The company endured the separation of church and state (1789–1905); the Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871); the Expulsion of the Congregations (1880); the civil unrest following the assassination of the charismatic socialist orator Jean Jaurès, a native Occitanian (1914); and the numerous inefficacious post-Napoleonic governing systems that rose and fell in nineteenth-century France.¹⁵⁵ The Pugets also survived competition against Cavaillé-Coll and managed to establish themselves in the south of France. Though technology had evolved during these years, the family’s instruments up to the 1920s were French symphonic organs indicative of the Romantic era. The external factors of political turmoil, new competition, and changing artistic aesthetics all were challenging factors in Maurice’s career.

Life and works

In his youth, Maurice attended the Toulouse Conservatory and took organ lessons with Georges Debat-Ponsan. During these years, he was awarded medals for his proficiency in solfège, piano, and organ while learning from his father in the family workshop. Young Maurice was the chief voicer of his father’s Albi Cathedral organ, ensuring all seventy-four stops sounded harmoniously.¹⁵⁷ To continue his study in organ performance, he left Toulouse and joined the studio of Adolphe Marty in Paris. After two years he came back to Toulouse to work again with his father and married Elia-Jane Desmons in 1912. His organbuilding career was interrupted when he was conscripted in World War I.¹⁵⁸

During the war, Maurice put his training as an organ technician to use. To trace enemy planes flying in the night sky, a French military captain, René Baillaud, designed a primitive sonar that he named the “Parabaloïde Baillaud.”¹⁵⁹ In order to operate this echolocation device, the user needed to have a keen ear, which Maurice had developed from his years of musical training and labor in the family workshop. He was directed by the French military’s general headquarters to help Baillaud develop the tool further.¹⁶⁰ For his successful work, which helped keep French soldiers and civilians safe during the war, Maurice was awarded the Croix de Guerre.¹⁶¹

Maurice officially took over the family business from his father in 1922, though Jean-Baptiste likely transferred responsibilities to his son gradually in the years prior.¹⁶² The same year Maurice and his wife had a son, Jean, whose descendants are alive today.¹⁶³ Maurice had several apprentices, the most famous of whom was Robert Boisseau.¹⁶⁴ However, neither his son nor any other apprentice succeeded Maurice after his sudden stroke in 1960.¹⁶⁵ By 1965 a central heating company had taken the place of the Puget workshop on Rue de Négreneys.

As Maurice assumed his role as head of the Puget workshop, organbuilding aesthetics in France were shifting. In the early twentieth century, Norbert Dufourcq and André Marchal spearheaded a movement to create eclectic organs. These instruments would have the foundation tone of a French symphonic organ but would also have sounds common to French Classical and German Baroque organs, such as brilliant mixtures, lustrous mutation stops, and soft reeds. Spanish organbuilder Victor Gonzalez, a former employee of both Cavaillé-Coll and Merklin based in Paris, constructed instruments in this style. This type of organbuilding became known as the neo-Classical movement. Shortly after his business was established in 1929, Gonzalez dominated the market with the help of his powerful allies, who included Dufourcq, Marchal, and German organbuilder Rudolf von Beckerath.¹⁶⁶ The Puget family faced more difficulty competing against the Gonzalez firm in post-war France than they did against Cavaillé-Coll at the height of his business’s power.¹⁶⁷

Maurice was aware of the rapid changes occurring in the organ industry and started constructing instruments in the neo-Classical style at least seven years before Gonzalez’s firm was founded. He was a gracious man who made concessions to his clients, though some scholars argue that his acceptance of customers’ neo-Classical demands damaged the reputation of the family. For example, Maurice made modifications to the organ in the Salle Franklin, the opera house in Bordeaux, by adding an 8′ Bourdon made of zinc; a three-rank Mixture, two ranks of which were made with spotted metal and the third plain metal; and a Voix humaine, also made of zinc.¹⁶⁸ After World War I, tin, oak, and other durable materials became even more expensive and scarce than they had been previously. Many critics decried Maurice’s work and reminisced about the organs of Eugène’s tenure.¹⁶⁹

Three notable reconstructions from Maurice’s first decade as head of the workshop include the organs of la Cathédrale Saint-Just et Saint-Pasteur in Narbonne in 1927, la Cathédrale de Perpignan in 1930, and la Collégiale Saint-Salvy d’Albi in 1931. These projects are defined by their Stentor stops and plethora of mutations.¹⁷⁰ Maurice also installed electro-pneumatic systems in his instruments throughout his career, and he altered mechanical blowers by adapting them to electricity. By using the electro-pneumatic system, Maurice was able to create extended and borrowed stops that shared the same rank of pipes. For example, on the organ at Saint-Salvy, there are sixty stops for forty ranks of pipes.¹⁷¹ Maurice constructed his instruments with strong foundation stops, similar to the robust 8′ tone his father designed at Albi Cathedral as well as other French symphonic organs by the family. By voicing his instruments to produce a vigorous sound, Maurice differed from Gonzalez, whose foundation stops were quieter.¹⁷²

World War II wreaked havoc on the Puget dynasty.¹⁷⁴ Materials that were already rare and expensive in France after World War I became even more scarce during the 1940s, which affected organbuilding as well as numerous other industries. The country’s economy was in shambles due to soaring inflation. The Puget family’s net worth was depleted, and clients for new organs were few and far between. French clergy were also lacking money after the separation of church and state, and Gonzalez snatched up whatever major organ projects were available at the time.¹⁷⁵ Cavaillé-Coll’s workshop, which had been succeeded by Charles Mutin and Auguste Convers after Aristide’s passing, closed its doors during this war. The once formidable giant of French symphonic organbuilding throughout the nineteenth century fell victim during these difficult years.

Despite dire circumstances, Maurice had some advantages to keep the family business afloat. First, he had a thorough understanding of organs throughout Occitania. He was a desirable restorer because he had an encyclopedic knowledge of many organs in the south of France. He always approached restoration projects respectfully, voicing organs from different eras in an appropriate, tasteful manner. Maurice also had influential Parisian contacts, continuing in Eugène and Jean-Baptiste’s tradition of professional correspondences.¹⁷⁶ Thanks to his friendships with prestigious organists such as Marcel Dupré, Alexandre Cellier, and Xavier Darasse, he was able to win contracts despite Gonzalez’s grip on the French organ scene. Three of Maurice’s most notable restorations were in the cathedrals of Toulouse in 1947, Monaco in 1953, and Nice in 1958.¹⁷⁷

In both Maurice’s time and the present day, one finds critics of France’s neo-Classical movement. Oftentimes, when builders tried to create eclectic organs with the versatility to perform multiple kinds of repertoire authentically, they produced instruments that could not interpret any single style well. Maurice’s organs were controversial because of their electrification, specification, and materials.¹⁷⁸ However, Maurice’s proficiency in technology, music, and history was never questioned. He brought artistry to neoclassicism with the resources that were available to him.

Maurice was adaptable, enduring several challenges in his environment. Before he succeeded his father, he was forced to sacrifice years of his early career to serve his country in World War I. He built with cheaper materials because those were what was available to him at a price the business could afford. Maurice prioritized his customers’ preferences in his work, which some critics perceived as a detriment. He treated each organ that he restored with a sensitivity to its history and its original construction.¹⁷⁹ Ultimately, by navigating through uncertain, turbulent cultural shifts with minimal resources, Maurice brought honor and prestige to the Puget family. After Maurice passed away, Marcel Dupré wrote a letter of condolence to the family: “I had not only the highest esteem for his value and talent as an organbuilder, and the deepest admiration for his courage and dedication to his art, but a deep friendship for him.”¹⁸⁰

Conclusion

Of the twenty-five largest Puget organs, fifteen were destroyed, typically replaced by neo-Classical instruments of other builders.¹⁸² Of the remaining ten large instruments, three are not functioning but are well preserved; another three are playable but are in need of restoration; and four have been restored.¹⁸³ Over the course of roughly 120 years, the Puget family constructed 350 organs and worked on 742 in total.¹⁸⁴ These instruments were found in churches, salons, theaters, conservatories, and concert halls not only in France but also in other European nations as well as in Asia, Africa, and Australia.¹⁸⁵ The Pugets built thirteen organs in Paris, a city defined by the work of Cavaillé-Coll.

The international demand for Puget organs was a result of the instruments’ caliber. For example, the Taur organ was durable and designed for the comfort of the performer. The Albi Cathedral instrument astonished onlookers with its five tubular-pneumatic systems. With seventy-four stops, there were limitless possibilities of combinations. The organs of the Taur and Albi Cathedral encapsulate the Pugets’ work as masterful technicians and artists.

Puget organs represent the best of Toulousain culture. A historic city, Toulouse has a rich musical heritage that can be traced as far back as the troubadours in the Medieval era. Toulouse also displays a distinct architectural style that, like many European metropolises, contains a variety of buildings both ancient and modern. By choosing local materials and constructing in the symphonic style, the Pugets created a distinct Toulousain organ sound that balanced normative French trends at the national scale with unique developments, such as voicing in a darker tone and consistently placing multiple divisions under expression. Puget façades tastefully reflect the architectural styles of the rooms in which they reside, maintaining aesthetic consistency. In perfecting aural and visual aspects of their instruments, the Pugets created a distinct Toulousain organ identity.¹⁸⁶

The Pugets were unique because of the culture of their workshop in which each of the four heads of family constructed organs differently from one another. They did not feel pressure to always build instruments in a prescribed manner and were quick to make changes. For example, Eugène made radical innovations at the Taur just after assuming control from his father, and Jean-Baptiste stopped building with mechanical actions immediately after he succeeded Eugène in 1892. Though Théodore likely apprenticed with Moitessier and abided by Bédos’s treatise, he was largely self-taught and instructed his sons in the craft of organbuilding. When asked why he preferred Puget organs to those of Cavaillé-Coll, Jean Daldosso said that every Puget organ is a new revelation since the family did not fear unorthodox experimentation.¹⁸⁸

By studying organs of the Puget family, performers can create better informed interpretations. For example, organists may be surprised to learn that on Puget organs, the Hautbois-Bassoon and Voix humaine were both activated by the reed ventil, unlike a Cavaillé-Coll instrument. Though Widor’s Symphonie V was written for his instrument at l’Église Saint-Sulpice, which had a single expressive division, one could deliver a historically informed performance of his work by manipulating the shades of an expressive Positif division like the Puget organ of Notre-Dame de la Dalbade. Jean-Claude Guidarini argued that timbres of mystic organ composers such as Louis Vierne, Charles Tournemire, and Olivier Messiaen are easy to produce on Puget instruments because the composers’ registrations feature somber 8′ foundations with tastefully balanced upperwork.¹⁸⁹ If Cavaillé-Coll’s and Gonzalez’s organs are the sole instruments upon which performers conceive their interpretations, the possibilities for artistry and creativity are constrained. The many testimonials in which generations of formidable French organ composers expressed respect and honor towards the Pugets indicate the validity of the family’s works, which allowed for tasteful interpretations of symphonic organ repertoire. Some compositions inspired by Puget organs include Georges Debat-Ponsan’s Elévation and the aforementioned sonata by Adolphe Marty, written for Albi Cathedral.¹⁹⁰

Organ builders also can benefit from learning about the Puget family. Each head of the family was attuned to the history of instruments, the desires of their clients, current trends in organ building, and how to voice organs in a tasteful manner. As a result, their numerous technical innovations, voicing styles, and materials were always calculated risks. The engineering details of their instruments, such as scalings, pneumatic system components, and façade blueprints are a worthy area of study that can inform organbuilders on different types of approaches to French symphonic organbuilding. Théodore, Eugène, and Maurice were especially considerate of the needs of performers since they were organists themselves.

Musicians and scholars are still seeking further information on the Puget family. For example, little is known about Jean-Baptiste’s organ in the prestigious Théâtre des Champs-Elysées in Paris. It was constructed in May 1913, and the façade is still visible today above the proscenium.¹⁹¹ Léonce de Saint-Martin was appointed as the theater’s organist.¹⁹² At the inauguration of this fifty-two-rank instrument, which had an array of percussive stops, an orchestra was conducted in turn by Claude Debussy, Vincent d’Indy, Paul Dukas, Gabriel Fauré, and Camille Saint-Saëns.¹⁹³ Though some details of the organ’s history are known, the Théâtre des Champs-Elysées did not keep many records on the instrument, and in 2020 the theater petitioned the general public to provide information about the organ so that they could begin a restoration.¹⁹⁴

Many questions about the dynasty puzzle Puget experts today. For example, one wonders if the organ of the Théâtre des Champs-Elysées provided prelude music to audience goers at the premiere of Igor Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring, an infamous disaster in which the performance by the Ballet Russes resulted in a riotous uproar from the audience.¹⁹⁵ There are many questions surrounding Théodore’s life, especially concerning the exact year of his company’s founding. In addition, one wonders when did Eugène discover the possibility of having two expressive divisions, and what organ, if any, inspired him to implement this organbuilding technique at the Taur. For many of the Puget instruments, both surviving and lost, there is a need for further research. I hope that this essay will serve as a springboard that inspires future study of the Pugets and their instruments.

The organs of the Puget family remain relevant in the modern age. Annually, thousands of organists flock to southern France for the festival of “Toulouse Les Orgues” to hear instruments such as the Puget organs of Notre-Dame du Taur and Notre-Dame de la Dalbade in concert. Students at the Conservatoire à Rayonnement Régionale de Toulouse come from around the world to study and perform repertoire on these organs. Many people can describe a Puget instrument they have experienced, but few are able to share information they have learned about the builder.¹⁹⁶ If the Pugets’ legacy is to be celebrated and their organs are to survive, further scholarship is needed. The priceless, masterful works of the Puget family deserve more recognition from the international organ community.

Notes

103. Guidarini, “La Dalbade France 1888, Beethoven, Berlioz, Chopin, Saint-Saëns. . .,” page 74.

104. Bachet, page 17.

105. Guidarini, page 74.

106. Rohan, pages 19, 76.

107. Delmas; Rohan, page 19. Delmas read a letter by Jean-Baptiste saying that zinc pipes were more expensive than tin, but that the organbuilder sought after the material for the sound it produced. Other evidence from Rohan suggests otherwise.

108. Bachet, page 10; Delmas.

109. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

110. De Lasala, “The Eugène Puget Organ Is Reborn,” page 10.

111. Shannon, page 8.

112. Comments made by Katelyn Emerson, April 26, 2023; Shannon, page 177.

113. Hamilton, page 56. One instance in which Eugène did use the pneumatic system was in the pedalboard of the Dalbade, as previously mentioned.

114. Rohan, page 19. It is unclear just how involved Bédart was with the Puget company. Rohan describes his role as “éminence grise,” which means “gray eminence.” He was influential in the philosophy of the company and its direction without having an official title.

115. Gabriel Bédart, “Les Orgues Tubulaire à Membranes de M. Puget,” L’Art Méridional, July 1, 1895.

116. Rohan, page 19.

117. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse, page 4.

118. Albi is a town located northeast of Toulouse in Occitania.

119. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini. White-bearded Jean-Baptiste is standing in the center of the image with his arms folded.

120. Justin Postlethwaite, “Albi: The Birthplace of Toulouse-Lautrec,” France Today, August 3, 2022, https://francetoday.com/travel/travel-features/city-focus-albi/.

121. “Albi Cathedral,” World Monuments Fund, December 2020, https://www.wmf.org/project/albi-cathedral.

122. Gérard Terrissol, Les orgues de la Cathédrale Sainte-Cecile d’Albi (Albi: Éditions Grand Sud, 1992), pages 8–16. Several other builders had made minor adjustments to Moucherel’s organ, which was built in 1736.

123. Terrissol, pages 20–22; Chris Van Doodewaard, “Pipe Organs: Albi Cathedral France 1736 Christophe Moucherel,” Pipe Organs (blog), October 20, 2010, http://mypipeorganhobby.blogspot.com/2009/01/albi-cathedral-france.html.

124. Terrissol, pages 20–22; “Composite of Sainte-Cécile,” Organa Reginae Caeli, November 18, 2019, https://organareginaecaeli.wordpress.com/composite-of-sainte-cecile/.

125. Jean-Claude Guidarini, “Le Grand Orgue Jean-Baptiste Puget de La Métropole d’Albi,” Le Dermogloste, March 17, 2009. Accessed January 25, 2022, http://dermogloste.viabloga.com/news/le-grand-orgue-jean-baptiste-puget-de-la-metropole-d-albi.

126. Terrissol, pages 20–22.

127. Guidarini. See Figure 8 for an image of the console.

128. Terrissol, pages 20–22.

129. Guidarini.

130. Guidarini.

131. Brown.

132. Guidarini. In 1932 the organ of Saint Eustache in Paris was expanded significantly, making the Puget organ the fourth largest in all of France.

133. Delmas; Guidarini. The wind pressure on the Albi organ was much higher than a typical French symphonic organ of this time.

134. Guidarini.

135. Shannon, page 72.

136. Guidarini; Terrissol, pages 20–22.

137. Reprinted from Guidarini.

138. Reprinted from Guidarini.

139. J. Lapeyre, “Variétés: Un Orgue et Une Sonate d’Orgue,” La Semaine Religieuse Du Diocèse d’Alby, November 26, 1904, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6390560d. November 22 was also the anniversary of the Dalbade organ dedication.

140. Lapeyre; Adolphe Marty, Sonate Héroïque de Sainte-Cécile (Paris: A. Nöel, 1905); Poliquin.

141. Lapeyre.

142. Guidarini.

143. Jean Guérard, “Leonce of Saint-Martin,” Musica et Memoria, 2016, http://www.musimem.com/st-martin.htm.

144. Ibid.

145. Philip Andrew Smith, “Léonce de Saint-Martin: Organist and Composer” (Doctor of Musical Arts dissertation, Hamilton, New Zealand, The University of Waikato, 2018), https://hdl.handle.net/10289/12116, 82.

146. Delmas; Guidarini; Terrissol, page 22. Dufourcq was a staunch political opponent of the Puget family. He championed organs built by Gonzalez.

147. Guidarini.

148. Delmas.

149. Delmas; Shannon, pages 66–67. Delmas says that pneumatic membrane decay, lead tube corrosion, and lack of maintenance were likely the sources of the problems.

150. Guidarini; Terrissol, pages 20–22; Timothy Tikker, “Albi Cathedral–Moucherel Organ,” Mander Organ Builders Forum, September 3, 2005, https://mander-organs-forum.invisionzone.com/topic/182-albi-cathedral-moucherel-organ/.

151. Neither the Pugets’ organ nor the 1981 instrument altered the existing casework, so Jean-Baptiste’s organ would have looked identical to this one.

152. Guidarini.

153. Delmas; Guidarini. Dufourq’s critiques were not the only red flags concerning this instrument’s condition. Delmas describes a report in the French Ministry of Culture in Paris from 1958, which states what organists Alexandre Cellier and Pierre Cochereau found when they were sent to evaluate the instrument. They claimed that a lack of maintenance and drastic temperature fluxes made the organ unplayable, especially in warm weather. The two recommended electrifying the action, moving the Echo into the Positif case, and swapping one or two stops. Regrettably, no action was taken following this report. At French cathedrals, decisions such as organ projects are made by the French Ministry of Culture and the commissions they assemble for their restoration projects.

154. Mitchell, reprinted from Guidarini, “Compositions Du Quelques Instruments Construits Ou Reconstruits Par La Manufacture Puget de Toulouse.”

155. B. S. Bennet, “19th Century French Politics,” University of Botswana History Department, September 11, 2000. http://www.thuto.org/ubh/ub/h202/fr19p1.htm; Musée protestant. “The Law of 1905.” Accessed April 12, 2023. https://museeprotestant.org/en/notice/the-law-of-1905/.

156. Reprinted from “Histoire et Anecdotes,” Toulouse Les Orgues, accessed April 12, 2022, https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/orgues-2/histoire-et-anecdote/.

157. Guidarini, “La Dalbade France 1888, Beethoven, Berlioz, Chopin, Saint-Saëns. . .,” pages 74–75.

158. Rohan, page 37.

159. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse, page 6. Paraboloïde Baillaud was a precursor to flight radar.

160. “L’Inauguration du Grand Orgue,” Le Cri de Toulouse, December 1921, 11ème Année, No. 47 edition.

161. Guidarini, “La Dalbade France 1888, Beethoven, Berlioz, Chopin, Saint-Saëns. . .,” page 75. “Croix de Guerre,” which is a military medal, best translates to “War Cross.”

162. Évrard, page 8.

163. Delmas; Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie Toulousaine de Facteurs d’Orgues, page 37. Jean, who passed away in 2018, was a career pharmacist. His daughter, Françoise, was born in 1953. She and her son, Nicolas, are living descendants.

164. Vincent Hildebrandt, “Boisseau–Cattiaux–Chevron,” Organs of Paris, accessed April 9, 2022, https://www.organsparisn.vhhil.nl/boiscat.htm. Boisseau and his apprentices built several organs. His son, Jean-Loup Boisseau, restored the organs of la Basilique Saint-Denis, Notre-Dame de Paris, la Cathédrale de Poitiers, and la Basilique Saint-Sernin in Toulouse.

165. Rohan, page 37.

166. Vincent Hildebrandt, “Gonzalez-Danion-Dargassies,” Organs of Paris, accessed March 19, 2023, https://www.organsparisn.vhhil.nl/gonzalez1.htm.

167. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie Toulousaine de Facteurs d’Orgues, page 36; Rohan, page 28. One reason Dufourcq wrote scathing critiques about the Albi Cathedral organ when its tubular-pneumatic systems failed was he saw the Pugets as competitors of Gonzalez, with whom he was aligned. Dufourcq did complement the Pugets on their restorations, citing their remarkable knowledge of instruments throughout the south of France.

168. Bachet, page 18.

169. Delmas; Guidarini, “La Dalbade France 1888, Beethoven, Berlioz, Chopin, Saint-Saëns. . .,” page 75. Another struggle Maurice faced came in 1936 when the French government instituted paid holidays. This law did not help organbuilders generate profit.

170. Bachet, page 18; Edward J. Stauff, “Stentor Bombarde,” Encyclopedia of Organ Stops, 1999, accessed March 20, 2023, http://www.organstops.org/s/StentorBombarde.html. Stentor stops were loud stops common on organs in the early twentieth century. A Stentor stop may refer to a Stentorphone, Stentor Octave (sounding at 4′ pitch), or a Stentor Bombarde, which is a penetrating reed.

171. Bachet, pages 18–19.

172. Hamilton, page 62.

173. Joseph Rivel, “Bénédiction & Inauguration Solennelle du Grand Orgue,” Le Bourdon de la Basilique Saint-Just & Saint-Pasteur Narbonne, October 23, 1927, 6ème Année, No. 11 edition, in Organ Historical Society Library and Archives, Villanova, Pennsylvania.

174. World War II was a particularly dark period for pipe organs and organbuilders. Across Europe, thousands of organs were dismantled so that metal pipes could be melted down to make ammunition. Many historic organs were bombed and lost forever. The Pugets were fortunate since their most famous instruments were not destroyed as a consequence of the war.

175. Delmas.

176. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie Toulousaine de Facteurs d’Orgues, page 40.

177. Bachet, page 19.

178. Bachet, page 19.

179. Bachet, page 18.

180. Rohan, page 26. Translation by Mitchell.

181. Rohan, page 26. Translation by Mitchell.

182. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie Toulousaine de Facteurs d’Orgues, page 40. The dismantling of large organs was common in the neo-Classical era of organbuilding. The instruments of Merklin and other notable builders were also destroyed in similar fashion in the latter part of the twentieth century.

183. Guidarini, “Les Puget, Une Dynastie Toulousaine de Facteurs d’Orgues,” page 40.

184. “Histoire de l’orgue et Concert Lyrique: le Public Conquis,” La Dépêche, March 4, 2015, https://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2015/03/04/2059782-histoire-de-l-orgue-et-concert-lyrique-le-public-conquis.html; Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie Toulousaine de Facteurs d’Orgues, page 40. It is unclear exactly how many organs were built for their homes outside of France and how many were moved there later. One of the Pugets’ instruments in Sainte-Marie College in Toulouse, built in 1875, was supposed to be transferred to Madagascar. Since Théodore could not oversee its completion in Africa, the organ remained in France and was later moved to Saint Barthélémy Church in Montastruc-la-Conseillère.

185. Delmas; Le Cri de Toulouse; Pastór de Lasala, “A Puget Organ in Sydney: A Fortunate Historical Accident,” OHTA News 44, no. 1 (October 4, 2018): pages 14–21. There was a single cinema organ constructed by the Puget family at Le Royal Cinéma in Toulouse.

186. Rohan, page 17. Because of their unique elements regarding aesthetics, some scholars such as Rohan argue that Puget organs are not comparable to Cavaillé-Coll’s instruments.

187. Reprinted from Guidarini. Addressed to the Pugets, the perimeter of the image lists all the family’s organs that Marty had dedicated up to 1901.

188. Hamilton, page 62.

189. Hamilton, page 62.

190. Rohan, page 30.

191. Delmas.

192. Smith, page 80.

193. Guidarini, Les Pugets, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’orgues à Toulouse, page 6.

194. Théâtre des Champs-Elysées, “Le Saviez-Vous? L’Histoire de l’Orgue du Théâtre N’Est Pas Évidente à Retracer,” December 2020, YouTube video, 2:41, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxvUGQV3NC8.

195. Delmas. The Puget organ was examined and accepted exactly one week before the Rite of Spring premiere.

196. Simon Thomas Jacobs, “In the Organ Lofts of Bordeaux, Toulouse, and Paris,” The Diapason, volume 105, number 8, whole number 1257 (August 2014), pages 20–24.

 

References

Key:

BNF=Bibliothèque National du France, Paris

OHS=Organ Historical Society Library and Archives, Villanova, Pennsylvania

 

​​Amann, Dominique. Le Facteur d’orgues Frédéric Jungk. France: La Maurinière éditions, 2013. www.la-mauriniere.com.

Les Amis de l’Orgue de Seysses. “L’orgue.” Accessed January 29, 2022. https://www.lesamisdelorguedeseysses.fr/orgue/.

Les Amis de l’Orgue Puget Saint-Antonin-Noble-Val. “Quand Théodore Puget Etait Representant du ‘Milacor’. . .,” 28 mai 2021. Accessed January 29, 2022. https://orguesaintantonin.fr/quand-Théodore-puget-etait-representant-du-milacor.

Art Lyb. “79 L’Orgue à cylindre d’Airvault,” filmed at L’Église Abbatiale d’Airvault dans les Deux-Sèvres. Uploaded October 13, 2017. YouTube, 4:59. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRCDtCXzg8c.

Association Aristide Cavaillé-Coll. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.cavaille-coll.fr/en/frequently-asked-questions/.

Association Jean-Claude Guidarini. “Association Jean-Claude Guidarini–AssoJCG.Org.” Accessed January 25, 2022. https://assojcg.org/.

L’Association Orgues Meridionales. “Orgues Meridionales.” Orgues Meridionales. http://orgues.meridionales.free.fr/.

Association Régionale des Activités Musicales en Languedoc-Roussillon. Orgues En Languedoc-Roussillon: Gard-Lozère. Volume 2. Aix-en-Provence: Aux éditions Édisud, 1988.

Bachet, Philippe, ed. Orgues En Midi-Pyrénées (Toulouse et Région): 15ème Congrès de La FFAO, 13 Au 18 Juillet 1998. Lyon: Fédération Francophone des Amis de l’Orgue, 1998. OHS.

Barone, Michael J. “Historic Organs of Australia.” St. Paul, MN: American Public Media, 2017. https://pipedreams.publicradio.org/autumntour/australia2017brochure.pdf.

———. “Historic Organs of France.” St. Paul, MN: American Public Media, 2017. https://pipedreams.publicradio.org/tour/2017france/france2017booklet.pdf.

Basilique Saint-Sernin de Toulouse (Site officiel). “Notre-Dame Du Taur.” Accessed March 7, 2023. https://www.basilique-saint-sernin.fr/note-dame-du-taur/.

Bédart, Gabriel. “Les Orgues Tubulaire à Membranes de M. Puget.” L’Art Méridional, July 1, 1895. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k53409606.

———. “L’Orgue du Conservatoire de Lille.” L’Art Méridional, June 15, 1900. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k53410783.

Bédos de Celles, Dom François. L’Arte Du Facteur d’Orgues. Facsimilie edition. New York: Bärenreiter, 1963.

“Bénédiction Solennelle Du Grand Orgue,” November 22, 1888. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

Bennet, B. S. “19th Century French Politics.” University of Botswana History Department, September 11, 2000. http://www.thuto.org/ubh/ub/h202/fr19p1.htm.

Bouvard, Michel. “Michel Bouvard and #OrganTalk at Toulouse les Orgues Festival 2020.” Interview by Alexandra Bartfeld. YouTube, November 22, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPetM1nnP2Q.

Bovet, Guy. “Berlioz: ‘Symphonie fantastique’ (Yves Rechsteiner).” La Tribune de l’Orgue–Revue suisse romande 66, no. 1 (2014): pages 45–46.

Bush, Douglas Earl, and Richard Kassel. “Clicquot.” In The Organ, an Encyclopedia. Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006.

“Les Callinet de Rouffach.” Accessed April 12, 2022. http://decouverte.orgue.free.fr/facteurs/callinet.htm.

Calmettes, Michel. “St Vincent Church–Carcassonne.” Orgues en France et dans Le Monde. Accessed October 14, 2022. http://orguesfrance.com/CarcassonneStVincent.html.

Cicchero, Jean-Marc. “Montreal d’Aude, Une Autre Colline Inspirée?,” July 13, 2016. https://orguesaintantonin.fr/montreal-daude-une-autre-colline-inspiree.

Cicchero, Philippe. Les Orgues Des Cathédrales de France. Gentilly: EMA, 1999.

Contrasty, Jean. Églises et Images de Sainte-Marie-de-La Dalbade Du VIe Au XXe Siècle. Tarbes, 1946. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k3347371p.

De Lasala, Pastór. “The Discovery of Another Piece to the Elusive Jigsaw.” OHTA News 31, no. 3 (2007): pages 18–20.

———. “The Eugène Puget Organ Is Reborn.” OHTA News 35, no. 3 (2011): pages 7–17.

———. “A Puget Organ in Sydney: A Fortunate Historical Accident.” OHTA News 44, no. 1 (2018): pages 14–21.

De Lasala, Pastór, Ann Henderson, and Kelvin Hastie. “Chapel of Kincoppal-Rose Bay School of the Sacred Heart New South Head Road, Rose Bay; Théodore Puget, Père et Fils of Toulouse, 1890, Installed 1906 (2/13 Mechanical).” Organ Music Society of Sydney. Accessed January 28, 2022. https://www.sydneyorgan.com/Puget.html.

La Dépêche. “Carcassonne. Le Grand Orgue Retrouve Son Look Originel.” June 2005. https://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2005/06/13/374007-carcassonne-le-grand-orgue-retrouve-son-look-originel.html.

La Dépêche. “Histoire de l’orgue et Concert Lyrique: le Public Conquis.” March 4, 2015. https://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2015/03/04/2059782-histoire-de-l-orgue-et-concert-lyrique-le-public-conquis.html.

Deschamps, Frederic. “Visite Du Grand Orgue de La Cathédrale Sainte-Cécile d’Albi.” Filmed in May 2021 in Albi. YouTube video, 48:52. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb2f6tOA5gw.

Dufourcq, Norbert. “Les Orgues de Toulouse.” Revue de Musicologie 38, no. 114 (1956): pages 155–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/928006.

ECHO-Organs. “ECHO: European Cities of Historical Organs,” February 18, 2023. https://www.echo-organs.org/.

Eschbach, Jesse. Aristide Cavaillé-Coll: A Compendium of Known Stoplists. Second edition. Volume 1. Kraichtal: Verlag Peter Ewers, 2013.

Évrard, Michel. “Toulouse Bonnefoy Un Orgue Puget aux Prénoms Trompeurs dans Deux Églises Successives.” Les Amis des Archives de la Haute-Garonne, no. 162 (October 31, 2008): pages 1–24.

Freeman’s Journal. “Rose Bay Convent Organ.” March 17, 1906. Trove. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119940189.

Grenyer, Titus. “Sydney’s French Romantic Organ–the Puget Organ of Kincoppal Rose Bay, 2021.” Uploaded April 9, 2021, in Sydney, Australia. YouTube, 12:18. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tN87BZSI2Y.

Guidarini, Jean-Claude. “Cavaillé, Puget. . . un Débat Cool.” Orgues Nouvelles 6ème année, no. 23 (December 2013). https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/puget-cavaille-coll.odt.

———. “Compositions Du Quelques Instruments Construits Ou Reconstruits Par La Manufacture Puget de Toulouse.” n.d. http://www.orgues-nouvelles.fr/ON23/textes/CompoOrgPuget.pdf?fbclid=IwAR11p00_bj-jvug9IbbgxWZyuVSrCQnsne0fup0Nmv15E8pneGhXEuUc3ec.

———. “La Dalbade France 1888, Beethoven, Berlioz, Chopin, Saint-Saëns. . . .” Jacket notes to Berlioz: Symphonie fantastique performed by Yves Rechsteiner. Alpha ALPHA652, 2011. CD. https://cdn.naxosmusiclibrary.com/sharedfiles/booklets/ALP/booklet-ALPHA652.pdf.

———. “Le Grande Orgue.” Moments Musicaux à Notre-Dame du Taur à Toulouse, 2018. Accessed January 25, 2022. http://taur-1880.jimdofree.com/.

———. “Grand Orgue de l’église Notre-Dame du Taur.” Toulouse Les Orgues. Accessed March 9, 2023. https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/instrument/grand-orgue-de-leglise-notre-dame-du-taur/.

———. “Grand Orgue de l’église Saint-Exupère.” Toulouse Les Orgues. Accessed April 26, 2022. https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/instrument/grand-orgue-de-leglise-saint-exupere/.

———. “Le Grand Orgue Jean-Baptiste Puget de La Métropole d’Albi.” Le Dermogloste, March 17, 2009. Accessed January 25, 2022. http://dermogloste.viabloga.com/news/the-jean-baptiste-puget-organ-of-albi-metropolitan-cathedral.

———. “L’Orgue Jean Daldosso du Temple du Salin à Toulouse.” Le Dermogloste, June 2008. Accessed February 10, 2022. http://dermogloste.viabloga.com/news/l-orgue-jean-daldosso-du-temple-du-salin-a-
toulouse-4.

———. Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse. Toulouse: Médiathèque José Cabanis, 2008. https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ob_79c1c0_les-puget-catalogue-expo-2008.pdf.

———. “Les Puget, Une dynastie toulousaine de facteurs d’orgues.” Midi-Pyrénées Patrimoine, Été 2011: pages 34–36, 40.

Guilmant, Alexandre. “Deuxième Séance d’Inauguration Solennelle du Grand Orgue de Notre-Dame du Taur.” Typo.-Lith C. Berdoulat, June 1880. In “Le Grande Orgue” by Jean Claude Guidarini. Moments Musicaux à Notre-Dame du Taur à Toulouse, 2018. Accessed January 25, 2022. https://image.jimcdn.com/app/cms/image/transf/dimension=1024x10000:format=jpg/path/s5bdc24606d23f03d/image/i8c3c33134c11eaa2/version/1411689846/image.jpg.

Gullet, Laura. “Day 8: L’orgue Rend-Il Fou?” Boston Organ Studio (blog), June 10, 2017. http://www.bostonorganstudio.com/2017-france-study-tour/2017/6/13/day-8.

Hamilton, Maggie. “Poetic License.” Choir & Organ, June 2009: pages 55–62.

Hildebrandt, Vincent. “Boisseau–Cattiaux–Chevron.” Organs of Paris. Accessed April 9, 2022. https://www.organsparisn.vhhil.nl/boiscat.htm.

———. “Gonzalez-Danion-Dargassies.” Organs of Paris. Accessed March 19, 2023. https://www.organsparisn.vhhil.nl/gonzalez1.htm.

Hissink, Willemijn. “Carcassonne, Église Saint-Vincent, Hoofdorgel.” De Orgelsite (blog), May 25, 2021. https://www.orgelsite.nl/carcassonne-eglise-saint-vincent-hoofdorgel/.

Huegel, Henri. “Paris et Départements.” Le Ménestrel 54, no. 49 (December 1888): page 391.

“L’Inauguration du Grand Orgue.” Le Cri de Toulouse. December 3, 1921, 11ème Année, no. 47. BNF. https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Le_Cri_de_Toulouse___..._bpt6k5395733j.pdf.

Jacobs, Simon Thomas. “In the Organ Lofts of Bordeaux, Toulouse, and Paris.” The Diapason 105, no. 8 (August 2014): pages 20–24. https://www.thediapason.com/content/organ-lofts-bordeaux-toulouse-and-paris.

Jacquin, Gala. “Toulouse: L’église Notre-Dame Du Taur va Faire Peau Neuve.” L’Opinion Indépendante, January 30, 2023. https://lopinion.com/articles/actualite/15240_toulouse-eglise-notre-dame-taur-peau-neuve.

Le Journal de Toulouse: Politique et Littéraire, “La Séance d’orgue.” June 1880, Année 76, No. 167 édition. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5377532h/f1.item.r=puget.zoom.

Julien, Abbé R. C. Toulouse Chrétienne: Histoire de La Paroisse de Notre Dame La Dalbade. Toulouse: Chez Edouard-Privat, 1891. https://archive.org/stream/histoiredelapar00juligoog/histoiredelapar00juligoog_djvu.txt.

Kincoppal-Rose Bay School. “Kincoppal-Rose Bay History.” Accessed February 23, 2023. https://www.krb.nsw.edu.au/about-us/our-history/.

Kralingen, Arjen van. “Recensie Clair-Obscur: Henri Ormières Bespeelt Het Puget-Orgel in de St. Vincent Te Carcassonne.” Orgel Nieuws (blog), March 20, 2021. https://www.orgelnieuws.nl/recensie-clair-obscur-henri-Ormières-bespeelt-het-puget-orgel-in-de-st-vincent-te-carcassonne/.

L., S. [sic] “On Nous Ecrit de Pibrac.” Journal de Toulouse: Politique et Littéraire, February 1864, 60ème année, no. 45 édition. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k53716127/f1.item.r=puget.zoom.

Lapeyre, J. “Inauguration du Grand Orgue de Saint-Benoît de Castres.” La Semaine Religieuse Du Diocèse d’Alby, November 2, 1922. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6279905k.

———. “Variétés: Un Orgue et Une Sonate d’Orgue.” La Semaine Religieuse Du Diocèse d’Alby, November 26, 1904. BNF. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6390560d.

Lea-Scarlett, E. J. “Delany, John Albert (1852–1907).” In Australian Dictionary of Biography. Canberra: National Centre of Biography, Australian National University. Accessed March 15, 2023. https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/delany-john-albert-3389/text5133.

Marion, Colette. “La Maison Puget: L’Orgue de Saint-Antonin.” Bulletin des Amis du Vieux Saint-Antonin, 2004. http://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Pages-de-2004.pdf.

Marty, Adolphe. Sonate Héroïque de Sainte-Cécile. Paris: A. Nöel, 1905.

Masson, Yves. “Orgues.” Les Orgues, 2022. http://orgue.free.fr/.

McAfee, Kay. “French Organ Music Seminar.” The Diapason 91, no. 1 (January 2000): pages 15–17.

Meyer, Peter. “Organist Had Love for French Culture.” The Sydney Morning Herald. May 24, 2012, sec. National. https://www.smh.com.au/national/organist-had-love-for-french-culture-20120523-1z5af.html.

Micot, Jean-Baptiste. “Rapport Sur Les Orgues de Toulouse,” 1796. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

Ministère de la Culture. “Église Saint-Vincent.” Accessed March 13, 2023. https://www.pop.culture.gouv.fr/notice/merimee/PA00102594.

———. “Gallery Organ: Instrumental Part of the Organ.” Accessed March 13, 2023. https://www.pop.culture.gouv.fr/notice/palissy/PM11000760auteur=%5B%22Puget%20Th%C3%A9odore%20%28facteur%20d%27orgues%29%22%5D&last_view=%22list%22&idQuery=%225e8e000-f2fa-c55-c8c-60a5a6b060%22.

Mitchell, John J. “German Influences on Franck’s Chorale in E Major.” Vox Humana, March 31, 2019. https://www.voxhumanajournal.com/mitchell2019.html.

Musée protestant. “The Law of 1905.” Accessed April 12, 2023. https://museeprotestant.org/en/notice/the-law-of-1905/.

Nayrolles, Jean. “Un architecte toulousain du XIXe siècle: Henri Bach (1815–1899).” Histoire de l’art 1–2, no. 1 (1988): 41–50. https://doi.org/10.3406/hista.1988.1628.

Oldham, Guy, and Kurt Lueders. S.v. “Puget.” Grove Music Online, January 20, 2001.

Organa Reginae Caeli. “Composite of Sainte-Cécile.” November 18, 2019. Accessed February 10, 2022. https://organareginaecaeli.wordpress.com/composite-of-sainte-cecile/.

Orgue Aquitaine. “L’Association Pour Le Développement de l’Orgue En Aquitaine.” Accessed February 13, 2023. https://orgue-aquitaine.fr/.

Les Orgues de l’Abbé Clergeau. “L’abbé Dessenne, L’abbé Cabias et l’orgue simplifié, l’abbé Larroque et Le ‘Milacor.’” L’Orgue de Sète. February 2009. Updated April 2017. Accessed January 29, 2022. https://www.organsparisaz.orguesdeparis.fr/index_htm_files/les_orgues_de_l_abbe_Clergeau.pdf.

Les Orgues de Paris. “Théâtre Des Champs-Elysées.” Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.organsparisaz4.orguesdeparis.fr/Theatre%20Champs-%20elysees.htm.

Orgues en France et dans Le Monde. “L’orgue Puget (1885) de l’église St Exupère de Toulouse (Haute-Garonne).” Accessed April 26, 2022. http://orguesfrance.com/ToulouseStExupere.html.

Ormières, Henri. “Le Grand Orgue Theodore Puget de Saint-Vincent.” Association les Amis de l’Orgue de Saint-Vincent. Accessed October 13, 2022. http://orgue.st.vincent.pagesperso-orange.fr/.

Paroisses Cathédrale Toulouse. “Notre-Dame de La Dalbade,” September 1, 2016. http://paroissescathedraletoulouse.fr/home-2/culture-et-tourisme/notre-dame-de-la-dalbade/.

Paul, Vivian. “The Beginnings of Gothic Architecture in Languedoc.” The Art Bulletin 70, no. 1 (1988): pages 104–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/3051156.

Philadelphia Chamber Music Society. “César Franck–Classical Music Composers.” Accessed March 18, 2023. https://www.pcmsconcerts.org/composer/cesar-franck/.

Poliquin, Robert. “Orgues En France.” Organs Around the World, 1997–2023. Accessed March 3, 2023. http://www.musiqueorguequebec.ca/orgues/orguef.html.

Postlethwaite, Justin. “Albi: The Birthplace of Toulouse-Lautrec.” France Today, August 3, 2022. https://francetoday.com/travel/travel-features/city-focus-albi/.

Puget, Théodore. “Copie In-Extenso Du Devis Inséré Au Registre Des Délibérations Du Conseil de Fabrique de l’église St-Vincent.” Edited by Conseil de Fabrique de l’église St-Vincent, January 22, 1870. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

Radio Présence. “Immersion à Notre-Dame Du Taur.” Recorded by Jean-Claude Guidarini and Radio Présence in 2012 in Toulouse. YouTube video, 26:12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy69JOvYnsE.

Ramackers, Robert. “Les Orgues de L’Abbé Clergeau,” February 2015. https://rmcks.pagesperso-orange.fr/orgue/orgues_clergeau/les_orgues_de_l_abbe_Clergeau.pdf.

Religiana. “Church of Notre-Dame de La Dalbade, Toulouse.” Accessed March 21, 2023. https://religiana.com/church-notre-dame-de-la-dalbade-toulouse.

Rivel, Joseph. “Bénédiction & Inaugration Solennelle du Grand Orgue.” Le Bourdon de la Basilique Saint-Just & Saint-Pasteur Narbonne, October 23, 1927, 6ème Année, No. 11 edition. OHS.

Rohan, Henri de. Th. Puget: Une Famille de Facteurs d’orgues à Toulouse, 1834–1960. Bibliothèque Municipale de Toulouse, 1987. Exhibition catalog, Bibliothèque Municipale de Toulouse, October 1–31, 1987. https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Puget-Rohan-catalogue-expow.pdf.

Rumsey, David. “Norman Johnston, 1917–2012.” Organ Music Society of Sydney, April 28, 2012. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://sydneyorgan.com/Norman.html.

Rushworth, G. D. “Richardson, Charles (1847–1926).” In Australian Dictionary of Biography. Canberra: National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, 2006. https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/richardson-charles-8200.

Shannon, John R. Understanding the Pipe Organ. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., 2009.

Smith, Philip Andrew. “Léonce de Saint-Martin: Organist and Composer.” DMA diss., The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand, 2018. https://hdl.handle.net/10289/12116.

Stauff, Edward J. “Stentor Bombarde.” Encyclopedia of Organ Stops, 1999. http://www.organstops.org/s/StentorBombarde.html.

Terrissol, Gérard. Les orgues de la Cathedrale Sainte-Cecile d’Albi. Albi: Éditions Grand Sud, 1992. OHS.

Théâtre des Champs-Elysées. “Le Saviez-Vous? L’Histoire de l’Orgue du Théâtre N’Est Pas Évidente à Retracer.” Filmed in December 2020 in Paris, France. YouTube video, 2:41. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxvUGQV3NC8.

Théodore Puget Pére et Fils 1834–1960, Une dynastie de facteurs d’orgues. Lavaur: Musée du Pays Vaurais, n.d. Exhibition catalog. https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/plaquette-Lavaur.pdf.

Thomas, Louis. Rapport de la Commission de Réception du Grand-Orgue de la Cathédrale de Montauban. Montauban: Imprimerie Catholique Jules Prunet, 1917. OHS.

Tikker, Timothy. “Albi Cathedral–Moucherel Organ.” Mander Organ Builders Forum, September 3, 2005. Accessed February 6, 2022. https://mander-organs-forum.invisionzone.com/topic/182-albi-cathedral-moucherel-organ/.

Toulouse Les Orgues. “Grand Orgue de l’Église Saint-Barthélémy.” Accessed March 16, 2023. https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/instrument/grand-orgue-de-leglise-saint-barthelemy/.

———. “Histoire et Anecdotes.” Accessed April 12, 2022. https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/orgues-2/histoire-et-anecdote/

​Vallas, Léon. César Franck. Translated by Hubert J. Foss. New York: Oxford University Press, 1951.

Van Doodewaard, Chris. “Pipe Organs: Albi Cathedral France 1736 Christophe Moucherel.” Pipe Organs (blog), October 20, 2010. http://mypipeorganhobby.blogspot.com/2009/01/albi-cathedral-france.html.

Widor, Charles-Marie. The Symphonies for Organ: Symphonie V. Edited by John Near. Volume 15. Recent Researches in the Music of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. Madison: A-R Editions, Inc., 1993.

Weigle, Carl G. “Nouvelle construction pneumatique pour les tuyaux d’orgues, d’églises, et de concerts. Paris, 1890.” Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

World Monuments Fund. “Albi Cathedral,” December 2020. https://www.wmf.org/project/albi-cathedral.

Appendix A: Finding aid to selected topics

Organs

Albi Cathedral (la Cathedrale Sainte-Cecile d’Albi): Bachet; Deschamps; Guidarini; Lapeyre; Organa Reginae Caeli; Orgue Aquitaine; Poliquin; Postlethwaite; Rohan; Smith; Terrissol; Tikker; Van Doodewaard; World Monuments Fund.

The Taur (l’Église Notre-Dame du Taur): L’Association Orgues Meridionales; Amann; Bachet; Basilique Saint-Sernin de Toulouse (Site officiel); ECHO-Organs; Guidarini; Guilmant; Gullet; Hamilton; Jacquin; Le Journal de Toulouse: Politique et Littéraire; Poliquin; Masson; Micot; Nayrolles; Radio Présence; Rohan; Théodore Puget Pére et Fils 1834–1960, Une Dynasty de Facteurs d’Orgues; Toulouse Les Orgues.

Puget family

Eugène Puget: Bachet; Évrard; Guidarini; Hamilton; Rohan; Théodore Puget Pére et Fils 1834–1960, Une Dynasty de Facteurs d’Orgues; Toulouse Les Orgues.

Jean-Baptiste Puget: Bachet; Bédart; Évrard; Guidarini; Hamilton; “L’Inauguration du Grand Orgue;” Les Orgues de Paris; Rohan; Théâtre des Champs-Elysées; Théodore Puget Pére et Fils 1834–1960, Une Dynasty de Facteurs d’Orgues; Toulouse Les Orgues; Weigle.

Maurice Puget: Bachet; Évrard; Guidarini; Hamilton; “L’Inauguration du Grand Orgue;” Rohan; Rivel; Théodore Puget Pére et Fils 1834–1960, Une Dynasty de Facteurs d’Orgues; Thomas; Toulouse Les Orgues.

Théodore Puget: Les Amis de l’Orgue Puget Saint-Antonin-Noble-Val; Les Amis de l’Orgue de Seysses; Art Lyb; Bachet; Cicchero; Dufourcq; Évrard; Guidarini; Hamilton; Les Orgues de l’Abbé Clergeau; Orgues en France et dans Le Monde; Ramackers; Rohan; Théodore Puget Pére et Fils 1834–1960, Une Dynasty de Facteurs d’Orgues; Toulouse Les Orgues.

Appendix B: Discography

Albums

Avot, Lionel. Franck: Pièces pour orgue. Toulouse: Hortus, 2011. http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Mar11/Franck_organ_Hortus083.htm.

De Miguel, Matthieu. Symphonic Acclamations and Gregorian Paraphrases. Toulouse: Priory, 2019. https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8716922--symphonic-acclamations-and-gregorian-paraphrases.

Ensemble Vocal Les Élements, Frédéric Desenclos, and Joël Suhubiette. Alfred Desenclos: Requiem. Toulouse: Hortus, 1997. http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/oct05/Desenclos_hortus009.htm.

Ensemble Vocal Les Élements, Michel Bouvard, and Joël Suhubiette. Duruflé: Requiem. Toulouse: Hortus, 1999. http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/may05/Durufle_requiem_hortus018.htm.

Monin, Virgille. Mulet: L’œuvre pour orgue. Toulouse: FY & Solstice, 2015. https://www.resmusica.com/2015/11/08/lorganiste-henri-mulet-revele-par-virgile-monin/.

Ormières. Clair-Obscur. Toulouse: Priory, 2021. https://www.prioryrecords.co.uk/Ormieres-St-Vincent-Church-Carcassonne-Puget-Franck-Vierne.

Rechsteiner, Yves. Organ recital: Rechsteiner, Yves–Beethoven, L. van, Berlioz, H., Chopin, F., Saint-Saens, C. (L’univers de l’orgue–La Dalbade, France 1888). Toulouse: Alpha, 2011. https://uh-naxosmusiclibrary-com.ezproxy.lib.uh.edu/h5/catalogue/ALPHA652.

YouTube

Bach, Johann Sebastian. Erbarm’ dich mein, O Herre Gott, BWV 721, performed by Mary Prat-Molinier, Albi. 5:52. YouTube, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoB0t59V6O0.

Bélier, Gaston. Toccata in D Minor, performed by Pastór de Lasala, Sydney. 4:21. YouTube, 2012. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27dtjo2asj4&ab_channel=tormus1.

Boëllmann, Léon. Élevation in E-flat Major, performed by Titus Greyner, Sydney. 3:08. YouTube, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzHK6ES-saU&ab_channel=PepOrgan.

Franck, César. Chorale in E Major, performed by John J. Mitchell, Toulouse. 15:43. YouTube, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae-EC8S2J3Y.

Lemaigre, Edmond. Prelude et Cappricio, performed by Pastór de Lasala, Sydney. 3:20. YouTube, 2012. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27dtjo2asj4&ab_channel=tormus1.

Vierne, Louis. “Final” from Premiere Symphonie, opus 14, performed by Mary Prat-Molinier, Albi. 6:34. YouTube, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri6wJB65d4w&ab_channel=EricCord%C3%A9.

Sally Gordon-Mark

Born in New York City, Sally Gordon-Mark has French and American citizenships, lives in Europe, and is an independent writer, researcher, and translator. She is also a musician: her professional life began in Hollywood as the soprano of a teenage girl group, The Murmaids, whose hit record, Popsicles & Icicles, is still played on air and sold on CDs. Eventually she worked for Warner Bros. Records, Francis Coppola, and finally Lucasfilm Ltd., in charge of public relations and promotions, before a life-changing move to Paris in 1987. There Sally played the harpsichord for the first time, thanks to American concert artist Jory Vinikour, her friend and first teacher. He recommended she study with Huguette Dreyfus, which she had the good fortune to do during the last three years before Huguette retired from the superieur regional conservatory of Rueil-Malmaison, becoming a devoted friend.

During Sally’s residence in France, she organized a dozen Baroque concerts for the historical city of Saint-Germain-en-Laye, worked as a researcher for books published by several authors and Yale University, and being trilingual, served as a translator of early music CD booklets for musicians and Warner Classic Records. She taught piano privately and also at the British School of Paris. In September 2020, she settled in Perugia, Italy, where she is studying medieval music and continues to offer her services as a translator in the world of the arts. Sally was the guest editor of the March 2023 issue of the e-magazine published by the British Harpsichord Society, Sounding Board, Number 19, devoted entirely to the memory of Huguette Dreyfus. For more information: sallygordonmark.com.

Editor’s note: Part 1 of this series appeared in the March 2023 issue of The Diapason, pages 18–20; part 2 appeared in the April 2023 issue, pages 14–19; part 3 appeared in the July 2023 issue, pages 10–15; part 4 appeared in the August 2023 issue, pages 10–14.

Et les fruits passeront la promesse des fleurs.

—François de Malherbe¹

Huguette Dreyfus’s performing career started while she was still a student in 1956, skyrocketed in the 1960s, and lasted until the end of 2008. During that half-century, she gave concerts all over the world, made 117 recordings,² and, in France alone, appeared on about 200 radio broadcasts and thirty television programs.³ Huguette received prizes, medals, and awards throughout her life in recognition of her achievements. What’s more, her reputation as an extraordinary pedagogue travelled beyond France’s borders, attracting harpsichordists, pianists, and organists from all over the world to study with her. Huguette once said in a radio interview:

For me, pedagogy is a very important part of my professional life, and I would say that in general, it is also very important for the evolution of an artist, because it prevents one from stagnating in one’s convictions. . . .⁴

Huguette greeted the arrival of the twenty-first century with her usual unfailing enthusiasm, intellectual curiosity, and energy. In the fall of 2000, she performed with Eduard Melkus at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna and was featured several times on French radio. In 2000 and 2002, she gave masterclasses in Budapest and at the Villecroze Academy in France, and again in 2003 and 2004 at the Conservatorio di Musica “Giuseppe Verdi” in Milan, Italy.

In a letter to a former student, Maria de Lourdes Cutolo, Huguette wrote that she was “continuing to teach, but playing less. . . . I often go out, and I lead an active life.” She mentioned that she would sit on national and international juries in 2004 and would give another concert in Vienna in March with Melkus and his ensemble, Capella Academica Wien.⁵ Until 2012, she continued to give interviews on French radio. On December 28, 2003, she participated in a documentary on French television, Johann Sebastian Bach: the Last Years, along with Philippe Herreweghe and other major artists.⁶

In the new century, CDs of her recordings continued to be released, notably reissues of Bartok’s Mikrokosmos; the historic recordings of C. P. E. Bach’s Concerto pour flûte et orchestre en ré majeur, with Jean-Pierre Rampal on flute and Pierre Boulez conducting the chamber orchestra; and with Henryk Szeryng, George Frideric Handel, 6 Violin Sonatas, Arcangelo Corelli, La Folia. The Japanese label Denon released her recordings of Bach’s Inventions and Sinfonias in 2005 and the 16 Harpsichord Transcriptions in 2006. In 2008, the CD of Konzert für Cembalo und Streicher, Schauspielmusik zu Ritter Blaubart [Concerto for Harpsichord and Strings, Playful Music for the Knight Bluebeard] by Hugo Distler came out on the Musicaphon label. Huguette had recorded the concerto in 1964 but did not play on the Bluebeard recording, which was done in 2002.⁷ The last reissue in her lifetime would be in 2013, Henri Dutilleux: The Centenary Edition, a compilation of remastered discs by Erato.⁸

In February 2006 in another letter to Maria de Lourdes Cutolo, Huguette wrote that she had been ill since the beginning of January with a severe case of infectious bronchitis.⁹ Illness was unusual for her, even though her schedule had always been demanding and full of voyages. Later in the year she was chosen by the Fondation Prince Louis de Polignac to present its prizes in a ceremony “under the high patronage of her very serene highness, the Princess Antoinette of Monaco.”¹⁰

In 2008 the two concerts that would bring her career to a close were personally meaningful. On May 28 Huguette performed Bach’s fifth Brandenburg Concerto with old friends Eduard Melkus conducting the Mulhouse Conservatory Chamber Orchestra and soloists Antje Lallart and Miwako Shiraï-Rey on violin and flute, respectively. This concert in her honor took place in the Saint Jean Temple in her native Alsatian city of Mulhouse, which had presented her with a municipal medal on May 25. In a local review, it was noted:

Known throughout the world, Huguette Dreyfus, the harpsichordist from Mulhouse, contributed considerably to the renaissance of early music. This Baroque festival pays tribute to her. . . . Huguette Dreyfus has only performed here twice before: the first time [as a prizewinner] of the Geneva competition, then a second time at the Temple St. Jean, in the context of a Bach festival organized 30 years ago. . . .¹¹

Huguette’s final concert would be with her musical partner of more than fifty years, violinist Eduard Melkus. He invited her to perform with him and his ensemble in Vienna on November 27, 2008, in honor of her eightieth birthday on November 30. That summer, she had given her last masterclass 
at Villecroze.

After having officially retired, Huguette accepted an invitation from Kristian Nyquist, a former student, to give a masterclass at the school where he taught, the Hochschule für Musik in Karlsruhe. Noticing that her neck seemed to bother her, he hesitated to ask her to play, but she surprised him by giving an impromptu but masterly performance for his students.¹²

In March 2009 Huguette participated in a major two-day conference on Wanda Landowska at the Cité de la Musique in Paris; her interview was broadcast on the radio. Introduced as “fervently admired by her students . . . luminous and profoundly human,” she was interviewed on March 5 by the event’s director, Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger. She began by speaking about her teacher, Ruggero Gerlin, who had been a student and disciple of Landowska for twenty years before the Second World War, when Landowska had to flee to the United States and he had to return to Italy. A detailed description of his style of teaching in her class at the Chigiana Academy in Siena followed. This led to a discussion of the Pleyel and Neupert harpsichords available at the time, and then to the acquisition of her own instrument, which, because of its quills, informed her touch. Huguette said that at the time the player had to accept what was available and adapt. “The truth of it is that I always liked the instruments that I was playing at the time that I knew them.” Interestingly enough, Eigeldinger gave her free rein, and she did not speak directly about Wanda Landowska at all.¹³

In October of that year, Huguette gave up her car, cancelling the insurance. She showed signs of having pain in her neck and back, but true to her nature, she did not complain. Those dearest to her would soon depart: her cousin Nicole on February 11, 2010, and Myriam Soumignac on September 7, 2012. She had already lost two of the teachers that had inspired her the most—Ruggero Gerlin in 1983 and Norbert Dufourcq in 1990—and her close friend and collaborator Luciano Sgrizzi in 1994.

On March 21, 2010, Huguette spoke as the guest of honor at the annual event hosted by the association of harpsichordists, Clavecins en France. That year it was held at the former location of the Paris Conservatory at 14 rue de Madrid, where many past students and colleagues, including her friends Kenneth Gilbert and Myriam Soumignac, came to pay tribute to her. In 2012, France Musique produced a two-hour comprehensive interview with Huguette in two parts, and seemingly for the first time on air, Huguette spoke about her personal life, even going back to her childhood.¹⁴

In 2013 Huguette was honored in Brazil, where she had given masterclasses during the entire month of October 1975 under the auspices of the Museum of Art in São Paulo, which had organized a unique event, the “Course-Festival of Harpsichord Interpretation.” As a result of those classes, several of her young students (Maria de Lourdes Cutolo, Ana Cecilia Tavares, and Ilton Wjuniski), who had had little opportunity to come into contact with a harpsichord before, received grants to come study with her in Paris, and they did. It is believed that her presence in Brazil and her influence inspired a surge in interest for the harpsichord in general. Harpsichordist Marcelo Fagerlande, who had witnessed the enthusiasm of the participants, created a Harpsichord Week (Semana do Cravo) when he became professor in the School of Music at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, and he eventually organized a tribute to Huguette. On October 30, 2013, a video conference with Huguette was arranged, since she could not make the trip to Brazil, and she was greeted by many of her former students.¹⁵

Shortly thereafter, in November, Huguette fell and fractured her skull, which resulted in her being in a coma for months. But she miraculously survived, and on November 30, 2014, Huguette returned home to be greeted on the phone by worried friends calling to wish her a happy birthday. During the following year, she recuperated slowly, seeing family and friends who came to visit. On June 7, 2015, she gave an interview, captured on video, to her old friend Rémy Stricker, a musicologist and former radio producer.¹⁶ However, the following year after a second fall, she was readmitted to the Corentin-Celton hospital in Issy-Les-Moulineaux, just south of Paris. A steady flow of friends, relatives, and students kept her company. When she stopped speaking, her silence, something that had always been unimaginable, was deeply unsettling.

The last time I saw Huguette, on May 14, 2016, a piece by Mozart was playing on her bedside radio. Small pots of roses stood under the windows. She had always loved flowers, but could have no garden, just as she had always loved animals, but could have no pets. She had no children; she had never married, but she had created a family nonetheless of her friends and students. For she did nurture many of her students, and for some of us, she was a mother. Sitting by the bed, holding her hand, my mind was unable to accept the incomprehensible fact of her absence, for she was no longer conscious of her surroundings. I had never known her to be inanimate before, so against all reason, I kept expecting her to say something or pat my hand. I wondered if her expectations and hopes had been fulfilled, if her unfailingly cheerful façade had been supported by real happiness. Her vitality that had seemed inexhaustible and indestructible was now mysteriously gone.

Huguette passed away serenely in the early morning hours of Monday, May 16, 2016. According to her wishes, a simple ceremony was held at the Père-Lachaise cemetery, where her ashes were eventually scattered in its memorial garden.

§

Huguette’s orphaned students honored her with concerts and book dedications. On May 5, 2018, Maria de Lourdes Cutolo (who had traveled from Argentina just to participate), Frank Gousset, Elisabeth Joyé, Frank Mento, Kristian Nyquist, Joël Pontet, Brice Sailly, Yasuko Uyama-Bouvard, Marie Van Rjhin, and Ilton Wjuniski performed in a memorial concert at the Rueil-Malmaison conservatory where she last taught. The auditorium was packed, despite little publicity, and latecomers had to stand in the uppermost balcony. Harpsichord makers Claude Mercier-Ythier and Marc Ducornet were in attendance: Claude mounted a display he had created out of color photocopies of all of Huguette’s LP covers, and Marc loaned his most popular concert harpsichord. Each player prefaced their performance with an anecdote about Huguette. After the concert, which ended with a moment of silence, we celebrated her memory with a reception as jolly as she would have wanted it to be. We lifted our glasses to her, wishing she were with us.

The following month, on June 18, the Conservatoire de musique, danse, et art dramatique de Mulhouse Huguette Dreyfus was inaugurated. Xavier Lallart, the director of the conservatory at the time, had nominated her as a candidate for the name, and she emerged the winner after a public municipal election. Given her love of teaching, no tribute to her could be more significant than this. According to Eduard Melkus, it was also Lallart who was behind the concert in May 2008 in Mulhouse. His wife Antje, conductor and violinist, had been old friends with Huguette, having met her through Eduard Melkus, with whom she had studied.¹⁷

In addition to her extensive discography, she left behind three publications: Mélanges François Couperin, published by A. et J. Picard et Cie of Paris in 1968; Rencontres de Villecroze (1995) François Couperin: nouveaux regards, actes des Rencontres de Villecroze, 4 au 7 Octobre 1995, sous la direction d’Huguette Dreyfus; and J. S. Bach: Goldberg-Variationen, Variations for Piano, BWV 988, Wiener Urtext Edition, Schott/Universal (UT50159), “Edited from the new Bach-Edition by Christoph Wolff. Fingering and comments on interpretation by Huguette Dreyfus.”

Beginning early in her career, many of Huguette’s recordings received France’s most prestigious prizes. She was awarded the Grand Prix du Disque de l’Académie Charles Cros¹⁸ in 1962, 1970, 1971, 1972; the Grand Prix de l’Académie du Disque français¹⁹ in 1964 and 1968; the Grand Prix des Discophiles in 1964; the Prix de l’Institut de Musicologie de l’Académie du Disque français in 1970; the Grand Prix du Président de la République from l’Académie Charles Cros in 1985; and the Prix de la Nouvelle académie du disque in 1995.²⁰

Huguette bequeathed her papers, photographs, recorded and published music, concert programs, and posters to the Bibliothèque nationale de Paris. Her archives are located at the Richelieu site, identified as FM FONDS DRE in the catalogue. To the Musée de la Musique in the Cité de la Musique-Philharmonie de Paris, she bequeathed her harpsichord, “Le Dreyfus,” and an 1821 Broadwood fortepiano. She left her Neupert spinet to an anonymous person, and her piano was sold at auction.

In an interview with musicologist Denis Herlin,²¹ Huguette told him that her brother had purchased her harpsichord from an antique dealer on Rue de Rivoli in Paris, and that she went to see it there, as did Norbert Dufourcq at her request. The harpsichord, said to be a Blanchet, had been in Raymond Russell’s collection, and was auctioned in June 1956 to the Pelham Galleries. She acquired the instrument in 1958 and hired the leading technician of the time, Marcel Asseman, to do necessary repairs to render it playable, but not to restore it.

When the Musée de la Musique acquired the harpsichord, its authenticity was questioned. Rumors had been circulating for years in Paris that it was not an authentic Blanchet, but no one wanted to tell Huguette. William Dowd, in partnership with Reinhard Von Nagel from 1971 to 1985, came to her apartment sometime in 1973 to examine the harpsichord for a piece he was writing on the Blanchet workshop. Without being able to disassemble it, he noticed that the keyboards and action had been replaced. He saw evidence of an earlier restoration, which could have been done in England, possibly by Arnold Dolmetsch, or in France before Raymond Russell acquired it. But without consulting Russell’s archives in Edinburgh, the instrument’s prior history cannot be ascertained.

The museum submitted Huguette’s harpsichord to scientific tests and a minute examination before undertaking its restoration. Analysis showed that the instrument had been reconstructed in the late-nineteenth or early-twentieth century by an unknown person. Technicians often leave identifying marks in the instrument, and one was found from Marcel Asseman. The wood was determined to be from the eighteenth century, which could mean that an old harpsichord had been rebuilt. Neither the soundboard nor the decoration on the bentside are original. The rose, a harpsichord maker’s trademark, is not considered to be Blanchet’s. Therefore, it has been concluded that the instrument was not built by Blanchet or anyone in his atelier. However, because it has historical significance, having been played by Huguette and her illustrious students, it has been named after her. The harpsichord is now completely restored and available for concerts, recordings, and masterclasses, according to Huguette’s wishes.²²

During her lifetime, the French government bestowed its highest awards on her, acknowledging her service to her country. There are two French national orders: the highest is the Legion of Honor, the second one is the National Order of Merit. They are very similar in their award criteria, the main difference being the minimal period of service: ten years for the National Order of Merit, twenty years for the Legion of Honor. Both of them have three ranks, Knight, Officer, and Commander; and two titles, Grand Officer and Grand Cross. Huguette was awarded the Knight of the National Order of Merit medal on June 6, 1973, then one for Officer on April 3, 1987, and then one for Commander on May 14, 2004. On December 30, 1995, she was awarded the Knight of the Legion of Honor medal, and then promoted to Officer on December 31, 2008.²³ She was also honored by the Austrian government, which made her a Commandeur de l’ordre national du Mérite, and Officier des Arts et des Lettres et du Mérite de la République d’Autriche.

Aside from the recordings, instruments, and publications she left behind, Huguette’s most important legacy may have been the indelible imprint she left on the performers she taught, who in turn became teachers themselves. For example, it was she who inspired concert artist Elisabeth Joyé to take up the harpsichord:

I was 17, passionate about music, and I played the piano. My dad was the treasurer of a music festival in the south of France, and I was the official page-turner. That summer, Huguette Dreyfus had been invited to the Collégiale de Six-Fours to play all of the Bach sonatas for violin and harpsichord on the Hemsch harpsichord that belonged to Claude Mercier-Ythier. I was turning the pages and was immediately fascinated by all that Huguette was doing on that magnificent instrument as to expressivity and dynamics. I was familiar with the Neupert harpsichord as being the instrument that played bass continuo in an orchestra. I adored Bach’s music that I was playing a lot on the piano. That night, I made the decision to start playing the harpsichord. Huguette advised me to study with André Raynaud in Aix-en-Provence because I did not envisage moving to Paris at the time—I was young! The following year, no doubt thanks to my obstinacy and my passion for Bach and the harpsichord, I was accepted into Huguette’s class at the Bobigny Conservatory, where I remained for three years before leaving for the Netherlands. I remember her lively and exacting teaching. I stayed in touch with Huguette until the end of her life, and we shared a great deal of memories. We also spoke about teaching and the young generation.²⁴

One of her colleagues, Françoise Lengellé, recalls her experience working with Huguette when they taught at the Conservatoire national supérieur de musique et de danse in Lyon, France:

The relationship between two colleagues that Huguette and I were able to have—outside of the admiration that I felt for her as an artist—was a source of permanent evolution and creativity for me. Watching and listening to her teach were always superb lessons in themselves. I was always thankful for her great culture, humor, and the epic laughs at Lyon and elsewhere that we shared. I owe her so much.²⁵

And so do many of us, as well as the audiences to whom Huguette introduced the harpsichord and the lesser-known Baroque repertoire in the 1960s. Later, it would be twentieth-century contemporary music for harpsichord that she would help make known to the public. Although future audiences will not be able to experience her effervescence and artistry in person, the recordings she left behind for future technology to embellish and the seeds she planted in her students will ensure her enduring presence in the perennial transmission of harpsichord music from generation to generation.

Notes

1. “And the fruits will surpass the promise of the flowers.” François de Malherbe, “Prière pour le Roy Henry Le Grand allant en Limozin,” Œuvres poétiques de Malherbe, E. Flammarion (Librairie des Bibliophiles), 1897, Paris, pages 108–113.

2. Huguette Dreyfus’s complete discography, compiled by the author, dolmetsch.com/huguettedreyfusdiscography.htm.

3. INA, http://inatheque.ina.fr/docListe/TV-RADIO/.

4. Huguette Dreyfus, radio interview by Myriam Soumignac, “Portraits en musique,” June 9, 1988, France Musique. INA, op. cit.

5. “Je sors beaucoup et mène une vie active,” Huguette Dreyfus, letter to Maria de Lourdes Cutolo, December 10, 2003.

6. Les chemins de la foi: Jean Sébastien Bach, les dernières années. France 2. INA, 
op. cit.

7. Robert Tifft, email to the author, June 13, 2023.

8. Huguette Dreyfus’s complete discography, compiled by author, op. cit.

9. Huguette Dreyfus, letter to Maria de Lourdes Cutolo, February 3, 2006.

10. Correspondance D, E, F. BnF VM FONDS 145 DRE-1 (3).

11. Coupures de presse, BnF VM FONDS 145 DRE 5 (4).

12. Kristian Nyquist, interview with author, March 5, 2022, Karlsruhe, Germany.

13. Huguette Dreyfus, interviewed by Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, March 5, 2009. “Wanda Landowska et la renaissance de la musique ancienne,” March 4–5, 2009, Cité de la Musique, Paris, France.

14. Marcel Quillévéré’s radio interviews of Huguette Dreyfus, “Les traversées du temps,” France Musique. March 7, 2012 (part 1) and March 8, 2012 (part 2).

15. Marcelo Fagerlande, phone interview by author, October 21, 2022. Also see Sounding Board, number 19, page 33. 16. “L’Entretien d’Huguette Dreyfus et Rémy Stricker sur Roland-Manuel,” June, 2015. youtube.com/watch?v=NQ_NjzI_cV0. The film was produced by Les Amis de Maurice Ravel, boleravel.fr, and directed by Gérard Guilloury, gerardguilloury.com.

17. Xavier and Antje Lallart, interviews by phone, email, and in person from July 15 through November 2022.

18. Charles Cros (1842–1888), an important poet, scientist, and inventor who experimented in the reproduction of sound.

19. The Académie du disque français was founded in 1951 by Jean Cocteau, Colette, Arthur Honegger, the poet Guy-Charles Cros (the son of Charles Cros), and Michel de Bry. In 1964 Georges Auric and Darius Milhaud were co-presidents of the academy.

20. Huguette Dreyfus’s complete discography, compiled by author, op. cit.; Biographie Huguette Dreyfus, https://www.whoswho.fr/decede/biographie-huguette-dreyfus_23542.

21. Denis Herlin, Sounding Board, number 19, page 35, March 2023.

22. Jean-Claude Battault, interview with author, March 9, 2022, Cité de la Musique, Paris, France. For more information on the instrument, see “Guillaume Finaz and ‘Le Dreyfus,’ ” Sounding Board, number 18, page 33, May 2022.

23. Alice Bouteille, director of communication, Cabinet du grand chancelier, Paris, France. Email to author, February 1, 2023. Translated from French by the author.

24. Elisabeth Joyé, email to author, April 1, 2023. Translated from French by the author.

25. Françoise Lengellé, email to author, April 11, 2023. Translated from French by the author.
 

Acknowledgments

After Huguette passed away in 2016, the first person I interviewed was our mutual friend, Claude Mercier-Ythier. He was eager to help me with my project to document Huguette’s life, giving me information and photographs. We made plans to collaborate on her discography, based on the accounts he painstakingly kept of her recordings. Since then, I was fortunate to meet six other contemporaries of Huguette: Eduard Melkus, Zuzana Ružicková, Anne-Marie Becksteiner Paillard, Paul Kuentz, Jill Severs, and Marie-Claire Jamet, who graciously welcomed me and shared their memories. Some gave me videos, recordings, and photographs of Huguette. Sadly, Claude, Zuzana, and Anne-Marie have since passed away.

However, the first person I must thank is Huguette herself. For many of her students, she was a midwife, a catalyst. She revealed me to myself, and I switched tracks, moving in a different direction towards a life that better suited my true nature. She showed me that I could perform the music I loved if I worked in a more efficient way and focused my attention only on the piece as I played. “The only thing that’s important is the music,” she once told me. In 2000 Huguette wrote the recommendation letter required for me to obtain a research pass at the Bibliothèque nationale de Paris, and I discovered another life-changing passion.

With gratitude for their assistance and/or participation in articles I have written on Huguette for both The Diapason and Sounding Board, I thank Judith Andreyev, Andrew Appel, Jean-Claude Battault, Olivier Baumont, Christine Bayle, the late Anne-Marie Beckensteiner-Paillard, Nanon Bertrand, Dr. Brian Blood (Dolmetsch Foundation), Alice Bouteille (Cabinet du grand chancelier), the Conservatoire Emmanuel Chabrier de Clermont-Ferrand, Jocelyne Cuiller, Maria de Lourdes Cutolo, Laurence Decobert (Bibliothèque nationale de France), Renaud Digonnet, Matthew Dirst, Françoise Dreyfus, Marc Ducornet, Mahan Esfahani, Marcelo Fagerlande, Guillaume Finaz, Catherine Findlayson, Elisabeth Giuliani, Katarina Glachant, Stuart Gordon (who restored many otherwise unusable images), François-Pierre Goy, Yannick Guillou, Ellen Haskel-Maserati, Denis Herlin, Marie-Claire Jamet, Elisabeth Joyé, Niamh Kenny (l’Académie musicale de Villecroze), Mark Kroll, Paul Kuentz, Chiaopin Kuo, Laetitia Faetibolt (City of Mulhouse, France), Antje and Xavier Lallart, Susan Landale, Véronique LeGuen, Yohann Le Tallec (Bibliothèque nationale de France), Françoise Lengellé, Edna Lewis, Jean-Rémy Macchia, Eduard Melkus, Frank Mento, the late Claude Mercier-Ythier, Laure Morabito, Marie-Claire Moreau-Mangin, Novine Movarekhi, Pamela Nash, Jenny Nex (The University of Edinburgh), David Noël-Hudson, Kristian Nyquist, Shigeru Oikawa, Larry Palmer, Olivier Papillon, Miriam Pizzi (Accademia Musicale Chigiana), Mario Raskin, André Raynaud, Julie Reid (archivist, Centre du patrimoine), Jean-Paul Rey, Marie Van Rhijn, Lionel Rogg, Salvo Romeo, Christophe Rousset, Alan Rubin, the late Zuzana Ružicková, Pascal Scheuir, Lucile Schirr (Archives, Strasbourg, France), Didier Schnorhk (formerly with the Concours de Genève), Jill Severs, Miwako Shiraï-Rey, Richard Siegel, Laurent Soumignac, Ana Cecilia Tavares, Pascal Teixeira da Silva, Mariko Terashi, Robert Tifft, Catherine Vallet-Collot (Bibliothèque nationale de France), Reinhard von Nagel, Yasuko Uyama-Bouvard, Kamila Valkova Valenta, Jory Vinikour, Daniel Wagschal, Olivia Wahnon de Oliveira (librarian of the Royal Conservatory of Brussels), Peter Watchorn, Jed Wentz, John Whitelaw, Laura Widolf (Conservatoire Huguette Dreyfus), Ilton Wjuniski, and Aline Zylberajch-Gester.

I am especially indebted to Françoise Dreyfus and François-Pierre Goy for their involvement, support, and assistance, without which these articles could never have been written. Special thanks go to Pamela Nash, Robert Tifft, and Jed Wentz for reading my drafts and making important observations. I am very fortunate to have benefited from their good natures, knowledge, and expertise. For their constant encouragement for me to write over the years, my heartfelt thanks go to Selina Hastings, Stuart Gordon, and Richard Hieronymus.

Jonathan Bezdegian

Jonathan Bezdegian, DMA, is the instructor of organ and campus minister for liturgical music and mission trips at Assumption University, in Worcester, Massachusetts.

Sitting on the parapet of the story where the towers arise from the massive corpus are all kinds of devilish things that were contrived by a grandiose imagination and captured in the grinning stone by a forceful and strict hand. Wondrous animals with long beaks, pointy claws, with misshapen ears and distorted mouths, devils with devout wings, midgets with long beards sit there and gape at the city with large, vicious, lurking eyes.¹

While the history of Louis Vierne’s Sixième Symphonie (Sixth Symphony), opus 59, is well documented, the actual harmonic construction of the thematic material leaves interested performers in a bit of a predicament. Traditional and functional harmonic analysis is not the correct method for deciphering this music. Occasionally, one will find evidence in Vierne’s music that successfully allows this method. However, modal material will always be present. Thus, the use of the Modes of Limited Transposition becomes important. To date, no sources directly address this approach.² The intent of this article is to apply the Modes of Limited Transposition and to prove their importance in the study of Louis Vierne’s organ works, focusing on the “Scherzo” from his Sixth Symphony.

Intriguingly during the time between the 24 Pièces de Fantaisie and the Sixth Symphony (1927–1930), Olivier Messiaen published Le Banquet céleste (1928) and Diptyque (1930). Both of these pieces use the Modes of Limited Transposition. Michael Murray makes reference to this in his book, French Masters of the Organ:

Though he was not yet twenty when he wrote Le Banquet céleste, he had already turned from prescribed harmony to the Modes of Limited Transposition that were to be a main feature of his early work, and it is these, or, more precisely, his uses of one of these, that create a distinctive harmonic movement dominant and tonic only by analogy.³

Based on the principle of modal evolution, the chronology of these works does not appear to be merely “coincidental.” However, the actual genesis of the Modes of Limited Transposition still remains a mystery.

It is impossible to tell if Vierne is responsible for the genesis of this modal material (later codified as the Modes of Limited Transposition by Messiaen). There is no known documentary evidence that allows this assertion. Messiaen also denied creating all of them.⁴ It is also unlikely that Vierne and Dupré collaborated on the use of these modes via improvisation practices.⁵ However, the evolution in composition regarding the use of these modern harmonies is evident. From evidence germane to this research, this evolution stems from the Paris Conservatoire.

Vierne remarked in his Mémoires about his excitement upon learning new, looser, and modern improvisational techniques from Adolphe Marty at the Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles in 1889. Later, Vierne drew on this inspiration while studying with his fellow pupils at the Paris Conservatoire. They all desired to be original. Charles Tournemire, in particular, was a prime example.⁶

The development of Vierne’s own original voice in regard to improvisation reached its initial height in 1897, when he took over Guilmant’s studio at the Conservatoire (he was leaving to go on a concert tour to the United States). Vierne’s enthusiasm was palpable: “I was . . . delighted to be able to express unrestrained my own ideas on free improvisation. We would ‘whoop it up’ with modern harmonies.”⁷

Through Vierne’s studies, collaborations, and improvisations, he would gradually incorporate all of his findings in his own music compositions. His modal usage began gradually. It is found extensively in his 24 Pièces de Fantaisie (1926–1927). However, at the time, for Vierne, this method was in its infancy. As his music progressed, more consistency in his dense modal writing is observed—at least thematically.

A close analysis of Vierne’s “Scherzo” from the Sixth Symphony, composed in 1930, exemplifies that his modal awareness has evolved. Thus, the modal usage becomes more logical in his writing. This is evident in the opening measures of “Scherzo.” There are no passing tones or chromatic alterations in the opening material. Modes 3 and 7 dominate the composition. (See Example 1. Mode 3 uses two transposition levels: 2 and 4. Mode 7 uses transposition 1, 2, and 5).⁸ Their common tone relationships are displayed in the examples of the main theme. However, for this opening material, the common tone of G is found in all transposition levels used by Vierne, thus allowing the free movement between each level on the opening measures (Example 1a).

Analytical chart of the opening page (measures 1–10):

Measure 1: M3, T4 (eighth-note opening flourish); sixteenth-note group: M3, T2

Measure 2: first sixteenth note: M3, T2; second group: M7, T1.

Measure 3: flourish: M3, T4; sixteenth notes: T2

Measure 4: sixteenth notes: M3, T2; 2nd group: M7, T1

Measure 5: flourish: M3, T4; sixteenth notes: M7, T2

Measure 6: flourish: M3, T2; sixteenth notes: M7, T1

Measure 7: first group of six notes: M3, T1; group of 4: M3, T2

Measure 8: first group of six: M3, T4; group of 4: M3, T2

Measure 9: flourish: M3, T4; sixteenth notes: M7, T2

Measure 10: first sixteenth notes: M7, T5; second group: M7, T2

While this article is not intended to provide an exhaustive analysis accounting for every note in each measure of the eighteen pages of “Scherzo”, a detailed analysis of page one illustrates a clear lack of functional harmony. One does not sense, aurally or visually, any traditional voice leading or harmonic progression. Thus, claiming that “Scherzo” is written “in the key of G minor” is erroneous. The material is modal, and knowledge of the Modes of Limited Transposition is paramount for understanding this music.

The most important analysis of “Scherzo” pertains to the main, cyclical theme (meaning, it is present in all five movements of the symphony).⁹ It comprises two parts—the first is six measures in duration; the second is ten measures.¹⁰ Here is the layout:

First statement

Part 1, measures 41–46: Mode 3, T1. See Examples 2 and 2a.

Part 2, measures 47–56: Mode 7, T2 (passing tone B in measure 55). See Example 3. (Mode 7, T2 is written in Example 1.)

Common tones (measure 46): E, D, C (allowing for modal shift).

Second statement (common tones G, D from previous measure)

Part 1, measures 57–62: Mode 3, T1, measures 41–46.

Part 2, measures 63–72: Mode 7, T2 (passing tone B in measure 71), measures 47–56. Common tones, E, D, C (from measure 62, allowing for modal shift).¹¹

Third statement

Part 1, measures 113–118: Mode 3, T4. See Example 4 (M3, T4 is written in Example 1).

Part 2, measures 119–128: Mode 7, T1 (passing tone B-flat in measure 127).

Common tones (measure 118): E-flat, D-flat, C-flat. See Example 5.

Fourth statement (common tones: C, G-flat, D-flat, D from previous measure).

Part 1, measures 129–134: Mode 3, T2. See Example 6.

Part 2, measures 135–144: Mode 7, T6 (passing tone C-sharp in measure 143).

Common tones (measure 134): F-sharp, E, D. See Examples 7a and 7b.

Fifth statement

Part 1, measures 153–158: Mode 3, T4.¹² See Example 8.

Part 2, measures 159–168: Mode 7, T3 (passing tone F-sharp in measure 167).

Common tones (measure 158): B, A, G. See Example 9.

Sixth statement (common tones: C-sharp, A, B-flat from previous measure)

Theme is inverted with a different accompaniment pattern; theme becomes segmented into three parts:

Part 1, measures 169–174: Mode 3, T4 (six measures). See Example 10a.

Part 2, measures 175–180: Mode 7, T5 (six measures).

Common tones (measure 174): A, B, C-sharp. See Example 10b.

Part 3, measures 181–184: Mode 7, T3 (passing tone C in measure 183) (four measures).

Common tones (measure 180): B-flat, C-sharp. See Example 10c.

Compared to Vierne’s earlier works in 24 Pièces de Fantaisie, “Scherzo” from Sixth Symphony is more modally consistent.¹³ The theme has virtually no chromatic alterations as seen in his previous compositions. Also, Sixth Symphony is Vierne’s last piece for solo organ. Rollin Smith states that “Vierne’s harmonic vocabulary by this time had become so intensely chromatic that one of the themes in each of the first two movements of this symphony utilizes all twelve notes of the chromatic scale.”¹⁴

We can conclude, then, that as the years progressed, these modal elements that were once used rather loosely took on a new structure and identity, one that piqued the interest of Olivier Messiaen. Through this interest, Messiaen wrote two compositions (between Vierne’s aforementioned pieces) and later codified these modal elements into the Modes of Limited Transposition. This codification was published in his La Nativité du Seigneur in 1936—one year prior to Vierne’s death.

Notes

1. Louis Vierne, Pièces de Fantaisie en quatre suites, Livre III, opus 53, ed. Helga Schauerte-Maubouet (Kassel: Bärenreiter-Verlag, 2008), XXII. A fitting quote to describe the imagery of “Scherzo.” This is further emphasized by Maurice Duruflé’s description of: “The Scherzo, although wishing to jest, neither succeeds in finding a true gaiety nor makes one forget the somber nightmares that haunt the Aria [Movement 2]. Instead, the composer, with sparkling verve, depicts the diabolical giggles of grimacing gargoyles.” Rollin Smith, Louis Vierne: Organist of Notre Dame Cathedral (New York: Pendragon Press, 1999), page 567.
2. The most recent document that analyzes Vierne’s Sixth Symphony is the dissertation of Emily Marie Meixner: Meixner, Emily Marie. n.d. “The Sixth Organ Symphony of Louis Vierne (1870–1937): An Analysis.” doi:10.7274/2227mp50s8q. It is a significant achievement and an interesting approach. Meixner does make reference to Vierne’s common use of the whole-tone scale (Mode 1 of the Modes of Limited Transposition) and the Gregorian modes (Phrygian and Mixolydian, respectively). My published articles in The Diapason and my dissertation, “Louis Vierne and the Evolution of His Modal Consciousness,” 2018, clearly outline my approach and methods. I will continue in this manner.

3. Michael Murray, French Masters of the Organ: Saint-Saëns, Franck, Widor, Vierne, Dupré, Messiaen (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1998), page 186.

4. Also, “Messiaen says he became fluent in his modes by often improvising on them in Dupré’s class. But he takes no credit for contriving them all.” Ibid., page 188.

5. By 1924 Vierne and Dupré, once close friends, were bitter enemies. The crux of the dispute was over the title of “Organiste titulaire de Notre-Dame de Paris.” This misuse by Dupré during his first American concert tour (he was Vierne’s assistant, not the sole organist of the cathedral) drove a wedge between these two men. The animosity lasted until Vierne’s death. Dupré even forbade any of his students to play Vierne’s compositions during their organ lessons at the Conservatoire. Smith, Louis Vierne, pages 330–343.

6. At this time (1890), César Franck was Vierne’s first teacher at the Paris Conservatoire. Vierne and Tournemire were also classmates. Regarding Tournemire, Vierne remarked that he was “a born improvisor” and the entire studio was “captivated by the harmonies he had discovered for the free theme,” in reference to a studio competition in 1890, where Tournemire was awarded “first accessit.” Smith, Louis Vierne, page 47.

7. Ibid., 125.

8. Be mindful of enharmonic equivalence when comparing music passages to scales. Having your own corrected score for study while reading this article is advised.

9. Maurice Duruflé referenced this in his description of the Sixth Symphony for the Paris premiere at Notre-Dame Cathedral in 1935. The full description is found in Smith, Louis Vierne, page 567.

10. This division is more for clarity than for phrasing/musicality. The mode changes at the created divisions.

11. The second statement is identical to the first, it is just written in the treble octaves. There are some notational changes in comparison. However, they are just enharmonic.

12. In the original score (published by Henry Lemoine in 1931), there is an error in the pedal theme in measure 155. The first pedal note in Lemoine’s score is an “E” moving down to “D.” This does not fit the regular pattern of the theme in previous statements. Also, it does not fit the Mode 3, T4 scale. On hearing this, it is an obvious engraving error. While Rollin Smith’s list of “Textual Corrections for the Six Symphonies” (Smith, Louis Vierne, Appendix E, pages 719–734) does not mention this correction, it is clearly made in Bärenreiter’s new 2010 edition (BA 9226). The correct pattern of measure 155 is “B” moving up to “D.” This also highlights the importance of understanding the Modes of Limited Transposition for analysis of Vierne’s organ works.

13. A composition of note is “Feux Follets.” The writing Vierne uses can best be described as a modally dense quilt patchwork of the work’s main theme and figurations. It is so highly chromatic that even the Modes of Limited Transposition do not work well as a form of analysis; it is chromatic writing.

14. Smith, Louis Vierne, page 565.

John Joseph Mitchell

John Joseph “JJ” Mitchell is a musician and scholar from Arlington, Virginia. He is the director of music at Saint John Neumann Church in Reston, Virginia, where he oversees several musical groups and accompanies liturgies on the organ. JJ graduated summa cum laude from Westminster Choir College with a bachelor’s degree in sacred music. He then earned his Master of Sacred Music degree in organ performance from the University of Notre Dame, where he attended on a full-tuition scholarship. He also studied at the Conservatoire à Rayonnement Régional de Toulouse, France, where he practiced and studied on the organs of the Puget family. JJ then earned his Doctor of Musical Arts degree in organ performance from the University of Houston (UH). During this time, he worked as a teaching assistant in the UH Music History Department and served as a musician in multiple churches around the city. The article published in this magazine is a cut of his complete dissertation on the Puget family, which was finished in May 2023.

JJ has served as organist on the music staff of churches such as Christ Church Cathedral, Houston, Texas; the Cathedral of Saint Thomas More, Arlington, Virginia; and the Basilica of the Sacred Heart, South Bend, Indiana. He has performed in these churches as well as at Boston Symphony Hall, the DeBartolo Performing Arts Center, and various other churches in the United States, Canada, France, and England. He is the winner of the Nanovic Grant for European Study for Professional Development and was a finalist for the Frank Huntington Beebe Grant. He also won second prize in the graduate division of the Hall Pipe Organ Competition in 2022. At age 24, JJ’s research on César Franck and his musical influences was published in the Vox Humana organ journal. In September 2020 he was a guest on Jennifer Pascual’s Sounds from the Spires SiriusXM Radio program in which his organ recordings were broadcast. He has played liturgies and concerts for international television audiences on the Salt + Life and EWTN networks. JJ is a member of the American Guild of Organists as well as the National Association of Pastoral Musicians (NPM), from which he has received several scholarships. He has served on NPM’s national publications committee. He is a member of The Diapason’s 20 Under 30 Class of 2021. JJ’s career goal is to teach sacred music to the next generation.

Editor's Note: Part 2 of this article is found in the July 2024 issue.

 

Théodore Puget, his sons Eugène and Jean-Baptiste, and his grandson Maurice, cultivated a dynasty of organ manufacturing that is worthy of recognition, though their work is often overshadowed by other organ builders in France. This essay argues that the organs of Théodore Puget and his sons demonstrate innovation and artistry in French symphonic organ building.

The Cavaillé-Coll problem

Since the Romantic era, the history of French symphonic organbuilding has been dominated by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll.¹ A prodigy of both acoustics and mechanics, Cavaillé-Coll constructed instruments to meet the artistic and cultural demands of cosmopolitan Paris. His organs, often designed to boom down cavernous naves of Gothic cathedrals, inspired compositions by renowned musicians including César Franck, Alexandre Guilmant, Louis Vierne, and Marcel Dupré. Cavaillé-Coll’s influence is so great that one may be tempted to believe that he alone was responsible for an entire era of organbuilding. His immense fame overshadows the reputations of other builders.² The Puget dynasty also consisted of formidable organbuilders of note during this time and deserves recognition.³

Théodore Puget (1801–1883), his sons Eugène (1838–1892) and Jean-Baptiste (1849–1940), and his grandson Maurice (1884–1960), hereafter referred to by their first names, cultivated a family lineage of French symphonic organbuilding in a different style than that of Cavaillé-Coll.⁴ Set upon the backdrop of Toulouse in southern France, Théodore created instruments fit to serve local parishes throughout the Occitania region and beyond. These organs reflected local cultural aesthetics with technological materials of the region. Théodore’s sons expanded his vision and built lasting organs that won the respect of the aforementioned organists and have left musicians in the modern age asking themselves whose instruments they prefer: those of Cavaillé-Coll or the Puget family.⁵

The organs of Théodore Puget and his sons demonstrate innovation and artistry in French symphonic organbuilding. This research begins with a study of Théodore Puget’s early life and career and includes a description of cultural trends concerning the pipe organ in nineteenth-century France. Two of Théodore’s sons’ most notable instruments are examined: Notre-Dame du Taur, constructed by Eugène, and the Cathedral of Sainte-Cécile in Albi, built by Jean-Baptiste. Of the hundreds of organs the Puget family produced between 1838 and 1960, these two contrasting instruments are excellent representations of different periods in the Puget history.⁶ Though Théodore and his grandson Maurice are deserving of praise for their work as organbuilders, the instruments of Eugène and Jean-Baptiste demonstrate the pinnacle of the family’s production and influence.

The formative era, 1838–1877: Théodore Puget

The birth of a dynasty

The lineage of the Puget family can be traced back to the seventeenth century, and many of Théodore Puget’s ancestors were woodworkers.⁷ Most sources claim that Théodore was born in 1799, but genealogical research conducted by Jean-Marc Cicchero in 2016 proves that he was born on November 15, 1801, in the village of Montréal d’Aude. His parents, François Puget and Catherine Boyer, were carpenters.⁸ Growing up around the family’s workshop, Théodore learned the art of woodworking. His family also made sure that he studied organ, though they were not musicians themselves.⁹ Théodore lived in the village of Fanjeaux between the years 1822 and 1837, where he married Louise-Anne Mossel in 1824.¹⁰ During his early career, Théodore was both an organist and a clockmaker.¹¹

Théodore’s training in organbuilding is a mystery. Many scholars argue that he was self-taught, combining his skills of woodworking and musicianship. Cicchero suggests that while Théodore could have determined some aspects of organbuilding on his own, he likely apprenticed with a builder. He could have studied with Prosper Moitessier in Carcassonne between the years 1826 and 1830. He also may have apprenticed with Sieur Benoit Cabias, a local builder of musical instruments in Carcassonne at that time. There is no evidence concerning Théodore’s work with either of these builders, though it is probable that he met both of them while living in Fanjeaux.¹³

The greatest influence on Théodore’s organbuilding was Dom Bédos de Celles. Bédos was a monk and organbuilder in the eighteenth century whose most famous instrument is the gallery organ of l’Église Saint-Croix in Bordeaux.¹⁴ His treatise, L’Art Du Facteur d’Orgues, is one of the most important documents on organbuilding ever written. This collection of detailed descriptions and precise illustrations is a guide on how to construct a pipe organ, including information about layout, voicing, winding, and many other pertinent elements. Bédos’s writing concerns organs of the French Classical era, though many of his methods were continued or expanded upon in the building of French symphonic organs.¹⁵

To Théodore, the contents of Bédos’s treatise were sacred. He kept a copy of L’Art Du Facteur d’Orgues in the shop and referred to it frequently. Even Théodore’s sons and grandson Maurice, who were far more progressive in their organbuilding than the Puget patriarch, consulted the Bédos text when building their instruments.¹⁶ For example, when Maurice designed the organ for l’Église Saint-Michel in Villemur, he created a five-rank mixture according to Bédos’s instructions. This instrument, built in 1960, was the final organ of the Puget dynasty, and Maurice never witnessed its completion.¹⁷ Though the Pugets deviated from some of the instructions due to the advances of industrial age technology and trends of symphonic organbuilding, Bédos’s treatise was a grounding foundation through the complete duration of the dynasty.

Théodore and his wife settled in Toulouse between 1839 and 1840, during which time he assembled milacor organs.¹⁸ The milacor was a patented device to help amateur organists accompany Gregorian chant.19 This machine was connected to a simplified keyboard of a small pipe organ typically containing five or fewer stops that was built in a factory setting, shipped out in a kit, and assembled by a local distributor.²⁰ Théodore was a Toulousain subcontractor for the organbuilder Abbé François Larroque, whose organs were commonly paired with milacor systems.²¹ During these years, Théodore’s older children assisted in these projects and took music lessons.²²

The first Puget organ, installed in the gallery of l’Église Saint-Exupère de Toulouse, was too tall for the milacor workshop. Larroque and Théodore asked the parish to keep this organ, which was over twenty feet in height, in the loft at the church’s expense as a model for clergy and other potential customers.²³ The church council agreed to purchase the instrument on the condition that Théodore would play every Mass and feast day for free for six years or have one of his sons substitute on his behalf.²⁴ Completed in 1842, the new instrument was double the size of a standard milacor. Théodore served as an organist at this church, fulfilling the council’s demands.²⁵ This landmark project demonstrated Théodore’s ability to produce gallery organs of a larger size than milacors.²⁶

There are multiple documented claims to the year Les Facteurs d’Orgue Théodore Puget, Père et Fils was founded. Some scholars assert that the firm was established in 1834, the earliest date put forth by some Puget sons.²⁷ According to one source, the company began as late as 1843.²⁸ The first documentation about the age of the Pugets’ business comes from a newspaper article written in 1864, which indicates that the organbuilding firm was founded in 1838.²⁹ The year 1838 was also when Théodore entered into cooperation with Larroque to build milacor organs. During this year Théodore prepared to relocate his family to Toulouse and sent his wife to Lagrasse to be with relatives as she gave birth to Eugène.³⁰ Théodore parted ways with Larroque at some point between 1843 and 1845.³¹

The Pugets’ workshop was always in Toulouse, though the address changed several times. In some instances, the factory remained in one place while the street name or block number was altered; other times, the Pugets had moved. Directories indicate that by 1855 the Pugets were located three blocks north of Saint-Sernin Basilica on Rue de Trois Piliers. During many of the family’s most prosperous years, 1863–1895, the Puget shop was headquartered in the Jeanne d’Arc neighborhood of Toulouse at various addresses.³² In 1899 the factory was moved south to what is now Boulevard Michelet. The shop relocated again in 1925 to Rue de Négreneys where it remained until Maurice’s death in 1960. None of these sites retains any remnants from the Puget workshops.³³

Théodore had nine children, some of whom worked in the family business.³⁴ His firstborn child, François, was Théodore’s logical successor since he demonstrated much promise as an organbuilder.³⁵ Tragically, François passed away from cholera in 1854.³⁶ Some of Théodore’s other children founded their own organ factories, which, in the case of the second-eldest son, Baptiste, resulted in bitter estrangement from the family.³⁷ The latter is not to be confused with Théodore’s youngest son, Jean-Baptiste. It should be noted that there are two Pugets with the first name “Maurice:” one was Théodore’s third-eldest son born in 1835, and the other, born in 1884, was the son of Jean-Baptiste who took over the company in 1922.³⁸ Théodore’s daughters, Marie and Josephine, were unsung workers in the Puget family who traveled to the worksites, overseeing projects’ expenses.³⁹

Confusingly, Théodore and his sons signed correspondence as “Théodore Puget.” Authors sometimes refer to Eugène, Jean-Baptiste, and Maurice all as “Théodore.” Jean-Baptiste went by several names throughout his life because, when François passed away, Théodore began addressing his youngest son as François. Later, when Baptiste set up his rival company in 1863, Jean-Baptiste was called Théodore by his family. In the times when Jean-Baptiste did not sign his name as “Théodore,” he wrote the middle initials of his name: “F. E. Puget.”⁴¹ In my writing, I distinguish the sons by their first names where they might otherwise be referred to as “Théodore.”⁴²

The formative era, 1838–1877: Théodore Puget

Organ construction trends of the mid-nineteenth century redefined what soundscapes were possible, converting organs constructed to mirror stile-antico vocal polyphony and Baroque dances into instruments that could more closely resemble that of a symphony orchestra. Church organs were designed to enhance liturgy, but now they were also featured in concerts of secular Romantic works. During France’s industrial revolution, builders like Cavaillé-Coll and the Puget family converted organs of the French Classical style, such as the instruments of Robert Clicquot, into symphonic organs by transforming existing pipework and adding modern innovations, including expression shoes, pneumatic systems, and several new stops.⁴³ According to Vincent d’Indy, when César Franck played the newly constructed Cavaillé-Coll organ at l’Église Sainte-Clotilde in 1846, he was thrilled and compared his new organ to an orchestra.⁴⁴ These culturally turbulent years in France created a new kind of market for organbuilding on which the Puget family capitalized.

Compared to his descendants, Théodore’s organbuilding is difficult to define because of how drastically his artistry evolved over time. During his first several decades of building, he constructed anachronistic instruments. For example, in 1842 he built a twenty-rank organ for l’Église Saint-Cere, the specification of which was particularly French Classical.⁴⁵ This instrument was a prime representation of Théodore following the instructions in Bedos’s treatise. By contrast, one year prior, Cavaillé-Coll had revolutionized the Parisian music scene by constructing a French Romantic organ at l’Église Saint-Denis.⁴⁶

Some clients favored Théodore’s anachronistic organs built in the French Classical style. His reputation in southern France was well established over the course of the nineteenth century. Many clients chose Puget because they did not want to pay Cavaillé-Coll’s steep fees for a new organ. Customers also recognized Théodore’s use of local, quality materials, such as oak and tin, which were durable. Following Bédos’s method, he pursued consistency and reliability rather than artistic innovation.⁴⁷

By 1865 Théodore’s sons persuaded their father to build organs in a Romantic style.⁴⁸ Eugène became the chief voicer for his father, beginning with the organ at l’Église Saint-Mathieu in Perpignan. Théodore constructed fewer mixtures and mutations, choosing instead reed choruses and ranks such as the Kéraulophone, Unda Maris, and Salicional. The 1875 organ of Saint-Vincent de Carcassonne, hereafter referred to as Saint Vincent, represents a transitional period in the Puget family’s history: the departure from organs built in the French Classical style to the creation of symphonic instruments. This organ is also one of Théodore’s last major projects before his retirement in 1877, so it is indicative of change in the family business leading to Eugène’s takeover. Théodore’s new style of organbuilding made him appealing to new clientele in the turbulent nineteenth-century market, which was rife with competition from Cavaillé-Coll and other organbuilders.

The same year the Saint Vincent organ was inaugurated, the Pugets began drawing up a proposal for a new organ in l’Église Notre-Dame du Taur in central Toulouse. Théodore did not oversee this project as he had transitioned the company into the hands of his ambitious son, Eugène. The organ of Notre-Dame du Taur would become a unique, defining opus for the Puget family that gave them an edge against their tenacious competition. Though credit for the Notre-Dame du Taur organ belongs to Eugène, Théodore’s organ at Saint Vincent set the precedent.⁵⁰ Eugène’s groundbreaking innovations at Notre-Dame du Taur were rooted in the organbuilding techniques he had learned while working for his father. The organ at Notre-Dame du Taur would catapult the Pugets’ prestige beyond the regional level.

The golden era, 1877–1892: Eugène Puget

Eugène, the sixth-eldest of his siblings, demonstrated keen intelligence at a young age.⁵¹ He studied at the Conservatoire de Toulouse and excelled in his study of music.⁵² Following the unexpected passing of his eldest brother François, Eugène took up a position in the family business.⁵³ His approach to organbuilding was influenced by his fascination with Romantic ideals of the nineteenth century, which is evidenced in his nicked pipework, Bertounèchian reeds, and symphonic foundations.⁵⁴ Though he did incorporate some new technology into his organs, Eugène was a traditionalist when designing instruments.⁵⁵

Under Eugène’s leadership, which officially began in 1877 following Théodore’s retirement, the Puget company expanded professional relations beyond Occitania. Eugène established relationships with famous Parisian organists of the time such as Charles-Marie Widor, Alexandre Guilmant, and Eugène Gigout, all of whom dedicated at least one Puget instrument each.⁵⁷ In letters to Eugène Puget, Widor addressed him as mon cher ami (my dear friend).⁵⁸ Camille Saint-Saëns sent a message to Eugène in 1891 that read: “I don’t think I will have time to visit your organ, but I know what you are worth and I will give you with great pleasure all the attestations you desire.”⁵⁹ When Eugène passed away unexpectedly, Guilmant wrote a letter of condolence to the family workshop, describing him as an “artiste.”⁶⁰ These professional connections with Parisian organists indicate the increased status of the Puget family. The organ most emblematic of Eugène’s craft is the gallery organ of l’Église Notre-Dame du Taur, hereafter referred to as the Taur.

Notre-Dame du Taur

The Taur is a historic church, the origin of which can be traced back to the martyrdom of Saint Sernin, the first bishop of Toulouse.⁶¹ The Romans had settled in Toulouse by the third century as part of their occupation of Gaul. The local authorities seized Saint Sernin, tied him to the back of a bull in the capitol plaza, and sent the animal running through the city streets, dragging the bishop. An oratory was built on the site where Saint Sernin was detached from the bull and pronounced dead. The church was called “l’Église Saint-Sernin du Taur” until the nineteenth century when a local statue of a black Madonna was moved there. L’Église Notre-Dame du Taur (Church of Our Lady of the Bull), became an official historic monument in 1840.⁶²

The first record of an organ in the Taur comes from the time of the French Revolution. The instrument at the time, a twenty-three-stop organ in the French Classical style, was described in a review of Toulousain organs by Jean-Baptiste Micot as useless in both its sonority and appearance.⁶³ There were restorations of the instrument carried out between 1840 and 1860, all of which failed.⁶⁴ When the church underwent renovations during the years 1870 to 1876, the clergy made plans to rebuild the organ and declared that this instrument needed to endure for at least longer than forty years. On November 24, 1875, the priests approved the Pugets’ proposal, which cost 32,000 francs.⁶⁵

One evident aspect of the organ was its unique tripartite façade. The Taur borders buildings on either side of the nave, so little natural light comes into the sanctuary save for the rose windows on the gallery wall and some smaller windows over and behind the altar. During the restoration, Henri Bach, the city architect of Toulouse, requested the Pugets to design an organ that would not obstruct these windows.⁶⁶ Bach approved these drawings after he made some corrections to them.⁶⁷ When the preeminent architect of France at the time, Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc, visited the Taur during the renovation and learned of the plans for the organ’s layout, he skeptically commented that the Pugets would be great artists if they yielded a successful result.⁶⁸

To frame the windows, three cases were built in the gallery. The two outer cases display pipes on two of their sides, and the middle case’s pipes are exposed on three sides. The tripartite façade contains 159 pipes in total, only two of which do not speak. If the whole façade were lined up horizontally, it would be sixty-nine feet wide.⁷⁰ In order to make the instrument playable, Eugène constructed five Barker machines to lighten the weight of the long trackers, the most extensive of which is forty-five feet.⁷¹ These trackers activate over 800 pallets.⁷²

Eugène chose local materials for the construction of his instruments. The cases and console at the Taur were made of oak, which was desirable for its durability.⁷³ Puget scholar Henri de Rohan states that burnished oak was the dominant wood used in the Puget’s workshop.⁷⁴ The bellows were made of sheepskin leather. Eugène prioritized these refined local materials in his instruments, which are integral to the organ’s authentic southern French character. All of the Taur organ’s original oak and sheepskin have endured.⁷⁵

The organ’s specification is impressive. With forty stops spanning over three manuals, each containing fifty-six notes, and a thirty-note pedalboard, this organ was the largest in Toulouse at the time of its construction.⁷⁶ The specification for the instrument boasted ten foundation stops speaking at 8′ pitch in the manuals. As a result, the foundations supported the upperwork easily. When drawn together, their combined sound was potent but not oppressive. Jean-Claude Guidarini, who was titular organist at the Taur from 1990 until 2020, described the jeux de fonds as “somber” and “calm.”⁷⁷

The voicing of the foundations at the Taur was mellow with a dark, rounded tone. This color was a contrast to foundations of other builders of the time, who constructed foundation stops that sounded brighter. Why the Pugets desired this kind of sound for their foundations is unclear, but the resulting unique sonority is an example of artistry from the organbuilder. In a demonstration of this organ I attended by Guidarini, he indicated that the Flûte harmonique was voiced to be a solo stop. He dissuaded visiting organists from registering this rank with the other 8′ stops, the rest of which were powerful enough on their own.

Though the foundations were mild, the reeds were vigorously round and powerful. Toward the end of Théodore’s life and the start of Eugène’s tenure, the company used brass shallots.⁷⁸ These reeds were voiced brighter than typical French symphonic organs by other builders. When paired with mixtures, mutations, and the foundations, the brashness of the reeds balances out and results in a broad sonority.⁷⁹ One crucial distinction concerning the reeds is the role of the Hautbois in the ensemble. On Puget instruments, this stop is labeled “Hautbois-Basson” rather than “Basson-Hautbois” and is activated on the reed ventil.⁸⁰

In addition to the foundations and reeds, there are other color stops on this instrument. The Voix humaine on the Récit is soft, especially compared to the stronger stops on the organ. Guidarini described all of the flutes, open and stopped, as “lovely and clear.”⁸¹ On the Positif, there is a Clarinette and a Cornet, which was originally on one stopknob. In 1939 Maurice Puget separated out the Cornet; removed the 8′ Kéraulophone, 4′ Dulciana, 2′ Doublette, and Unda Maris; and added a 1′ Piccolo.⁸²

Another major element of Eugène’s instrument was its two enclosed divisions operated by two expression shoes. In nineteenth-century France, the vast majority of symphonic organs had only a single enclosed division, which was almost always the Récit. By having both an enclosed Récit and Positif, half of the Taur organ was under expression. With the boxes shut, the pipes were barely audible. The organist could achieve a smooth crescendo from a mystic pianissimo to a robust fortissimo by manipulating the boxes as well as the seventeen combination pedals. One division could accompany the other with ease, and the Grand Orgue could serve as a tutti contrast.⁸³

Because he was an organist, Eugène understood how to construct a console to suit performers’ accessibility needs. Stops were arranged in the French tiered-console style and were comfortably within an arm’s length from the bench. The music rack was placed above the Récit so the view of the upper manual was unobstructed. The expression shoes were easy to manipulate and did not require much leg strength. The natural ergonomic design of the Taur organ console was more comfortable than the consoles of Cavaillé-Coll, who designed with the perspective of a technician rather than an organist.⁸⁴ Though the plaque on the console reads 1878, which is the date of the completion, the organ was not inaugurated until two years later.⁸⁵

Théodore promoted the instrument’s dedication ceremony with flyers that were sent almost exclusively to local parish priests and affluent southern French residents who were likely to be future customers of the Pugets.⁸⁶ Eugène found his father’s grassroots, old-school method of advertising to be unacceptable for the family’s ambitious new organ. To garner attention at the national level, Eugène invited lionized organist Alexandre Guilmant to dedicate the Taur organ. Guilmant’s performance fee of 1,000 francs for the inaugural concert was considered astronomically expensive at the time.⁸⁷ His performance spanned two evening sessions on the nights of June 17 and 18, 1880.⁸⁸ The program included works by Handel and Mendelssohn, along with transcriptions of selections by Beethoven and several compositions by Guilmant himself, concluding with an improvisation on a popular theme.⁸⁹

The reception committee included almost all the organists of Toulouse, the director of the local conservatory, and Théodore Sauer of the Daublaine et Callinet organ company.⁹⁰ The committee’s report lauded the new instrument’s voicing, round and powerful foundation stops, and orchestral qualities.⁹¹ The organ’s expressive Positif division impressed several listeners who were accustomed to instruments with only one enclosed division. The vast dynamic range of the Taur organ astounded musicians, audiences, and congregations alike. The Reverend Eugène Massip, who was the rector of the Taur at the time, described how the two expressive divisions would yield magnificent results for worship. Jacques Lacaze, the Taur’s titular organist at the time, wrote glowing reviews about the new Puget instrument.⁹²

The Taur church as a whole is a prime representation of Toulousain art and culture. Its domineering, fortress-like façade overlooking the Rue du Taur is constructed of red brick, a common local material.⁹⁴ The dark interior of the church is lined with paintings of Saint Sernin’s martyrdom by Toulousain artist Bernard Bénézet.⁹⁵ The black Madonna and the sculpture of the bull in the sanctuary are staple fixtures with local significance. The whole church is a quintessential example of southern French neo-Gothic ideals. The Puget organ tastefully complements the church’s aesthetic.

Of all the instruments the Pugets built, the Taur organ is the most influential opus of the dynasty. This instrument inspired several organs of Eugène’s tenure, including l’Église Saint-Fulcran in Lodève, l’Église Saint-Amans in Rodez, l’Église Notre-Dame des Tables in Montpellier, l’Église Saint-Aphrodise in Béziers, and l’Église Notre-Dame de la Dalbade in Toulouse.⁹⁶ The Taur organ was an archetype but not a reproduced, copied project. For example, the Pugets did not have standardized models for organs in the manner that other companies did with factory catalogs published in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. However, the artistic and technical decisions Eugène made for his other projects were based on the success of the Taur organ. Eugène’s traditionalist tendencies are evident in his consistent organbuilding choices, such as the use of tin rather than zinc, mechanical action with Barker levers, and tiered three-manual consoles. He voiced all of his instruments in a similar manner to that of the Taur organ.⁹⁷

Eugène elevated the perception of the Puget family during the Taur project. After Guilmant’s inaugural performance in 1880, the Pugets cultivated a national reputation. In the eighty years that followed, highly respected Parisian organists of multiple generations—from Guilmant to Xavier Darasse—dedicated Puget organs.⁹⁸ The Taur organ was widely considered the finest, most innovative organ in southern France at the time of its inauguration, surpassing Cavaillé-Coll’s reputation there.⁹⁹ As a result, organists traveled across France to play and listen to Puget instruments.

Today many organists and scholars consider the Taur organ to be the greatest instrument the Puget dynasty ever built. Save for its electric blower and Maurice’s minor changes to the specification, the organ remains entirely in its original state from 1880. The 143-year-old sheepskin has always been treated naturally without chemicals.¹⁰⁰ On September 25, 1987, the organ was classified by the French government as a historic monument. In July 2022 the first ever restoration of the organ was announced as part of a renovation of the whole church. The project is scheduled to finish in autumn of 2025.¹⁰¹

The Taur has maintained a prominent role in both the artistic and liturgical life of Toulouse. To showcase the organ and celebrate the seasons of the liturgical year, Guidarini initiated a concert series called “Moments Musicaux au Taur.”¹⁰² He would invite local organists as well as students at the Toulouse Conservatory to give recitals on the Puget instrument for the general public, with programs centered on works for appropriate liturgical seasons. I performed at the Taur in December 2019, the final year Guidarini organized the concert series before his passing. My experience playing the Taur organ has, in major part, inspired 
this research.

To be continued in the July 2024 issue.

Notes

1. Jesse Eschbach, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll: A Compendium of Known Stoplists, second edition, volume 1 (Kraichtal: Verlag Peter Ewers, 2013); John R. Shannon, Understanding the Pipe Organ (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., 2009); Philippe Cicchero, Les Orgues Des Cathédrales de France (Gentilly: EMA, 1999). Cavaillé-Coll built over 500 instruments across Europe and beyond. He is considered a master of both technical prowess and artistry. Some innovations for which he was known include the implementation of the Barker lever, the development of the harmonic flute stop, and the construction of ventil systems. These engineering feats gave his organs qualities more similar to a symphony orchestra than a choir and, as a result, influenced the composition of new organ repertoire.

2. Arjen van Kralingen, “Recensie Clair-Obscur: Henri Ormières Bespeelt Het Puget-Orgel in de St. Vincent Te Carcassonne,” Orgel Nieuws (blog), March 20, 2021, https://www.orgelnieuws.nl/recensie-clair-obscur-henri-Ormières-bespeelt-het-puget-orgel-in-de-st-vincent-te-carcassonne/. Puget scholars Jean-Claude Guidarini and Henri de Rohan make similar remarks in their writings when discussing Cavaillé-Coll from the perspective of the Puget family.

3. Henri de Rohan, Th. Puget: Une Famille de Facteurs d’orgues à Toulouse, 1834–1960 (Toulouse: Bibliothèque Municipale de Toulouse, 1987), pages 11, 17, 19, https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Puget-Rohan-catalogue-expow.pdf.

4. Jean-Marc Cicchero, “Montreal d’Aude, Une Autre Colline Inspirée?,” July 13, 2016, accessed January 28, 2022, https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ob_760b48_theodore-puget.pdf; Maggie Hamilton, “Poetic License,” Choir & Organ (June 2009), page 62. Eugène’s full name was Eugène Germain Lagrasse Puget. Jean-Baptiste’s full name was François-Ernest Jean Baptiste Puget.

5. Jean-Claude Guidarini, “Cavaillé, Puget . . . un Débat Cool,” Orgues Nouvelles, 6ème année, no. 23 (December 2013), https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/puget-cavaille-coll.odt.

6. Jean-Claude Guidarini, “Compositions Du Quelques Instruments Construits Ou Reconstruits Par La Manufacture Puget de Toulouse,” n.d., http://www.orgues-nouvelles.fr/ON23/textes/CompoOrgPuget.pdf?fbclid=IwAR11p00_bj-jvug9IbbgxWZyuVSrCQnsne0fup0Nmv15E8pneGhXEuUc3ec.

7. Jean-Marc Cicchero.

8. Philippe Bachet, ed., Orgues En Midi-Pyrénées (Toulouse et Région): 15ème Congrès de La FFAO, July 13–18, 1998 (Lyon: Fédération Francophone des Amis de l’Orgue, 1998), page 28; Jean-Marc Cicchero, Rohan, page 35. François Puget, a dressmaker, was born in 1771 and died in 1831. The dates of Catherine Boyer are unknown. Together, they had six children, of which Théodore was the only surviving male; one of his siblings died in infancy. Only one of Théodore’s four sisters, Hélène Geneviève, married.

9. Jean-Marc Cicchero.

10. Bachet, page 28; Jean-Marc Cicchero; Rohan, page 35. Louise Anne Mossel was born in 1802, but her death date is unknown.

11. Jean-Marc Cicchero.

12. Reprinted from Jean-Claude Guidarini, “Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’orgues,” May 13, 2019, accessed April 12, 2022, http://www.orgue-puget-lavelanet.com/2019/05/les-puget-une-dynastie-de-facteurs-d-orgues.html.

13. Jean-Marc Cicchero. Cicchero argues that one cannot learn organbuilding from books alone because there are several nuances and details as to how complex mechanisms in the instruments work. Also, there is no evident relation between Benoit Cabias and Abbé Cabias, who was another organbuilder of the time.

14. I use the words “gallery” and “tribune” interchangeably in the research. These terms are synonymous.

15. Dom François Bédos de Celles, L’Art Du Facteur d’Orgues, Facsimile edition (New York: Bärenreiter, 1963).

16. Rohan, page 17. Eugène’s and Jean-Baptiste’s instruments contained stops that were scaled, voiced, and labeled according to the directions in L’Art Du Facteur d’Orgues. This is especially true of the pipes speaking at 8′ and 4′ pitches, such as the Montre.

17. Mathieu Delmas, Zoom call. Interview by John J. Mitchell, July 1, 2022; L’Association Orgues Meridionales, “Villemur,” Orgues Meridionales, http://orgues.meridionales.free.fr/Villemur.pdf. During the 1920s and 1930s, there was a newfound appreciation for organs of the seventeenth century.

18. Mathieu Delmas; “Quand Théodore Puget Etait Representant Du ‘Milacor’ . . .,” May 28, 2021, accessed January 29, 2022, https://orguesaintantonin.fr/quand-theodore-puget-etait-representant-du-milacor.

19. Kurt Lueders, emailed comments made to the author, April 24, 2023. In French, the word “milacor” is a play on words, combining “mille,” which means “one thousand,” and “accord,” meaning chords. According to Kurt Lueders: “This brand name has the same pronunciation as ‘a thousand chords,’ cleverly evoking the use to which the device is put. An overtone of the French word ‘cor’ [which means ‘horn’] may also be present, but the allusion would be much less obvious to a French speaker.”

20. “L’abbé Dessenne, L’abbé Cabias et l’orgue simplifié, l’abbé Larroque et Le ‘Milacor,’” Les Orgues de l’Abbé Clergeau, accessed January 29, 2022, https://rmcks.pagesperso-orange.fr/orgue/orgues_clergeau/index_abbe_Larroque.htm; “Quand Théodore Puget Etait Représentant Du ‘Milacor’ . . . .”

21. “L’abbé Dessenne, L’abbé Cabias et l’orgue Simplifié, l’abbé Larroque et Le ‘Milacor.’”

22. Jean-Marc Cicchero.

23. Michel Évrard, “Toulouse Bonnefoy Un Orgue Puget aux Prénoms Trompeurs dans Deux Églises Successives,” Les Amis des Archives de la Haute-Garonne, Petite Bibliothèque, no. 162 (October 31, 2008): page 4, https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/pb_162_txt.pdf.

24. Delmas; Évrard, page 4.

25. Évrard, page 4.

26. Jean-Claude Guidarini, “Grand Orgue de l’Église Saint-Exupère,” Toulouse Les Orgues, accessed April 26, 2022, https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/instrument/grand-orgue-de-leglise-saint-exupere/; “St Exupère Church–Toulouse (Haute-Garonne),” Orgues en France et dans Le Monde, accessed April 26, 2022, http://orguesfrance.com/ToulouseStExupere.html. Théodore’s organ at Saint-Exupère was fourteen stops with two manuals, one under expression, including stops found in Romantic-era symphonic organbuilding such as Clarinette and Hautbois-Basson. Eugène expanded this organ’s pipework and installed a new console in 1885. Jean-Baptiste and his son Maurice made further modifications to the instrument.

27. Évrard, page 9; Rohan, page 35.

28. Maison Théodore Puget, Père et Fils, “Orgues Construites Ou Restaurées Par La Maison,” October 1911, reprinted from Pastór de Lasala, “A Puget Organ in Sydney: A Fortunate Historical Accident,” OHTA News 44, number 1 (October 4, 2018), page 18.

29. Évrard, page 4; S. L. [sic], “On Nous Ecrit de Pibrac,” Journal de Toulouse: Politique et Littéraire, février 1864, 60ème année, no. 45 édition, BNF, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k53716127/f1.item.r=puget.zoom. An advertisement for the Puget family written in 1869 also lists 1838 as the year of founding.

30. Jean-Marc Cicchero.

31. Delmas; Hamilton, page 55.

32. Évrard, pages 6, 9. On September 10, 1869, a fire broke out at the Puget factory. The structure survived, but most of what was inside the shop was lost to the flames.

33. Bachet, page 15. Bachet’s and Évrard’s writings describe the precise addresses of the Puget factory in more detail.

34. Bachet, page 28. Théodore’s sons Olivier and Jean Ernest Gustave died in infancy.

35. Rohan, page 36.

36. Bachet, page 16.

37. Delmas; Rohan, page 36; “Orgue Puget de l’Église de Saint-Antonin-Noble-Val,” Fondation du Patrimoine, January 19, 2022, https://orguesaintantonin.fr/lorgue-puget. The organ in Saint Antonin-Noble-Val, north of Toulouse, is an example of Baptiste’s work. His son emigrated to Buenos Aires, Argentina, in the twentieth century, and two of his descendants, Elsa and Alberto Puget, are alive today.

38. Bachet, pages 16–18.

39. Évrard, page 4.

40. John J. Mitchell, compiled from Bachet, pages 15–19; Delmas; Évrard, pages 3–4; Jean-Marc Cicchero; Rohan pages 35–37; Jean-Gabriel Pélaprat, “Les Orgues de la Famille PUGET” Facebook group, May 20, 2023.

41. Évrard, page 3.

42. Successors of instrument builders commonly continue signing work using their father’s or mother’s name after the head of the family has died.

43. Douglas Earl Bush and Richard Kassel, “Clicquot,” in The Organ, an Encyclopedia (Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006).

44. “César Franck–Classical Music Composers,” Philadelphia Chamber Music Society, accessed March 18, 2023, https://www.pcmsconcerts.org/composer/cesar-franck/; Léon Vallas, César Franck, trans. Hubert J. Foss (New York: Oxford University Press, 1951), page 102; John J. Mitchell, “German Influences on Franck’s Chorale in E Major,” March 31, 2019, accessed March 18, 2023, https://www.voxhumanajournal.com/mitchell2019.html.

45. Bachet, pages 15–16.

46. Rohan, page 18.

47. Rohan, pages 17–18.

48. Delmas; Rohan, page 18.

49. Photo credit: Tylwyth Eldar (cropped). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en.

50. Toulouse Les Orgues, “Grand Orgue de l’Église Saint-Barthélémy,” accessed March 16, 2023. https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/instrument/grand-orgue-de-leglise-saint-barthelemy/.

51. Jean-Claude Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’orgues à Toulouse (Toulouse: Médiathèque José Cabanis, 2008), https://orguesaintantonin.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ob_79c1c0_les-puget-catalogue-expo-2008.pdf.

52. Rohan, page 37.

53. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’orgues à Toulouse, page 3. When François died, Eugène joined the factory to make up for the new lack of manpower. Eugène was titular organist at la Basilique Notre-Dame de la Daubade in Toulouse for most of his career until his passing.

54. Rohan, page 38. Abel Bertounèche was a reed voicer for Cavaillé-Coll who influenced the Pugets and other organbuilders of the time.

55. Rohan, page 36.

56. Reprinted from Rohan, page 39.

57. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse, page 3; “Orgue de Rodez, Église Saint-Amans,” Orgue Aquitaine, accessed February 13, 2023, https://orgue-aquitaine.fr/; The Puget family members were almost all organists, which may explain why their instruments were so ergonomically suited to musicians.

58. Bachet, page 16.

59. Rohan, page 25.

60. Rohan, page 25.

61. Saint Sernin is also referred to as Saint Saturnin in certain sources.

62. “Notre-Dame Du Taur,” Basilique Saint-Sernin de Toulouse (Site officiel), accessed March 7, 2023, https://www.basilique-saint-sernin.fr/note-dame-du-taur/; Robert Poliquin, “Orgues En France,” Organs Around the World, 1997–2023, http://www.musiqueorguequebec.ca/orgues/france/toulousendt.html.

63. Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue;” Jean-Baptiste Micot, “Rapport Sur Les Orgues de Toulouse,” 1796, Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

64. Dominique Amann, Le Facteur d’Orgues Frédéric Jungk (France: La Maurinière éditions, 2013), www.la-mauriniere.com, pages 53–54; Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue.” One restoration was carried out by organbuilder Frédéric Jungk between the years 1850 and 1857. This organ was expanded to thirty-seven stops over three manuals. There were nine couplers and tirasses with a swell box (boîte expressive), pneumatic machine, Barker lever, and a state-of-the-art winding mechanism. The organ was inaugurated in 1860 and after only fifteen years was damaged during the church’s restoration in 1875.

65. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse, page 6. A complete specification of this Puget organ is found on page 17, Mitchell, reprinted from Guidarini, “Compositions Du Quelques Instruments Construits Ou Reconstruits Par La Manufacture Puget de Toulouse.”

66. L’Association Orgues Meridionales, “Notre-Dame-du-Taur,” Orgues Meridionales, http://orgues.meridionales.free.fr/SaintExupere.pdf. The church’s reception committee claims that it was the wish of the clergy to leave the gallery windows unobstructed. Henri Bach designed the windows and was delegated the responsibility of overseeing the organ façade’s layout.

67. Jean Nayrolles, “Un architecte toulousain du XIXme siècle: Henri Bach (1815–1899),” Histoire de l’art 1, no. 1 (1988): page 45, https://doi.org/10.3406/hista.1988.1628; Radio Présence, “Jean-Claude Guidarini: ‘Immersion à Notre-Dame Du Taur’” (Toulouse, 2012), 18:27, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy69JOvYnsE.

68. Rohan, page 54.

69. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

70. Sixty-nine feet is about twenty-one meters.

71. Forty-five feet is about fourteen meters.

72. Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue.”

73. Delmas.

74. Rohan, page 54.

75. Hamilton, page 58.

76. Rohan, page 56.

77. Hamilton, page 58. It is unclear if Guidarini made these comments in English or if they were translated from French to English by Hamilton.

78. Bachet, page 24; Delmas; Hamilton, page 59.

79. Guidarini “Le Grande Orgue.”

80. This detail regarding the oboe is critical for performers bringing French symphonic repertoire to Puget instruments. On a Cavaillé-Coll organ, for example, not only is the label different, but also, the Hautbois-Basson is not on the reed ventil. When taking repertoire to a Puget written for a Cavaillé-Coll, the performer and their console assistant(s) must strategize in advance how to bring on this stop.

81. Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue;” Hamilton, page 58.

82. Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue.”

83. Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue.”

84. Radio Présence, “Jean-Claude Guidarini: ‘Immersion à Notre-Dame Du Taur’” (Toulouse, 2012), 15:38, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy69JOvYnsE.

85. Guidarini, “Grand Orgue de l’Église Notre-Dame du Taur,” Toulouse Les Orgues, accessed March 9, 2023, https://toulouse-les-orgues.org/instrument/grand-orgue-de-leglise-notre-dame-du-taur/; Rohan, page 23.

86. Rohan, page 15.

87. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse, page 6. The fee for the performance was over three percent of the cost of the whole organ. For perspective, if a new organ in 2023 costs $1,000,000, Guilmant’s fee for a performance would be about $32,000.

88. “La Séance d’orgue,” Le Journal de Toulouse: Politique et Littéraire, June 1880, Année 76, No. 16 édition, Gallica.

89. Alexandre Guilmant, “Deuxième Séance d’Inauguration Solennelle du Grand Orgue de Notre-Dame du Taur” (Typo.-Lith C. Berdoulat, June 1880), in “Le Grande Orgue,” Guidarini, https://image.jimcdn.com/app/cms/image/transf/dimension=1024x10000:format=jpg/path/s5bdc24606d23f03d/image/i8c3c33134c11eaa2/version/1411689846/image.jpg.

90. “Les Callinet de Rouffach,” accessed April 12, 2022, http://decouverte.orgue.free.fr/facteurs/callinet.htm; Rohan, page 48. The Callinets, another organbuilding dynasty, predate both the Pugets and Cavaillé-Coll. They were one of the first symphonic organbuilding companies in France. Their instruments demonstrate the drastic changes in French organ building from the early eighteenth century to the late nineteenth century.

91. Bachet, page 17.

92. Delmas; Rohan, page 56.

93. Archives of the Musée de Lavaur, shared by l’Association Jean-Claude Guidarini.

94. Toulouse is colloquially referred to as “La Ville Rose,” meaning “The Pink City,” since many of its historic buildings are constructed with red brick.

95. Poliquin.

96. Guidarini “Le Grande Orgue.”

97. Rohan, page 38.

98. Guidarini, Les Puget, Une Dynastie de Facteurs d’Orgues à Toulouse, page 6.

99. Guidarini, “Le Grande Orgue”

100. Hamilton, page 58.

101. Gala Jacquin, “Toulouse: l’église Notre-Dame du Taur va faire peau neuve,” L’Opinion Indépendante, January 30, 2023, https://lopinion.com/articles/actualite/15240_toulouse-eglise-notre-dame-taur-peau-neuve.

102. “Association Jean-Claude Guidarini– AssoJCG.Org,” accessed January 25, 2022, https://assojcg.org/.

Thomas Fielding

Organist and composer Thomas Fielding is director of music for the Cathedral of Saint John the Evangelist and music coordinator for the Office of Worship, Diocese of Cleveland, Ohio. He is a 2007 doctoral degree graduate of the Indiana University Jacobs School of Music, where his principal teacher was Christopher Young. Previous studies were with Martin Jean and Robert A. Hobby. Fielding has taken first prize in the national Arthur Poister (Syracuse, New York) and San Marino (California) performance competitions, has won several national composition prizes, has been the recipient of several full-tuition scholarship awards at Indiana University and, as an undergraduate, won several music prizes offered by his alma mater Valparaiso University. He has played recitals on some of the world’s finest instruments, including two appearances at Saint Paul’s Cathedral, London, England. His scholarly work has been featured in The American Organist and The Tracker magazines. He was for four years the dean of the Central North Carolina Chapter of the American Guild of Organists.

As an active and commissioned composer, Dr. Fielding’s works appear in the catalogs of Choristers’ Guild, GIA Publications, Selah, E. C. Schirmer, and Paraclete Press. His works have been performed by soloists, choirs, and orchestras throughout the United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia in addition to the 2016 American Guild of Organists national convention in Houston, Texas. His compositions also have been broadcast on National Public Radio on both Weekend Edition and Pipedreams. For more information, visit thomasfielding.com.

Introduction

Esquisses Byzantines and Carillon-Sortie are the two most frequently performed works by the enigmatic French composer Henri Mulet (1878–1967). A dedication printed on the front page of the score of Esquisses Byzantines refers to the Basilique du Sacré-Coeur perched high on Montmartre in Paris. The typical interpretation of this cycle views Esquisses Byzantines as an external tribute to the empirical structure of the basilica; however, only the first five of the suite’s ten movements illustrate the architectural features of the building. The final five allude to different aspects of customs and rituals at the basilica. Curiously, the last two movements have Latin rather than French titles.

Mulet added four inscriptions referred to as “mottos” that strongly suggest a philosophical agenda. He finished the composition in 1908, but for no recorded or anecdotal reason did not publish the work until 1920. The first motto contains the dates 1914–1919. This suggests that the mottos were added at the time of publication.

From 1894 until 1940, a time when art and politics were entwined, ideologies and music in France were inseparable.¹ Jane Fulcher notes that composers “were indeed intellectuals, deeply engaged with public issues, symbols, and ideologies, and their evolution in this period cannot be explained by ‘pure’ stylistic development, or sporadic influence from other arts.”² Mulet was just such an intellectual, and his Esquisses Byzantines is a product of this movement.

The Archdiocese of Paris built Sacré-Coeur Basilica for specific theological and political reasons that are embodied in the towering motto that dominates the apse of the building. Because of their magnitude, two words stand out: Gallia Poenitens (France repents). Ideologically, the construction of Sacré-Coeur was an act of reparation for the sins of France committed during the 1789 Revolution and the 1870 Franco-Prussian War. Even though Mulet composed Esquisses Byzantines in 1908, he may have published it in 1920 to celebrate both the dedication of the basilica and the Allied victory in World War I. To fully understand the ideology of Esquisses Byzantines, an examination of the history of France’s love affair with the Sacred Heart of Jesus is called for.

Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus in France

Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus is rooted in the concept of Christ’s humanity and the five glorious wounds of his Passion. Minor rituals dedicated to the Sacred Heart were found in late Medieval monastic writings. These became widely popular as a result of the visions of Saint Marguerite-Marie Alacoque (1648–1690), a French nun and mystic. At age 23, Alacoque entered Visitation Convent at Paray-le-Monial. Early in her novitiate, she had visions of the Sacred Heart pierced by a lance for the world’s sins and surmounted by a flame of love. Replete with the drama of Baroque piety, God’s message, sent to the world through Alacoque, was that of a vengeful deity seeking reparation and atonement for the numerous sins of France. These transgressions included material extravagance, moral decadence, and the apostasy of Protestantism. At one point, Alacoque received a vision of three demands of the Sacred Heart that needed to be fulfilled before France could receive abundant blessings from the Lord:
• France, through its king, should be consecrated to the Sacred Heart;
• an edifice should be built for this purpose;
• this historic compact should be recorded on the royal insignia.3

The first test of her prophecy occurred in June 1720, when the merchant ship Grand Saint-Antoine arrived in the port at Marseille. Despite the standard forty-day quarantine imposed on foreign ships, the bubonic plague spread from the ship and ravaged the city. By December, 50,000 people had died. The diocesan bishop, Henri François Xavier de Belsunce de Castelmoron (1671–1755), was well known for his love of public religious spectacles such as large-scale pilgrimages and massive processions. In the plague’s arrival, he saw God’s displeasure with the people of Marseille. In November and December Belsunce staged several penitential cortèges, and by spring 1721 deaths had fallen dramatically.

The plague was an invitation to penitence sent by an angry God whose patience with crime, heresy, and sin had been tested and exceeded. The Sacred Heart of Jesus was the best recourse, according to Belsunce, and his consecration of the city of Marseille to the Sacred Heart was the correct spiritual initiative to take in the face of the plague. The Sacré-Coeur had driven the plague from Marseille.⁴

When the plague returned in 1722 Belsunce cited ongoing moral corruption as its cause. The city’s principal governors again consecrated Marseille to the Sacred Heart on May 28. By autumn the plague had disappeared from the city. Marseille became the paragon for Catholic France of the power found in devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

The French Church experienced a far greater trial in the Revolution of 1789. Revolutionaries slaughtered scores of Catholic clergy and religious. For the Catholic Counter-Revolution, this civil disturbance was nothing less than another chapter in the ongoing war between good and evil.

For some, the religious policy of the Revolution was sure to bring down divine chastisement, for others, the Revolution was itself a chastisement. Profanations and wicked exaltations were the signs by which they recognized in the Revolution an evil of terrifying and unsurpassed strength.⁵

The demands made by God to Alacoque had not yet been fulfilled, and Catholic France was suffering for it. Meanwhile, the Catholic Counter-Revolution, fueled largely by rural conservatives, embraced the Sacred Heart of Jesus as its symbol. Convents and pious families churned out embroidered Sacred Heart emblems by the tens of thousands, and several militant priestly orders dedicated to the Sacred Heart were formed. “. . . The Sacré-Coeur emerged as the devotion and the image of Catholic resistance to the scourge of the Revolution.”⁶

Once the Revolution was over, nineteenth-century France struggled to determine which political system would best serve it. Political regimes and forms of government changed repeatedly. The brief restoration of the Bourbon monarchy between 1814 and 1830 created the opportunity to consecrate the nation to the Sacred Heart. Louis XVI had done so privately before the Revolution, but Louis XVIII, who ruled from 1814 until 1824, was too savvy a politician to engage in an act that could be so divisive to the nation. Another surge of fervor to fulfill Alacoque’s prophecy ensued when France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. The pious French believed that these two wars were a divine condemnation of a nation fallen from grace. Bishop Félix Fournier (1803–1877) of Nantes proclaimed, “Defeat . . . was a punishment from God; it was the consequence of moral failure on a national scale.”⁷ Catholic France recognized these disasters as a call from God to repent and atone for its sins.

The National Vow and the construction of the Basilique du Sacré-Coeur

In 1870 Alexandre Félix Legentil (1821–1889) became a refugee in Poitiers after the Franco-Prussian defeat, the patriotic trauma of the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, and the devastation of the Paris Commune. While there, inspired by similar building projects in Lyon and Marseille, he vowed to build a national church dedicated to the Sacred Heart. He quickly won the enthusiasm of Hubert Rohault de Fleury (1828–1910), his brother-in-law, and the support of Cardinal Pie, Bishop of Poitiers. Legentil and de Fleury were able to convince Parisian Archbishop Joseph Hyppolyte Guibert (1802–1886) to support their National Vow to the Sacred Heart and the construction of Sacré-Coeur. Guibert wanted to keep its text as apolitical as possible for fear of the Republicans. After some correspondence and negotiation on the exact wording of the vow, Legentil, Hubert Rohault de Fleury, and Cardinal Guibert opted for the following:

In spite of the misfortunes that ravage France, and perhaps of even greater woes that threaten it; in spite of the sacrilegious attacks committed in Rome against the laws of the Church and the Holy See, and against the sacred person of the Vicar of Jesus Christ; We humble ourselves before God, and, bringing together in our love the Church and our homeland, we recognize that we have been guilty and rightly punished. And to make appropriate amends for our sins and to obtain from the Sacred Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ the forgiveness of our transgressions as well as the extraordinary relief that alone can deliver the Sovereign Pontiff from his captivity, and put an end to France’s misfortunes, we promise to contribute to the erection in Paris of a sanctuary dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.⁸

In fulfillment of the prophecy of Alacoque, multiple consecrations were made to the Sacred Heart. Along with its widely disseminated emblem, France only needed a church, and the National Vow ensured that this would happen.

After the far-left socialist Paris Commune was suppressed on May 28, 1871, the Third French Republic was quickly formed. Conservative royalist Marie Joseph Louis Adolphe Thiers (1797–1877) was elected president. The following year, Archbishop Guibert formally approved the Sacré-Coeur building project on January 18. The endorsement of the National Vow by Pope Pius IX quickly followed in July 1872. Guibert wrote the following to Legentil and Fleury: “This temple, erected as a public act of contrition and reparation . . . will stand among us as a protest against other monuments and works of art erected for the glorification of vice and impiety.”⁹ These “monuments” refer to the massive rebuilding of Paris undertaken by Georges-Eugène Haussmann (1809–1891) by order of Emperor Napoleon III during the Second Empire (1852–1870).

Guibert was keenly interested in choosing the right place for the new church. He considered consecrating several existing buildings, including the Paris Opéra and the Trocadéro. Both were constructed during Haussman’s renovation of Paris. The debate lasted for some time until Guibert visited the summit of Montmartre, the “Hill of the Martyrs,” and was overwhelmed by the magnificent view of Paris. During Roman Emperor Decius’s persecution of Christians in 250 A.D., Saint Denis, the first evangelist of Gall, was martyred on Montmartre. Saint Joan of Arc and other saints made pilgrimages to the site, and Saint Ignatius of Loyola founded the Jesuit order there. During the Commune, two royalist generals who were defending Montmartre from the Republican mob were also martyred there. The site had been used for various purposes throughout the centuries but was not for sale.

To secure Montmartre, Guibert made a petition to the National Assembly concerning the construction of the church. On July 23, 1873, the National Assembly passed a law that proclaimed the construction of Sacré Coeur a public utility (Paris). Meanwhile, the Republic appointed a new president, Patrice de MacMahon (1808–1893), Marshall of France and Duke of Magenta, whose main ambition was to establish a constitutional monarchy. Catholic sympathizers held the majority in the National Assembly, and the land was seized by the government by expropriation (“eminent domain”) and sold to the Archdiocese of Paris.

Although declared an act of public utility, the project received no tax funding. Rather, donations poured in from across the country from private “subscribers” who purchased construction stones that would bear their names. During the nineteenth century, Gothic architecture was considered the quintessential style; however, the Works Committee of 1872 chose a Byzantine concept proposed by Paul Abadie (1812–1884) from among the seventy-eight entries in a competition held for the design of the building. The style of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul and San Marco Basilica in Venice inspired Abadie’s plan. Workers laid the cornerstone of the basilica on June 16, 1875, in the presence of President MacMahon, who donated a statue of the Sacred Heart that stands in the apsidal chapel in the crypt. Subsequent Republican regimes regarded the construction of the basilica as an incitement to civil war. They considered halting progress on the building in 1873, 1897, and 1899; but because the government would have had to reimburse the eight million subscribers some thirty million francs, work continued. Sacré Coeur was ready for consecration in 1914, but the outbreak of World War I delayed this until October 24, 1919.

Henri Mulet and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur

On October 17, 1878, three years after work began with laying the cornerstone of the new church, Henri Mulet was born. Sacré-Coeur was a constant presence throughout his childhood, as he was reared in its shadows. Henri’s entire family was musical. Gabriel, his father, was a celebrated choirmaster of Sacré-Coeur from 1886 to 1903. Blanche Victorie Patin Gatin, his mother, played the harmonium both in the provisional chapel erected on the site and later in the unfinished great church.¹⁰ From her, Henri learned to play the organ and piano.¹¹

In his day, Gabriel Mulet received widespread acclaim as the master of the choir of Sacré-Coeur and as a composer of liturgical music. Although forgotten today, his works include the 1894 Cantata à Jeanne d’Arc and a Tantum ergo for choir and large orchestra composed in 1900. He also composed the text and music for a “Chant Populaire” for the dedication of the great bell of Sacré-Coeur, simply titled The Savoyarde.
The Bulletin de l’Oeuvre du Vœu national notes that the hymn’s “music constitutes a model of imitative harmony.”¹² Sacré-Coeur historian Father Jacques Benoist further opines that this influence is obvious in Mulet’s Esquisses Byzantines.¹³ In Gabriel’s hymn, the choir sings the pious text, while a recurring “strike” on low C of the organ pedals marked “Savoyarde” represents the tolling of the massive bell. This tolling bell effect is somewhat akin to the oscillating octaves heard in Henri’s “Campanile” movement, thus suggesting that Henri may have learned something about musical composition from his father. Additionally, father and son collaborated on a pious “Cantique pour la Communion,” O Mon Jésus, with a text by Gabriel and music by Henri. The work was published in 1900 by Le Beau, a small religious publishing house that Leduc assimilated in 1905.

In 1889 Henri Mulet enrolled at the Paris Conservatoire, where he studied organ and composition with Charles-Marie Widor. Mulet was generally a musical conservative, and because of his birthdate, he is considered a Middle-Impressionist composer.¹⁴ Although he only composed for fifteen years, 1896–1911, one can group his compositional output into three broad stylistic periods. In 1911 he appears to have stopped composing abruptly. “He was hostile to the changes and innovations of the twentieth century, and his style remained strongly rooted in the symphonic organ of Cavaillé-Coll of the nineteenth century.”¹⁵ In 1937 he retired from his final church position at Saint Philippe-du-Roule and the Paris musical scene because his colleagues and even the church’s authorities preferred “modern” music to Franck and his contemporaries.¹⁶

In 1924 Mulet’s colleague and friend Vincent d’Indy (1851–1931) offered Henri the position of professor of organ at the Schola Cantorum where he taught until 1931. The Schola, founded as a foil to the Conservatoire’s emphasis on theatrical music, emphasized formal technique over originality. The Schola’s sacred music curriculum was an exemplar of the principles for church music dictated in the 1903 Motu Proprio by Pope Pius X. This explicitly ultramontane document idealized Gregorian chant and Roman-style polyphony as best suited to the Catholic liturgy. The Schola implemented the papal agenda.

Especially significant here is that the Schola Cantorum did not just define musical values that it considered to be “national,” it established a “code” that associated them with genres, styles, repertoires, and techniques. . . . French nationalist leagues taught the Republic that music could be invariable as a form of "representation”—that it could help shape perceptions when surrounded by a discourse that imbued it with ideological meaning.¹⁷

Mulet seems to have been a papal sympathizer. Aware of the demands that Pope Pius X made of Catholic musicians, he acquiesced. Many like Messiaen did not. In 1921 Mulet presented a lecture to the General Congress of Sacred Music in Strasbourg titled, “The Harmful and Anti-religious Tendencies of the Modern Organ.” The article, published in 1922, critiques the Hope-Jones cinema organ and its use in church. Mulet called it the “Antichrist.” Although Mulet played the cinema organ during his time at Draguignan, his distaste for its liturgical use comes from the papal dictum: “They are also anti-religious because the orchestral organ leads to the performance of transcriptions of orchestral music and even of music for the theatre, which is formally condemned by our Holy Father Pope Pius X.”¹⁸

Eventually Mulet withdrew from public life. He spent his last years at the convent of the Little Sisters of the Poor in Draguignan. He died there on September 20, 1967, elusive, secretive, and largely forgotten. No obituary was published, and the location of his grave has been forgotten.

Esquisses Byzantines as Mulet’s spiritual testament

Esquisses Byzantines is a programmatic set of pieces. Its first five movements describe the physical structure of the basilica, and the second five relate aspects of its ideology, customs, and rituals. Three programmatic “mottos” that Mulet added to the piece at the time of publication hint at this ideological schema. Together, these mottos strongly suggest that Mulet’s work is a kind of sermon on the power of the devotion of the victorious French to the Sacred Heart.

Mulet was reclusive and not at all interested in displaying his biography for public scrutiny. He rarely commented on his pieces or music in general. Our knowledge of Mulet, his music, and his temperament comes to us mainly in the form of anecdotes by one of his closest friends, Félix Raugel (1881–1975). The theories in this article cannot be verified in first-person writings by Mulet; likewise, the personal significance of his compositions is vague. Raugel was ignorant of the programmatic meanings of Mulet’s music. Even Henri’s wife Isabelle really did not understand him.¹⁹

Mulet completed Esquisses Byzantines in 1908 but did not add the dedication—“In memory of the Basilica of the Sacred Heart of Montmartre, 1914–1919”—until its 1920 publication. These dates are critical: they are of World War I. Many people believe that Mulet composed the work between 1914 and 1919. This is incorrect. He added those dates to the motto, and they refer only to the motto and not the actual years of composition.

Primed to be dedicated on October 17, 1914, the festivities for the dedication of the basilica were postponed because the previous July, war with Germany intervened. At the onset of the war, the French did not know if God would take pity on them, but many believed the spiritual reparations moved him to do so. Faced with the prospect of another humiliating defeat at the hands of Germany, the French bishops sought to fulfill God’s demands to France almost as soon as the war began. “As early as 1914, the Bulletin’s columnist recalled that France had not responded to the three main demands made of it in 1689. Therefore, the Lord can hardly cover it with glory!”²⁰ At the time, conservative Catholics were overwhelmingly monarchists. Modern secular forms of government had been condemned decades earlier in the “Syllabus of Errors” issued by Pope Pius IX in 1864. Pope Pius X reinforced this condemnation with his “Oath Against Modernism” in 1910, which was professed by all religious and many lay Catholics. The French bishops consecrated the entire country to the Sacred Heart on its feast day, June 11, 1915, and many allied banners displayed an emblem of the Sacred Heart:

In March 1917, soldiers from France, England, Italy, Japan, Poland, Romania, and Russia gathered in Paray-le-Monial with their banners on which a Sacred Heart was affixed. They met again on June 15, 1917, in Montmartre for a day of Catholic soldiers of the Allied armies, where they renewed according to the formula of Cardinal Amette [of Paris] their solemn consecration to the Sacred Heart. Montmartre is therefore naturally regarded by the allies as the center of the expansion of devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus throughout 
the world.²¹

Only at the end of that bloody conflict was the Basilica finally consecrated. A victorious France—led by the fiery oratory of [George] Clemenceau [sic]—joyfully celebrated the consecration of a monument conceived of in the course of a losing war with Germany a generation before. Gallia Poenitens at last brought its rewards.²²

For Catholic France, this victory was the direct result of the intervention of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the fulfillment of the prophecies of Sainte Marguerite-Marie Alacoque. In the Savoyarde hymn, Gabriel Mulet foretells this in the ninth stanza: “You will shout the Hosanna of glory / When our soldiers, Happy Day, / Will come back with victory / Under the flag of the Sacred Heart.”²³

The basilica was finally consecrated on October 24, 1919, and the people of France recognized it as a symbol of the Allied victory in the war.

The High Altar was consecrated by Cardinal Amette, Archbishop of Paris, and thirty bishops consecrated the other thirty altars—fifteen in the Basilica, and fifteen in the crypt. At midday, the Pontifical High Mass was celebrated by Cardinal Vico, Prefect of the Congregation of Rites.²⁴

Had Mulet composed a mere tribute to the basilica’s architecture, the dates on the score’s dedication might likely be those of the entire time of construction from cornerstone to consecration (1875–1919). Instead, Mulet chose the dates from the beginning of World War I to its formal end with the signing of the Treaty of Versailles on June 28, 1919. Moreover, English speakers tend to limit the meaning of the word memoîre to its cognate translation “memory.” This might suggest some nostalgia or sentimental longing for something in the distant past, perhaps a reflection on Mulet’s childhood lived in the shadow of the basilica or as if the building had been destroyed; however, memoîre can also mean a thesis or proposition needing defending.²⁵ Mulet’s proposal may have been that the Sacred Heart of Jesus and his church saved France. One may view Mulet’s work as not only a celebration of the consecration of the building but also a celebration of the Allied victory that Catholics attributed to the divine intervention of the Sacred Heart. In this light, the motto may even be a defense of the prophecies of Alacoque.

The fourth movement, “Chapelle des Morts” (“Chapel of the Dead”), bears the inscription: “In venerable memory of His Eminence Cardinal Guibert whose empty tomb in this chapel is still waiting for the fulfillment of his last will.” The Chapelle des Morts in the basilica’s crypt includes the tomb of Cardinal Guibert, surmounted by a statue of him presenting a miniature of the basilica to God. Additionally, the tomb of his successor, Cardinal Richard, is there as is an urn containing the heart of Alexandre Legentil. Despite the plural name and multiple tombs found in this chapel, Mulet singularizes Cardinal Guibert.

The son of a farmer, Guibert was born on December 13, 1802, in Aix-en-Provence. After several years at a Sulpician major seminary, he became a Missionary of Provence on January 25, 1823. On August 14, 1825, in Marseille he was ordained a priest. He received three successive bishoprics: Viviers in 1842, Tours in 1857, and Paris in 1871. He was elevated to the College of Cardinals on December 22, 1873. His appointment to Paris was hardly a “promotion,” for all three of his predecessors had been assassinated in office. Guibert initially refused the appointment, but Pope Pius IX mandated his acceptance of the post. He was installed as archbishop in Notre-Dame Cathedral on October 27, 1871. He died on July 8, 1886. According to multiple biographers, the two tremendous achievements of his tenure in Paris were the construction of the basilica and the establishment of the Catholic University (Institute) in 1875.

Guibert was the principal representative of the ultramontane movement in France. Ultramontanism, which translates “beyond the mountains (Alps),” was an unorganized movement of conservative nineteenth-century Catholics that emphasized absolute, centralized papal authority. The movement arose in the 1860s when the Italian Unification movement conquered the Papal States. The ultramontane Catholics supported the restoration of the Papal States without compromise. Concerning papal authority, Guibert writes: “The Bishops desire order; they respect authority, which is the principal foundation of society. The hand of the Church has never been seen in revolutions. You will do well to direct your attention and solicitude elsewhere.”²⁶ And again: “The republic has received neither from God nor from history any promise of immortality.”²⁷ Guibert’s writings highlight an ardent desire among conservative Catholics to restore the French monarchy and practical papal sovereignty. The Republic was the enemy.

Before his death, Guibert directed that his Requiem Mass should be simple and that the money that would have been spent on an elaborate funeral be given to the poor. At first, he was laid in state and was buried in the Cathedral of Notre-Dame. His remains were later transferred to the Chapel of the Dead in Sacré-Coeur. A Latin inscription on his tomb states that he was interred there in 1922, thirty-six years later. Mulet’s motto suggests his indignation that Guibert’s remains were still missing from the Chapel of the Dead in 1919. Whether this indicates that Mulet supported Guibert’s ideology is debatable, but he seemed to admire the cardinal enough to bring attention to his empty tomb.

The fifth movement, “Campanile” (“Bell Tower”), bears the inscription “All white, it towers over the vastness of the countryside from afar.” The basilica sits on Montmartre, one of the highest points in Paris. Guibert chose this site because of the view of the city that it affords; however, Mulet chose the word “campagne” rather than “ville” or “Cité,” perhaps because he felt that the bell tower is the pinnacle point not only of Paris but of the entire country. He reinforces this by identifying the bell tower, not the basilica as a whole, as this zenith point. “Campagne” can also mean a military or political campaign. This could be Mulet’s deliberate allusion to the evangelical mission of the basilica and to call all of France to penitential conversion.

By 1912 the bell tower of Sacré-Coeur was complete and thus was not finished when Mulet wrote his work in 1908. Because of this, Mulet may have had an idealized vision of the belfry and the entire basilica in mind. The bell tower and its great drone bell, “La Savoyarde,” were sources of great pride among Parisian Catholics. Catholic churches have named, blessed, and consecrated bells for centuries in a rite known as the “baptism of bells.” The formal name of the great bell of Sacré-Coeur is Françoise Marguerite of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, colloquially known as La Savoyarde. The bell was cast at the Paccard foundry in Annecy-le-Vieux. Francis Albert Leuilleux, Archbishop of Chambery, and the bishops of Savoy initiated its creation; the clergy and upper and lower classes of the province funded it, hence the nickname La Savoyarde.

Weighing nineteen tons, La Savoyarde is the largest bell in France and the sixth largest in Europe. It arrived at Montmartre on October 16, 1895. A team of twenty-eight horses pulled it into Paris. Its arrival was a huge public spectacle attended by hundreds of thousands of Parisians. It was formally baptized on this date by Cardinal Archbishop Richard of Paris. A souvenir booklet from the occasion tells us, “The voice of the bells is the voice of God,”²⁸ and that, “It is, thank God, this terrible Savoyard, of a size and weight to resist all the attacks of the demolishers and the shock of all future revolutions.”²⁹ “It is, in all respects, the most beautiful bell that has been made to this day. It is the largest, the richest, and the most harmonious that exists in France. She is the queen of the world’s bells. We can only delight in it: it is the Bell of the Sacred Heart.”³⁰ By using the word “campagne” to include all territories outside of the city of Paris, Mulet may very well have been advancing the mission and message of the basilica for all of France and even the world.

The most interesting and vastly popular movement that suggests an ideological program for the Esquisses Byzantines is its final movement: “Tu es petra et portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus te” (“You are the rock and the gates of Hell will never prevail against you”). Mulet’s manuscript that Leduc presumably used for publication, now in a private collection, shows that at the time of composition, Mulet titled the work simply “Toccata.” Mulet scribbled this out and added the “Tu es petra” title in different ink, along with a host of other changes. This points to the ideological meaning given the work at the time of publication. The Latin inscription is a quote from the Vulgate Bible that asserts that Christ established the papacy. The Greek text of Saint Matthew’s Gospel has been the subject of debate among Christians since the Western Schism. The Catholic Church’s official interpretation of the Vulgate states that the Church is founded not on a geological rock but by Christ who appointed Peter as the first pope and established the Petrine ministry as God’s eternal presence in the world. Orthodox and Protestant churches interpret the Greek differently. The full text of Matthew 16:18–19 reads: “Et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus eam,” “And I tell you, because you are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” Mulet made three edits to the Biblical text.

The first edit is the change from “Petrus,” a masculine, proper noun meaning the name Peter, to “petra,” a feminine noun meaning a geological rock. Given the uniform association between Mulet’s Catholic audience with the papacy, this revision is startling. Several seminary professors of Church history found no precedent in the Catholic world for this alteration. One of them felt that the substitution was so bizarre that perhaps Mulet was writing from memory and misquoted the Vulgate!

The dominant theory to explain this change is that the “rock” is Montmartre Hill, and that “hell” is an allegory for the passage of time and erosion by the elements. This widely accepted theory does not come directly from Mulet nor anecdotally from Raugel. The Greek word “Petrus” appears sixteen times in the New Testament. If Mulet only wanted to speak of geological rocks, he could have selected any of these since the “Tu es petra” text has such a strong association with the papacy. Another theory says that “petra” refers to the smaller, Medieval church of Saint Pierre-de-Montmartre, an institution consecrated over 700 years before the basilica. Regardless, both interpretations struggle to compete with the dominant Catholic exegesis.

Significant, too, is the omission of the phrase “et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam,” the portion of the text interpreted as the source of papal authority. This omission suggests that Mulet is not arguing for the legitimacy of the Petrine office but the invincibility of “petra.” The third edit is the change of the word “eam” (“him”) to “te” (“you”) to match the feminine gender of “petra.” This change is significant because of the distance between the two agreeing words in the Latin text. A mere misquotation would not be so precise. Despite the difference in languages, Mulet may have linked the French “Montmartre” with the Latin “petra” because both are of feminine gender. Without a doubt, “petra” means “rock.” Mulet just changed the Biblical text to suit his purpose, a tactic that he frequently employed in various other pieces. Knowing that his Catholic audience would immediately associate this passage with the papacy, Mulet may have intended another double meaning of the word “petra.”

To fully understand Mulet’s use of the title and its relationship to the basilica, one needs to examine the status of the papacy by 1920. The French Revolution of 1789 effectively ended the notion of government as a divinely ordained hierarchy. This idea quickly swept across the globe. In Italy, minor revolutions in the 1820s, 1830s, and 1840s gave rise to the movement to unite the Italian peninsula: the Risorgimento. Because the centrally located Papal States divided Italy in half, the Italian nationalists viewed them as an obstacle to unification. The nationalists conquered them one by one, and by 1861 only Rome remained directly under papal rule. The pope’s army was weak and had never been able to defend any of its states without the military assistance of historically Catholic countries. Most of these allies withdrew their aid when the First Vatican Council (1869–1870) decreed papal infallibility. Only the French remained, and the onset of the Franco-Prussian War in 1870 recalled all these troops from Rome. The pope pleaded for international assistance, but still enraged at the definition of papal infallibility, the leadership of Europe’s traditionally Catholic countries refused. King Victor Emmanuel II (1820–1878) of Italy attempted diplomatic resolutions to the problem of Rome, but Pope Pius IX would cede nothing to the Italians.

Rome, undefended, was invaded by the Italian army under the command of Raffaele Cadorna (1815–1897) in the early morning hours of September 20, 1870. It fell soon afterward. The populace of Rome was itself divided on whether Rome should be independent of the papacy. “The Catholic religion represented the hand of medieval superstition and inequality, faith in the supernatural rather than in reason.”³¹ By 1873, cries of “death to the Pope” rang in the streets, which led to the excommunication of King Victor Emmanuel II for his Law of Suppression of Religious Corporations. Unwavering, the pope insisted that his spiritual autonomy depended upon his territorial sovereignty. There was no room in Rome for two sovereigns. Pope Pius IX declared himself “Prisoner of the Vatican” and refused to leave its buildings rather than to accept the sovereignty of the King of Italy. He and his successors would remain “prisoners” until Pope Pius XI bartered the Lateran Treaty with Benito Mussolini in 1929, creating the Vatican City State.

When Rome fell, France gazed at the events in Italy with tears in its eyes. France, the Pope’s surest defender, abandoned him in his hour of greatest need. The papal nuncio to France remarked that as “. . . the French army’s catastrophe on the Rhine began, . . . the conviction is spreading and deepening that the French government’s sins toward the Holy See have provoked God’s wrath on France.”³² The French defeat in the Franco-Prussian War was God’s punishment inflicted on the nation for abandoning the pope. France needed to atone for its sins against God when it allowed Papal Rome to fall.

“To obtain the deliverance of the Sovereign Pontiff and the Salvation of France” is one of two fundamental goals of Legentil’s National Vow. The construction of Sacré-Coeur to fulfill the demands of Alacoque’s vision was a required act of reparation for the country’s sins against the papacy. To win back God’s favor, its construction was essential. Revolutions in France and Italy had ended the church’s immediate, practical, governing authority, resulting in the execution of bishops and clergy and the demolition of once-great monasteries and convents. The pope was walled up in the Vatican in the face of a secular government and a populace thirsty for his blood. The bishop of Poitiers, François Pie, noted that, “The Revolution of 1789 is the original sin of public life.”³³ Simply put: hell is the Revolution. The Savoyarde dedication booklet anticipates this explicitly, stating that its purpose is “to resist all the attacks of the demolishers and the shock of all the future revolutions” (italics added).³⁴ The precedent of this view and its likely dissemination among French Catholics suggests that Mulet’s message in this final movement of the cycle is a statement of faith in both the physical building and its ideology; and as such, “Tu es petra” is no mere circus showpiece, but the profound prayer of a fervent heart and a statement of hope and comfort to an oppressed Church.

Conclusion

While there is no doubt that Mulet’s Esquisses Byzantines is a colorful interpretation of the architecture of the Sacré-Coeur Basilica in Paris, one should not neglect its ideological program. A close reading of this text completes the understanding of the piece in a more philosophical way than the empiricists suggest. The ideology of the basilica is one of atonement—a call to France to repent for the sins of the Revolution and for failure to protect the pope from the Risorgimento. The fruit of this penance was the Allied victory in World War I. Mulet’s programmatic inscriptions seem to support this as does his otherwise unknown motivation for publishing the work at this time. Mulet never commented on the program of the Esquisses Byzantines, but this in no way dismisses this close reading.

The French victory in World War I confirmed for conservative Catholics that the final fulfillment of the prophecies of Marguerite-Marie Alacoque had been successful. France had atoned for its sins. Alacoque was canonized on May 13, 1920, the final affirmation of the victory won through the Sacred Heart of Jesus for France and the world.

Notes

1. Jane F. Fulcher, The Composer as Intellectual: Music and Ideology in France 1914–1940 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), page 17.

2. Ibid., page 5.

3. Raymond A. Jonas, France and the Cult of the Sacred Heart: an Epic Tale for Modern Times (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), page 27.

4. Ibid., page 40.

5. Ibid., page 83.

6. Ibid., page 90.

7. Ibid., page 149.

8. Alfred Van den Brule, Le Sacré-Coeur De Montmartre: Hubert Rohault De Fleury (Paris: Spes, 1930), page 134.

9. David Harvey, Paris, Capital of Modernity (Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge, 2006), page 376.

10. Jacques Benoist, “Le Sacré-Coeur De Montmartre De 1870 a Nos Jours,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History, volume 26, number 1 (1992), pages 355–356.

11. Felix Raugel, letter to Kenneth Saslaw, July 7, 1973. Correspondence: Saslaw archives, Donna Walters, Gautier, Mississippi, November 16, 2023.

12. Bulletin De l’Œuvre Du Vœu National, Archives Historiques De l’Archevêché De Paris (AHAP), 1895, page 924.

13. Benoist, page 608.

14. Donna Mary Walters, Steven Best, and Thomas Fielding, The Enigmatic Organist (manuscript), page 1.

15. Ibid., page 26.

16. Ibid., page 23.

17. Fulcher, op. cit., page 11.

18. “Les tendances et antireligieuses néfastes de l’orgue moderne,” Congres General de Musique Sacrée, Strasbourg, July 26–31, 1921, page 9.

19. Isabelle Mulet letter to Kenneth Saslaw, July 7, 1973. Correspondence in Saslaw archives, Donna Walters, Gautier, Mississippi, November 16, 2023.

20. Benoist, op. cit., page 586.

20. Benoist, op. cit., page 588.

21. Harvey, op. cit., page 381.

22. G. Mulet, “La Savoyarde: Cantique Populaire” (Grenoble, M. Fleurot, 1896).

23. Paul Handley, editor, “Sacre Coeur Is Consecrated,” Church Times, October 25, 2019, www.churchtimes.co.uk/.

24. Jean-Loup Truche, Concerning the Translations of the Words “Memoîre” and “Campagnes,” email to the author, January 12, 2020.

25. Quoted in R. F. O’Conner, “Cardinal Guibert.” American Catholic Quarterly Review, Volume XLII, Number 165 (January 1917), page 465.

26. Ibid., page 487.

27. Savoyarde.

28. Ibid., page 47.

29. Ibid., page 71.

30. David Kertzer, Prisoner of the Vatican (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2006), page 111.

31. Ibid., page 39.

32. Kertzer, op. cit., p. 39.

33. Jonas, op. cit., page 147.

34. “Voeu national au Sacré Coeur: cérémonie du baptême de Françoise Marguerite du Sacré-Coeur [cloche dite la Savoyarde de]” (Paris: Imprimerie Devalois, 1895).