Uploaded August 2025 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Gulbenkian Orchestra conducted by Michel Swierczewski.
I - Allegro: 0:00
II - Andante: 7:43
III - Menuet. Allegro moderato: 16:00
IV - Final. Allegro agitato: 19:22
Méhul's Symphony No.1 was composed on 1808, being premiered on November 3 of 1808, at a semi-private concert at the Cercle Musical de la Rue Mandar. Initial reaction was positive, and the Conservatoire Orchestra under Habeneck gave the first public performance on March 12 of 1809. Reports on the reception of the piece vary, but it wasn't performed again in France. It was the first
one of a planned set of six symphonies for concerts at the Conservatoire, which he didn't manage to complete.
Cherubini dismissed Méhul's Symphonies as of little interest, François Habeneck refused to revive them, nor did François-Joseph Fétis find much of interest. On the other hand, Symphony No. 1 had a much greater impact in Germany. Mendelssohn possibly performed in Leipzig on 1838, conducting the Gewandhaus Orchestra, and programmed the work in three of his seasons as director of said orchestra. The work clearly follows the "Sturm und Drang" style, influenced by the works of Joseph Haydn and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, both of whom wrote some of the most dramatic and passionate music of the time in the key of G minor. Noteworthy is Méhul's modest and sensitive orchestration in his symphonies.
Robert Schumann compared it with Beethoven's famous Symphony No.5 in C minor, with which Méhul's Symphony shares striking similarities. Méhul, hailed as one of the first romantic composers, probably knew of Beethoven's first two symphonies, and on his part the German was an admirer of the Frenchman's work, but no evidence points that the two composers knew of the other's respective symphonies. Thus the coincidences are accidental rather than intentional. Mozart's Symphony No.40 is the most likely model Méhul's work is based on, and Beethoven's work is a revolutionary symphony based on the fate motive, with no apparent precursor.
The first movement is structured in a modified sonata form. It begins with a passionate and restless main theme in G minor, exposed forte on full orchestra and from which the influence of Mozart is quite apparent. It is contrasted by a lyrical second theme in B-flat major. The ensuing development is short but dramatic, based on fragments of the main theme subjected to near constant modulation. The recapitulation is unusual, starting with the second theme in the key of G major before returning to the main one in G minor. A brief contrapuntal passage leads to a dramatic and brilliant coda.
The second movement is structured as a theme and variations. It opens with a gentle and melodic main theme in B-flat major, presented by strings in piano and showing Haydn's influence. After it is repeated, the first variation fleshes out the material from its simple opening. The second features a dramatic modulation to F minor, scored for solo strings. The third then returns to B-flat major, with ostinato figures added on the basses. The fourth variation opens with fortissimo martial rhythms, leading to a contrapuntal series of exchanges between woodwindins and strings. The fifth, as the third, is busier in texture with rushing string figuration. The andante then ends with dissonances answered by gentle phrases.
The third movement is a minuet in ternary form, closer to Beethoven's scherzi in spirit. It begins with a rhythmic, two-part main theme in G minor, exposed by pizzicato strings in piano. The influence of Haydn (and possibly Beethoven) is also audible here. As is customary for a minuet, each part is repeated. The trio section features a rising second theme in G major, also exposed by the strings but in arco and forte. As with the main theme, is it also divided in two parts that are repeated. The minuet is then repeated before the coda begins with menacing G minor fanfares, ending the movement with resolution.
The fourth movement is also written in sonata form. It opens with a rhythmic and agitated main theme in G minor, exposed piano on full orchestra as a kind of moto perpetuo. The influence of Beethoven is also strong here, and the material is strikingly similar as the one found in the fate symphony. The second theme is more melodic but hardly contrasting in nature, introduced by strings and also in the key of G minor. The development is short but characterized by its sudden and bold modulations that maintain the music near constant rhythmic drive. On the other hand, the recapitulation of the themes is more standard and in their respective home keys. A crescendo ends the symphony with a vigorous and dramatic coda.
Picture: "The Revolt of Cairo" (1810) by the French painter Anne-Louis Girodet de Roussy-Trioson.
Musical analysis partially written by myself. Sources: tinyurl.com/2a7lxydj, tinyurl.com/23m8a3ts, tinyurl.com/2xq9om7f and tinyurl.com/228yc5sf
To check the score: tinyurl.com/29bqkzc7
Gulbenkian Orchestra conducted by Michel Swierczewski.
I - Allegro: 0:00
II - Andante: 7:43
III - Menuet. Allegro moderato: 16:00
IV - Final. Allegro agitato: 19:22
Méhul's Symphony No.1 was composed on 1808, being premiered on November 3 of 1808, at a semi-private concert at the Cercle Musical de la Rue Mandar. Initial reaction was positive, and the Conservatoire Orchestra under Habeneck gave the first public performance on March 12 of 1809. Reports on the reception of the piece vary, but it wasn't performed again in France. It was the first
one of a planned set of six symphonies for concerts at the Conservatoire, which he didn't manage to complete.
Cherubini dismissed Méhul's Symphonies as of little interest, François Habeneck refused to revive them, nor did François-Joseph Fétis find much of interest. On the other hand, Symphony No. 1 had a much greater impact in Germany. Mendelssohn possibly performed in Leipzig on 1838, conducting the Gewandhaus Orchestra, and programmed the work in three of his seasons as director of said orchestra. The work clearly follows the "Sturm und Drang" style, influenced by the works of Joseph Haydn and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, both of whom wrote some of the most dramatic and passionate music of the time in the key of G minor. Noteworthy is Méhul's modest and sensitive orchestration in his symphonies.
Robert Schumann compared it with Beethoven's famous Symphony No.5 in C minor, with which Méhul's Symphony shares striking similarities. Méhul, hailed as one of the first romantic composers, probably knew of Beethoven's first two symphonies, and on his part the German was an admirer of the Frenchman's work, but no evidence points that the two composers knew of the other's respective symphonies. Thus the coincidences are accidental rather than intentional. Mozart's Symphony No.40 is the most likely model Méhul's work is based on, and Beethoven's work is a revolutionary symphony based on the fate motive, with no apparent precursor.
The first movement is structured in a modified sonata form. It begins with a passionate and restless main theme in G minor, exposed forte on full orchestra and from which the influence of Mozart is quite apparent. It is contrasted by a lyrical second theme in B-flat major. The ensuing development is short but dramatic, based on fragments of the main theme subjected to near constant modulation. The recapitulation is unusual, starting with the second theme in the key of G major before returning to the main one in G minor. A brief contrapuntal passage leads to a dramatic and brilliant coda.
The second movement is structured as a theme and variations. It opens with a gentle and melodic main theme in B-flat major, presented by strings in piano and showing Haydn's influence. After it is repeated, the first variation fleshes out the material from its simple opening. The second features a dramatic modulation to F minor, scored for solo strings. The third then returns to B-flat major, with ostinato figures added on the basses. The fourth variation opens with fortissimo martial rhythms, leading to a contrapuntal series of exchanges between woodwindins and strings. The fifth, as the third, is busier in texture with rushing string figuration. The andante then ends with dissonances answered by gentle phrases.
The third movement is a minuet in ternary form, closer to Beethoven's scherzi in spirit. It begins with a rhythmic, two-part main theme in G minor, exposed by pizzicato strings in piano. The influence of Haydn (and possibly Beethoven) is also audible here. As is customary for a minuet, each part is repeated. The trio section features a rising second theme in G major, also exposed by the strings but in arco and forte. As with the main theme, is it also divided in two parts that are repeated. The minuet is then repeated before the coda begins with menacing G minor fanfares, ending the movement with resolution.
The fourth movement is also written in sonata form. It opens with a rhythmic and agitated main theme in G minor, exposed piano on full orchestra as a kind of moto perpetuo. The influence of Beethoven is also strong here, and the material is strikingly similar as the one found in the fate symphony. The second theme is more melodic but hardly contrasting in nature, introduced by strings and also in the key of G minor. The development is short but characterized by its sudden and bold modulations that maintain the music near constant rhythmic drive. On the other hand, the recapitulation of the themes is more standard and in their respective home keys. A crescendo ends the symphony with a vigorous and dramatic coda.
Picture: "The Revolt of Cairo" (1810) by the French painter Anne-Louis Girodet de Roussy-Trioson.
Musical analysis partially written by myself. Sources: tinyurl.com/2a7lxydj, tinyurl.com/23m8a3ts, tinyurl.com/2xq9om7f and tinyurl.com/228yc5sf
To check the score: tinyurl.com/29bqkzc7
