# Opus numbers in Haydn



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

I'm looking for Joseph Haydn's published works, but I'm having great difficulty finding the opus numbers associated to them. For some reason, only the string quartets and some of the trios have them in wikipedia. Haydn has more than eighty opus numbers, and I'm really curious to discover which works belong to each of them. I know there's the Hoboken catalogue, but I'm not interested in it at the moment.

Somebody knows a site/book that has a comprehensible list of all works of Haydn sorted by opus number, and not by Hoboken?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Did Haydn himself assign opus numbers? Or did his publishers do it later? My understanding is that Haydn, like most composers of his generation and before never considered opus numbers hence the work of Hoboken and Kochel.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

There were historically different opus numbers assigned by publishers; the quartet series with the Festetics had some on the covers.
This unreliability might be a reason they are usually ommitted, except in case of the string quartets.
In a good Haydn works index at least some should be mentioned, just like the two or three different numberings of piano sonatas. I have a Haydn book that is a translation of the 1980s (or so) New Grove Haydn article that has a work index with some opus numbers (but only in the quartet section they have a column).

None are given for any set of trios but 
op.13 are the piano sonatas Hob 16: 21-16
op.14 the sonatas Hob 16: 27-32
op.30 the sonatas Hob 16: 35-39, 20


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

I was able to discover some more opus numbers by making a search in the _imslp_ website. For example, Op. 6 is a set of six violin duos, Op. 13 is a set of six symphonies, Op. 82 is a set of three piano trios, and Op. 92 is a piano sonata. The problem is that there are still many opus numbers missing even there.



Xisten267 said:


> *Haydn has more than eighty opus numbers*, and I'm really curious to discover which works belong to each of them.


According to my recent research, Joseph Haydn has more than one hundred opus numbers. They should be better known in my opinion, as he may have been the first still famous composer to have had a significant portion of pieces covered by them.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

As the unfinished last SQ is known as "op.103" there might be around 100 but it is also likely that not all numbers were used.
There are reasons for why these opus numbers are not known, except for the string quartets. As you see, they are not even unique, as op.13 was apparently used twice, if you are correct with that set of symphonies. I am pretty sure that op. 71 (today 3 quartets) was also used for piano trios.

The Hoboken numbers are far from perfect as they reproduced errors from earlier listings (such as Mandyczewski's numbering of the symphonies or including the quarterts op.3) and introduced? new ones, like counting the SQ version of the 7 last words like 7 string quartets (complete nonsense, as this is either one work or 9 pieces (7 words + praeludium + terremoto) but not 7, that's one reason why opus numbers are better in the case of the SQ) but they are at least some standard.

It's understandable to correct errors of these older listings, therefore we have something like Huss numbers for the symphonies or the different numberings of the piano sonatas but they often introduce more confusion (cf. Scarlatti Longo vs. Kirkpatrick numbers). And almost nobody (except maybe scholars) uses revised Koechel numbers, if applicable (there are sometimes given in () on recordings but often ignored).

So for practical reasons, I think one should usually stick to an established numbering system.


----------



## bagpipers (Jun 29, 2013)

Opus numbers were surely given by publishers I don't think any composers used those.And posthumous catalogs had the acronym of the person who catalogued to mark such.Like BWV (Bach werke verzeichnis)


----------

