Show Summary Details

Page of
PRINTED FROM Oxford Music Online. © Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single article in Oxford Music Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).

Janáček, Leoš [Leo Eugen]free

  • John Tyrrell

(b Hukvaldy, Moravia, July 3, 1854; d Moravská Ostrava, Aug 12, 1928). Czech composer. His reputation outside Czechoslovakia and German-speaking countries was first made as an instrumental composer, with a small number of chamber and orchestral pieces written between his operas, which he considered his main work. The balance has now been largely redressed and he is regarded not only as a Czech composer worthy to be ranked with Smetana and Dvořák, but also as one of the most substantial, original and immediately appealing opera composers of the 20th century.

1. Early life and studies (1854–80).

Janáček was born into the Czech cantor tradition. Both his grandfather (Jiří, 1778–1848) and his father (Jiří, 1815–66) were teachers, musicians and leading cultural figures in the poor communities they served. In 1838 Janáček’s father married Amálie Grulichová and in 1848 he moved with her and their five children to a full teacher’s post in the village of Hukvaldy. Leoš was the fourth of the eight children born there and to relieve the crowded home he was sent, when he was 11, to be a chorister at the Augustinian ‘Queen’s’ Monastery in Old Brno. Brno played a vital role in Janáček’s development; in particular the choirmaster of the monastery, Moravia’s leading composer, Pavel Křížkovský, took a keen interest in his musical education.

Janáček was to follow his family’s teaching tradition and by September 1869, after completing his basic schooling, including three years at the German Realschule in Old Brno, he went on a state scholarship to the Czech Teachers’ Institute (c.k. Slovanský Ústav ku Vzdělání Učitelů). He passed his final examinations (excelling in music, history and geography) in July 1872 and served the compulsory two-year period of unpaid teaching at a school run by the institute. In 1872 he also took over the monastery choir when Křížkovský was transferred to Olomouc Cathedral. Janáček’s hard, thorough work enabled him to perform a wide variety of music at the services – Palestrina, Lassus, Haydn and contemporary Czech and German works – and led to his appointment (1873) as choirmaster of a working-men’s choral society, Svatopluk (founded 1868). Janáček raised the level of the society from its Liedertafel traditions, moving the concerts out of the taverns into the new Besední Dům, and widened the repertory. It was for Svatopluk that he wrote his first choruses (jw IV/1–8), mostly, simple four-part settings of folk texts in the style of Křížkovský.

In the autumn of 1874, after completing his period of unpaid teaching, Janáček obtained leave to study with Skuherský at the Prague Organ School for a year, during which he completed the first two years of the three-year course. Extremely poor, with no money even for a piano, he was unable to take full advantage of the musical life of Prague. Several student exercises, mainly church and organ works (jw II/1–6; VIII/1–4), date from this period. Returning to Brno in 1875 he resumed all his previous activities: teaching and conducting the monastery choir and Svatopluk, from which, however, he resigned in October 1877, nine months after becoming conductor (1876–88) of the Czech middle-class Beseda choral society (founded 1860). After a few months he turned the male-voice Beseda choir into a mixed body, and, with help from the monastery choir and pupils from the institute, he mustered a force of 250 singers for large-scale choral works, Mozart’s Requiem (1878) and Beethoven’s Missa solemnis (1879). He also championed Dvořák, introducing to Brno audiences his Moravian Duets and Serenade for Strings, a model for Janáček’s own works for string orchestra, the Suite jw VI/2 (1877) and the Idylla jw VI/3 (1878). He came to know Dvořák personally and the two men went on a walking tour of Bohemia in the summer of 1877.

Janáček had returned to the Prague Organ School (June–July 1877) for a month of special study in which he worked through binary and ternary forms (jw VIII/5). Two years later, on a year’s paid leave from the Teachers’ Institute, he enrolled at the Leipzig Conservatory (October 1879–March 1880). There his teachers included Oscar Paul (whose history lectures he also attended at the university) and Leo Grill. As in Prague, poverty prevented his taking full advantage of his new surroundings: he attended the Gewandhaus concerts, but never went to the opera. Most of Janáček’s Leipzig compositions are lost but his frequent letters to Zdenka Schulzová chronicled his life in this period almost to the hour, and from them we know exactly what Janáček wrote. Although initially attracted by Paul, rather than to Grill, who had shown little interest in his first, overambitious offering, a piano sonata (jw X/5), Janáček soon settled down to a course of extremely hard study under the strict and systematic Grill. With him he progressed, via 14 two- and three-part fugues jw X/6 and seven romances for violin and piano jw X/8, to a set of piano variations jw VIII/6 and a series of rondos jw X/14. From the two surviving pieces, one of the romances (jw VII/3) and the Schumannesque piano variations, it is clear that Janáček had acquired smoother and more imaginative technique than in his earlier instrumental works. Although he mentioned in his letters a plan of continuing his studies with Saint-Saëns in Paris, he enrolled, after the Easter vacation, at the Vienna Conservatory (April–June 1880), where he studied with Franz Krenn. His pieces at Vienna were more ambitious: a four-movement violin sonata jw X/16, entered for the Vienna Conservatory competition, nine songs of a song cycle Frühlingslieder jw X/17, entered for the Vincenz Zusner competition, and three movements from a string quartet jw X/18. Janáček failed to win either competition; none of these pieces survive.

2. The Organ School, folk music, the early operas (1881–1904).

Before leaving for Leipzig Janáček had already become engaged to his piano pupil Zdenka Schulzová (1865–1938), the daughter of the director of the Teachers’ Institute, Emilian Schulz. By the time he returned to Brno Janáček had been recognized by the education ministry as a ‘full teacher of music’ (May 1880) at the Teachers’ Institute and he and Zdenka were married on 13 July 1881, shortly before Zdenka’s 16th birthday. In addition to all his earlier activities Janáček began to realize his ambition of founding an organ school in Brno. A committee was established under the auspices of the Jednota pro Zvelebení Církevní Hudby na Moravě (Society for the Promotion of Church Music in Moravia) and on 7 December 1881 Janáček was appointed director; teaching began in September 1882, at first in the Teachers’ Institute until separate premises were acquired (1884). From 1886 to 1902 he also taught music at the Old Brno Gymnasium. At the Beseda he added to the repertory some of Dvořák’s major choral works as well as works by Brahms, Smetana, Tchaikovsky, Saint-Saëns and Liszt; he established singing and violin classes (1882), a permanent orchestra and (1888) piano classes. When the Provisional Czech Theatre opened in Brno in 1884 he founded a journal to review its activities. This was the Hudební listy, published by the Beseda, with Janáček as editor and chief contributor. The journal lasted until 1888; Janáček’s relationship with the Beseda became increasingly difficult and he resigned in 1890. His married life, too, was no easier. The tensions between a fervently patriotic Czech and very young girl from a staid German middle-class background proved unbearable and the couple separated from the autumn of 1882 (soon after the birth of their daughter Olga) until the summer of 1884. A son, Vladimír, was born in 1888 but died of meningitis in 1890.

After his return from Vienna, Janáček virtually stopped composing, partly through lack of time, partly because his studies in Vienna had ended disappointingly and partly because he was unsure where his talents lay. During this period he wrote only a few choruses, notably the Mužské sbory (‘Male-Voice Choruses’) jw IV/17 and the mixed-voice Kačena divoká (‘The Wild Duck’) jw IV/18. The latter was written for a collection of school songs (1885), requested by his friend Berthold Žalud; the former was dedicated to Dvořák, who was startled by the boldness of the modulations.

In 1887, three years after the opening of the Brno Czech theatre, Janáček began to compose his first opera, Šárka (jw I/1), to a verse libretto by the well-known Czech poet Julius Zeyer. Zeyer had intended the work for Dvořák (who toyed with it) and consequently refused the unknown and inexperienced Janáček permission to use his text. By then Janáček had already written and revised the work; it remained unperformed until 1925. Janáček had already begun working with the philologist and folklorist František Bartoš (1837–1906). The two men had known each other from Czech cultural activities in Brno but Janáček’s post (from 1886) at the Czech Gymnasium in Old Brno, where Bartoš had taught since 1869, brought them together as colleagues and led to their collaboration on two important editions of Moravian folksongs: a collection of 174 songs (jw XIII/1, published 1890) and the massive definitive collection of 2057 songs and dances (jw XIII/3, published 1899–1901). Even before his work with Bartoš, Janáček had shown an interest in the folk music of his native region. Disappointed by the fate of his first opera, Janáček now immersed himself completely in a study of Moravian folk music.

In addition to the folksong editions he brought out with Bartoš he popularized his discoveries in a series of orchestral dances and dance suites such as the Valašské tance (‘Valachian Dances’) jw VI/4 and the Suite for orchestra jw VI/6. That Janáček thought he had found his true direction is signalled by the opus numbers, op.2 and op.3, which he added to these two works, the only ones to be so honoured (the putative ‘op.1’ is thought to be the early piano variations jw VIII/6). Folkdances similarly formed the basis for two stage works: Rákoš Rákoczy jw I/2, hurriedly put together for the 1891 Jubilee Exhibition in Prague, and the one-act opera Počátek románu (‘The Beginning of a Romance’) jw I/3, which consists of little more than folkdances with added voice parts. The libretto was adapted from a short story by Gabriela Preissová, who wrote the play Její pastorkyňa (‘Her Stepdaughter’). When Janáček realized the far greater possibilities of this play as the basis for an opera, also in a Moravian rural setting, he became dissatisfied with his unassuming but favourably received earlier work and withdrew it after four performances (1894).

Janáček worked on Jenůfa (as the opera has become known abroad) for two or three years, during which period he wrote the prelude, Žárlivost (‘Jealousy’), and Act 1. But then he stopped. His life was immensely busy at the time, since he was teaching at several institutions including the Teachers’ Institute (to 1902), the Old Brno Gymnasium (to 1896) and the Organ School, of which he remained director. In addition to his folksong editions with Bartoš, there were preparations for the Prague Ethnographic Exhibition in 1895 (Janáček was responsible, with Lucie Bakešová, for the Moravian contribution). Janáček’s busy life, however, may not account fully for his stopping work on Jenůfa. The rather different idiom of the later two acts suggests that he may have found his technique inadequate to the demands of the libretto and spent about five years rethinking his approach to composition and to opera in particular. This theory is supported by his writings of the period, which in analyses, introductions and music reviews examine a wide range of compositions by other composers (the process begins with his enthusiastic review (jw XV/149) of Tchaikovsky’s Queen of Spades, which he regarded as a new sort of opera). An important catalyst was the gradual formulation of his ideas on ‘speech melody’, his habit of jotting down in musical notation scraps of overheard speech, often with notes on the circumstances, and making inferences about the emotional state of the speaker. Some indication of the new direction is given by the cantata Amarus jw III/6, written directly after Janáček’s trip to Russia (summer 1896), and the earliest work which suggests the style of the mature composer. Its deep personal resonance (the subject matter reflected in Janáček’s lonely life at the monastery) may have been a factor; it is significant that the keyboard miniatures (Po zarostlém chodníčku, ‘On the Overgrown Path’, jw VIII/17) that he began writing in 1900, shortly before he resumed work on Jenůfa, are also autobiographical.

Towards the end of 1901 there are indications that he was working on Act 2 of Jenůfa. A few months later his daughter Olga, who was now almost 21 and wanted to become a Russian-language teacher, left for Russia to stay with Janáček’s younger brother František, who had settled in St Petersburg. Within a month she caught typhoid fever and although she recovered enough to return to Moravia by the summer, her constitution, already undermined in childhood by chronic rheumatic heart disease, was fatally weakened. Her long illness cast a shadow over the composition of the rest of the opera: Janáček played it to her four days before she died, on 26 February 1903.

Jenůfa was a very different work from its predecessor. The success of its première in Brno (21 January 1904) was however probably due more to its Moravian setting than to the provincial audience’s awareness of its stature. The performances suffered from a tiny and inadequate orchestra and Janáček, moreover, made substantial alterations before the work was published (1908). He had submitted both The Beginning of a Romance and Jenůfa to the Prague National Opera before settling for Brno premières. Karel Kovařovic, chief conductor at Prague, eventually went to see Jenůfa at Brno but still declined to take it up; possibly he remembered Janáček’s scathing criticism (jw XV/70) of his own opera The Bridegrooms many years earlier (1887).

3. From ‘Jenůfa’ in Brno (1904) to 1917.

In 1904, the year of the première of Jenůfa, Janáček reached the age of 50 and resigned from his post at the Teachers’ Institute. He concentrated on composition and on running the Organ School, which with a bigger grant acquired a new building in 1908 to accommodate 70 students. Janáček remained director until 1919, refusing an offer in 1904 of the directorship of the Warsaw Conservatory.

Janáček submitted his next opera, Osud (‘Fate’) jw I/5 (1903–7), to the newly opened theatre in the Prague Vinohrady district. Although it was accepted there, production was continually postponed and despite Janáček’s threatened lawsuits it was never performed during his lifetime. Its exploration of unusual subject matter (it was semi-autobiographical) and a widening of the musical language mark an advance on Jenůfa, but its clumsy libretto by Janáček and a 20-year-old schoolteacher has stood in its way. Libretto problems also dogged his next opera, Výlet pana Broučka do měsíce (‘The Excursion of Mr Brouček to the Moon’) jw I/6. Janáček began it in 1908 and after working to little effect with a long succession of ‘librettists’, he made virtually his own libretto from Svatopluk Čech’s satirical novel, composing many versions until he temporarily abandoned it in 1913.

Most of his other compositions during this period were choruses and small instrumental works. For piano he added more pieces to On the Overgrown Path. Together with another suite V mlhách (‘In the Mists’) jw VIII/22 and the sonata jw VIII/19 these constitute almost all Janáček’s major solo piano music. The sonata had been first performed in 1906 at the Klub Přátel Umění v Brně (Club of the Friends of Art in Brno), founded in 1900 and whose music section Janáček inaugurated in 1904. The club provided the opportunity for performing small-scale works, for instance the Piano Trio jw X/22, based on Tolstoy’s novella The Kreutzer Sonata, written for and performed at a Tolstoy evening at the club in 1909. In the Mists was Janáček’s entry for a competition sponsored by the club and was published by it towards the end of 1913. The club also published the vocal score of Jenůfa (in 1908) and the ‘ballad for orchestra’ Šumařovo dítě (‘The Fiddler’s Child’) jw VI/14 (in 1914).

The finest works from this period are the three great male-voice choruses, Kantor Halfar (‘Halfar the Schoolmaster’) jw IV/33 (1906), Maryčka Magdónova jw IV/34–5 (1906–7) and 70.000 jw IV/36 (1909). These were the culmination of the line of choruses that Janáček had written continuously from his first compositions for Svatopluk. Their texts, drawn from Petr Bezruč’s Slezské písně (‘Silesian Songs’), had a deep social and patriotic appeal for Janáček and perhaps this fact, together with their physical setting near his native Hukvaldy, explains the strong response they elicited from him.

By his 60th birthday, shortly before the outbreak of World War I, Janáček was respected in Brno as a composer, as an active folklorist and as the director of the chief music teaching institution in Moravia. Outside Moravia he would have been known, if at all, by fewer than 30 printed compositions, mostly connected with his folk and teaching activities and a few smaller choruses, keyboard pieces and liturgical works. Very few of these had been performed outside Brno. Of his larger works his folk ballet Rákoš Rákoczy had been staged in Prague in 1891; his orchestral prelude Žárlivost (‘Jealousy’) jw VI/10, now detached from Jenůfa, was performed in Prague in November 1906 (conducted by František Neumann); his tableau vivant Otče náš (‘Our Father’) jw IV/29 was given a concert performance in Prague a few days later. The cantata Na Soláni čarták (‘The Čarták on Solaň’) jw III/7, requested for the 50th anniversary of the male choir Orlice, was duly given its première in 1912, and performed by the choral society Žerotín in Olomouc in 1913. The most promising of these larger ventures was a performance of Amarus under Vilém Zemánek with the Czech PO in October 1912, since Zemánek then asked Janáček to write a new orchestral piece for the Czech PO, The Fiddler’s Child. However, the first performance, scheduled for March 1914 under Janáček, was aborted during rehearsals and the piece was not given until 1917.

Janáček’s best hope of fame at the time would have appeared to be his choruses. The Smetana Choral Society in Plzeň had come across the print of Janáček’s 1885 male-voice choruses jw IV/17 and performed the third chorus, ‘Ach vojna, vojna’ (‘Ah, the War’), in Plzeň with such success in March 1905 that that summer it was taken on tour to Spa, Belgium: the first public presentation of any Janáček work outside the Czech lands. The Plzeň Smetana Society went on to perform the remaining choruses from the group and Janáček showed his gratitude by sending it manuscripts of the first two Bezruč choruses (jw IV/33 and 35). At about the same time Janáček had chanced to hear the Moravian Teachers’ Choral Society and had sent the conductor Ferdinand Vach two choruses (nos.1 and 3) from his still unpublished set jw IV/28. Vach’s choir gave the first performance the same year with such success that the choruses became standard repertory pieces, toured in Prague, Vienna, Munich and Paris as well as many locations in Moravia. Even more remarkable was the choir’s espousal of the much more ambitious second setting of Maryčka Magdónova (jw IV/35), which it performed many times in 1908, and later toured as far as Russia.

By now Janáček was at least more prosperous: in 1910 he and his wife moved into a house specially built for them in the grounds of the Organ School’s final location in Kounicova ulice; and in 1912, instead of the usual holidays in Moravia, the couple ventured abroad to the Adriatic coast of present-day Croatia. A plan for a return visit two years later was abandoned because of the outbreak of World War I.

For Janáček, however, the most significant event of the period was the acceptance late in 1915 by the Prague National Theatre of his opera Jenůfa, after the persistent intervention of his friend Dr František Veselý, Veselý’s wife Marie Calma Veselá and the critic Karel Šípek. Kovařovic’s resistance had been overcome only with great difficulty and with the condition that he revise the opera. Thus on 26 May 1916 Janáček’s opera was performed in Prague, carefully prepared in a cut and reorchestrated version by Karel Kovařovic with a fine cast including Gabriela Horvátová as the Kostelnička. It was an instant and sustained success. Universal Edition published Kovařovic’s version in piano score and full score and energetically promoted productions in Vienna, Berlin and other German cities. The Prague German writer Max Brod, who had reviewed the opera enthusiastically, made the German translation. Brod became Janáček’s champion, the translator of most of his later operas and wrote the first book about him.

This single event transformed Janáček’s fortunes and above all his confidence in himself. He had abandoned Brouček in 1913. Now he took it up again and with a fresh set of librettists, notably Viktor Dyk and F.S. Procházka, he revised the existing opera, adding a final ‘epilogue’ act. Shortly after, he approached Procházka about a sequel, a second excursion to 15th-century Hussite wars. This was completed remarkably quickly, by the end of 1917. In January 1918 Janáček discarded the added ‘epilogue’ act of the first excursion and so the two excursions found their final form as a ‘bilogy’ now entitled Výlety páně Broučkovy (‘The Excursions of Mr Brouček’) jw I/7, published by Universal Edition in 1919 and staged the following year at the Prague National Theatre.

There were also other consequences of Janáček’s new fame. His married life, never easy, had lost much of its meaning at the death of the Janáčeks’ surviving child Olga, and although he and Zdenka had eventually achieved a stable and reasonably contented companionship, it was easily upset by Janáček’s interest in other women. By far the most serious of his affairs was that with Gabriela Horvátová. She had been keenly supportive at the time of the Prague Jenůfa and Janáček was swept off his feet by this assertive woman. He attended most of the repeat performances in Prague of Jenůfa in order to see her and took a holiday with her in Luhačovice in 1917. Their passionate relationship is documented by an incomplete correspondence and by a devastating account in Zdenka Janáčková’s memoirs. By the time the affair had cooled (in 1918), Zdenka had attempted to commit suicide and the couple had gone through a form of divorce, supervised by their two lawyers but not the courts, whereby Janáček continued to support Zdenka and she continued to look after him.

4. The last years (1917–28).

In the years between the Brno and the Prague premières of Jenůfa Janáček was not composing at full capacity. His chief interest was opera and there was little chance of his operas being performed outside Brno and thus little incentive for further works. Jenůfa’s success in Prague and abroad changed this. The amazing creative upsurge in a man well into his 60s can also be partly explained by his patriotic pride in the newly acquired independence of Czechoslovakia shortly after the end of the war in 1918. The event had been anticipated in Brouček’s second excursion, where Janáček’s intention was not so much satiric (as in the first excursion) but patriotic – an appeal to a more heroic past – and it was to the first president of the Czechoslovak Republic, T.G. Masaryk, that the score was dedicated. Similar intentions are signalled by dedications of two orchestral pieces: Ballada blanická (‘The Ballad of Blaník’) jw VI/16, written in autumn 1919 and also dedicated to Masaryk, and Taras Bulba jw VI/15, begun in 1915, completed in 1918 and dedicated to the Czech armed forces.

A final reason for Janáček’s remarkable late flowering was his friendship with Kamila Stösslová, the wife of an antiques dealer David Stössel. Janáček had met the couple on holiday in Luhačovice in the summer of 1917 and fell in love with Kamila, then almost 27 (Janáček was 62) and strikingly beautiful. Zdenka Janáčková at first welcomed Janáček’s new friend, finding the good-natured if unsophisticated Kamila a useful ally against Horvátová, while David Stössel, then in the army, helped the Janáčeks with provisions during the war. Since the Stössels were then living in Přerov, in Moravia, visits between the two couples happened quite frequently and Zdenka and Kamila corresponded even more regularly than Janáček did with Kamila. In this way the relationship continued for ten years. Its ups and downs are documented in over 700 letters from Janáček to Kamila (only a few of hers survive) and taken as a whole they provide a rich source for Janáček’s personal world in the final years of his life. Until April 1927 Kamila successfully kept Janáček at arm’s length and the much-damaged relationship between Janáček and his wife improved.

The creative gains were immediately apparent. He began his song cycle Zápisník zmizelého (‘The Diary of One who Disappeared’) jw V/12 within days of returning from his meeting with Kamila in July 1917; the subject matter of a young farmer deserting his home and parents to live with a gypsy woman had resonances in Janáček’s attraction to the dark-haired and dark-skinned Kamila. Further fantasies may have been fuelled by his next new opera Káťa Kabanová jw I/8 (1920–21), in which the heroine is drawn away from her constricted family life by the arrival of a handsome stranger. In his letters to her Janáček stressed his identification of Kamila with both the gypsy (in the Diary) and Káťa, as he did with the heroines of his next two operas Příhody lišky Bystroušky (‘The Cunning Little Vixen’) jw I/9 (1922–3) and Věc Makropulos (‘The Makropulos Affair’) jw I/10 (1923–5).

In betweeen he found time to compose incidental but by no means insubstantial works. The First String Quartet jw VII/8, written at the request of the Czech Quartet, was completed in less than a month in 1923. The same year he began a four-movement symphonic work Dunaj (‘The Danube’) jw IX/7; he wrote the wind sextet Mládí (‘Youth’) jw VII/10 in the spring of 1924 and the Concertino for piano and chamber ensemble jw VII/11 early the next year.

By the time he had passed his 70th birthday Janáček’s change in fortune was remarkable. He had retired from the Brno Organ School (which in 1919 joined the Beseda music school to become the Brno Conservatory) and instead gave composition masterclasses (in Brno) for the Prague Conservatory (1920–25). Though Brouček had only grudgingly been produced in Prague in 1920 (the only Janáček operatic première outside Brno), all his new operas were taken up immediately by Brno, followed by Prague (Káťa Kabanová: Brno 1921, Prague 1922; The Cunning Little Vixen: Brno 1924, Prague 1925; The Makropulos Affair: Brno 1926, Prague 1928). Even the early Šárka had been remembered and was performed in Brno in 1925. Universal Edition published each new opera as it came out; in 1924 Jenůfa received important premières at Berlin (under Kleiber) and at the Metropolitan, New York. The Cunning Little Vixen had been presented as part of the ISCM Festival in Prague in the spring of 1925; in September the chamber section of the festival took place in Venice and Janáček went there to hear his First Quartet given a very warm reception. One of the honours that marked his 70th birthday was the first honorary doctorate from Masaryk University in Brno (28 January 1925), a distinction he never ceased to cherish, signing correspondence and all his compositions ‘Dr Ph. Leoš Janáček’.

With Makropulos out of the way Janáček took a year off from opera. In the spring of 1926 he wrote his largest purely orchestral work, the five-movement Sinfonietta jw VI/18, which was given a triumphant first performance by Václav Talich and the Czech PO in June that year. Shortly after completing the work he went to England for a week at the invitation of a committee organized by Rosa Newmarch, with whom he corresponded and who had enthusiastically taken up his cause. His visit coincided with the General Strike, but a concert, which included most of his chamber works to date, took place as planned, at the Wigmore Hall (6 May). In the second half of the year he wrote other substantial works: the Msa glagolskaja (‘Glagolitic Mass’) jw III/9; a miniature piano concerto (the Capriccio for piano left hand and chamber ensemble jw VII/12 commissioned by the pianist Otakar Hollmann, who had lost his right hand in World War I); and extended the eight movements of his Říkadla [1] (‘Nursery Rhymes’) written in 1925 (jw V/16) to 18 (Říkadla [2] jw V/17).

His fame continued to grow. While Jenůfa was performed in dozens of German opera houses, Káťa Kabanová began to penetrate into Germany with performances in Cologne (1922, under Klemperer) and Berlin (1926). His native Hukvaldy unveiled a plaque in July 1926, and on 10 February 1927 he was elected, together with Schoenberg and Hindemith, a member of the Prussian Academy of Arts. The Sinfonietta began to be widely known; Klemperer conducted performances in 1927 in Wiesbaden, New York and Berlin. The Glagolitic Mass, which received its première in Brno in December 1927, was performed in Prague in 1928. Meanwhile Janáček began work on his last opera, Z mrtvého domu (‘From the House of the Dead’) jw I/11, and Janáček’s friendship with Kamila Stösslová moved on to a more intense level. At Easter 1927, having drafted Act 1 of From the House of the Dead, Janáček went at Zdenka’s suggestion (she wanted him out of the house during redecorating) to spend a few days with the Stössels. During two walks Kamila and Janáček reached a new understanding and Janáček thereafter addressed her with the intimate form ‘Ty’ (she continued to use the more formal address ‘Vy’) and signed his letters ‘Leoš’ instead of his full name and title. It seemed that no physical intimacies took place (Janáček triumphantly celebrated their first kiss only the next summer). Nevertheless something had happened: Kamila now evidently accepted his love and he wrote ever more frequent letters to her (in which he fantasized about marrying her and about her bearing his child) and found excuses for frequently visiting her, to the increasing disquiet of his wife. The new state of their relationship was celebrated in his String Quartet no.2 Listy důvěrné (‘Intimate Letters’) jw VII/13 which, as he graphically put it, had been written in fire, unlike earlier works ‘written only in hot ash’ (letter to Stösslová, 18–19 May 1928). The quartet was composed in a few weeks (29 January–19 February 1928) as a break from From the House of the Dead, which he was finding increasingly oppressive, though by the time of his regular summer holiday in Luhačovice on 1 July 1928 the opera had been completed in autograph, copied out by his two trusted copyists, and Janáček had checked through the first two acts.

In 1921 Janáček had bought a cottage in Hukvaldy, to which in 1924 and 1925 he added land from the adjacent forest. Like Luhačovice, which he visited most summers from 1903, this became a favourite holiday place, but while the visits to the fashionable Moravian spa of Luhačovice had a social dimension, Janáček retreated to Hukvaldy to do the concentrated creative work that his increasingly public life in Brno made difficult. That he had been born there made the Hukvaldy ties especially strong. In July 1928, after three weeks in Luhačovice, he went to Hukvaldy and was joined for the first time there by Kamila, her 11-year-old son Otto and, for the first few days, her husband. Janáček took with him the sketches of The Danube, Schluck und Jau jw IX/11 (incidental music for a production of Gerhart Hauptmann’s play, which he had reluctantly taken on) and the fair copy of Act 3 of From the House of the Dead. During one of their expeditions Janáček caught a chill, which rapidly developed into pneumonia. On 10 August he was taken to the nearest large town, Moravská Ostrava, where he died at 10 a.m. on Sunday 12 August. His funeral, held in Brno on 15 August, was a large public event at which the final scene of The Cunning Little Vixen was played. Shortly after his death his Second String Quartet was given publicly (Janáček had been present at private performances); in April 1930 From the House of the Dead received its première in a much-revised version prepared by Janáček’s pupils Břetislav Bakala and Osvald Chlubna. Zdenka Janáčková died ten years after her husband, in 1938; Kamila Stösslová died in 1935.

5. Sources of inspiration.

Janáček is sometimes categorized as a nationalist composer. Moravian nationalism certainly formed an important part of his outlook, especially from about 1888 for ten years or so when all his creative endeavours centred on Moravian folk music. While Bohemian and western Moravian music looks west, sharing the regularities of instrumentally-based German and Austrian folk music traditions, eastern Moravian folk music (i.e. Janáček’s focus of interest) shares the melodically and rhythmically richer irregularities of word-based Slovak, Hungarian and Romanian folk musics. In this sense Janáček drew on sources that brought him closer to his contemporary Bartók than to his Bohemian predecessors Dvořák and Smetana. He collected Moravian folk music, edited it, arranged it and used it as the basis for his own music. Many of Janáček’s early choruses were based on Moravian folksong texts, his ballet Rákoš Rákoczy and his second, third and fourth operas all had Moravian settings, a couple of his works had ‘Moravian’ worked into their genre descriptions (Jenůfa) or even in their titles (Our Father was originally entitled Moravian Our Father), two of his most successful, choruses (from jw IV/28) are in Moravian dialect. The big gain for Janáček was the enrichment of his personal style and his emancipation from the mainstream straitjacket. Nevertheless it was a creative phase that he transcended, so that a knowledge of Moravian folk music is not a prerequisite for understanding his mature works. Janáček’s home province of Moravia is Czech-speaking; to define Janáček as a Moravian composer (rather than a Czech one) would be to turn a Moravian awareness into a Moravian separatism that was never part of his political agenda. Janáček always regarded the Bohemian capital Prague as his capital city, which he loved to visit. Two of his nine operas (Brouček andMakropulos) and several choruses, e.g., those to words by F.S. Procházka (jw IV/40-41, 44), were set in Prague. He would have been uncomfortable with the later separation of the Czech lands from Slovakia since Moravia shared not only a border with Slovakia, but many elements of musical folk culture; Janáček felt at home in the Slovak capital of Bratislava and took several holidays in Slovakia. Altogether he was proud of the new Czechoslovak Republic and happy to define himself as a ‘Czechoslovak composer’. Like any Czech of the period he had received much of his education in German (including a year at the conservatories of Leipzig and Vienna) and, in later life, dealt very ably in German in his professional dealings. But a defining element from an early age was his anti-German, and anti-Austrian, stance. This is understandable, in a patriot eager for liberation from the Austrian Habsburg control of the Czech lands, but Janáček took an uncompromising line. He made his young bride (from a German–Czech mixed marriage) speak only Czech with him (having written his love letters to her in German), refused to speak German to her German-speaking relatives, and discouraged her contacts with her family. In his public life covert anti-Germanism was evident in his enthusiastic support for Czech-language institutions such as the Czech Readers’ Circle, the Brno Beseda and the Brno Organ School, and in his Russophilism. Russia, with its well established musical and literary traditions, was by far the largest independent Slavonic nation at the time and it offered both example and potential protection to Czechs of the period (who preferred to ignore its high-handed treatment of its Polish-speaking subjects). Janáček’s active Russophilism began in 1896, when he visited Russia to see his brother František. He wrote up his impressions in an extensive newspaper article (jw XV/150) and the next year he founded the Russian Club in Brno, which actively promoted a knowledge of Russian language, literature and music. He was delighted when his daughter Olga decided to become a Russian language teacher and encouraged her fateful trip to Russia in 1902. Russian literature inspired two early, incomplete operas and several chamber works: Pohádka (‘Fairy Tale’) jw VII/5 for cello and piano, with a programme based on Vasily Zhukovsky, and the Piano Trio and First String Quartet, both based on Tolstoy's tale of marital infidelity, The Kreutzer Sonata. The Russian advances at the beginning of World War I encouraged Janáček to hope that the Russians might liberate his country from the Austrians, and inspired two compositions, the Violin Sonata jw VII/7 and Taras Bulba jw VI/15, based on Gogol’s grisly and chauvinist tale of Cossack military life (see jw XV/247).

By 1915, however, the Austrian authorities had closed down the Russian Club and although it was reconstituted after the war, it fizzled out partly because the anti-Austrian stance which it fuelled had softened in the liberated country. Furthermore Janáček's pro-Russian sympathies did not extend to the Bolshevist government that had taken over. But his love of Russia and its culture remained. Two of his later operas, Káťa Kabanová and his last major work From the House of the Dead, are based on Russian literature, the latter composed straight from the Russian original, with Janáček translating into Czech as he went along. Vocal music predominates in Janáček's output, particularly choruses (mostly for unaccompanied male voices) and operas. From Šárka to the end of his life there was scarcely any time in which he was not writing, revising or at least planning an opera. Writing choruses served as a preparation and as a substitute for operas, and as soon as his opera writing began in earnest after Jenůfa’s acceptance in Prague his interest in choruses waned. Apart from a few trifles the only chorus after 1916 was Potulný šílenec (‘The Wandering Madman’) jw IV/43 (1922) with words by Tagore, whose visit to Prague in 1921 had made a great impression on Janáček. It is significant that the most vital and important choruses, the Bezruč group, were written in a period of particular frustration with his operatic career. Janáček set these choruses in a more obviously dramatic manner than he had used previously, with indirect speech turned into direct speech and solo voices to suggest individual characters, a technique he extended memorably in two later works. In The Wandering Madman he added a solo soprano to the male-voice chorus to sing the questions of the young boy, while in The Diary of One who Disappeared he turned a song cycle for solo tenor into a chamber cantata by including an offstage chorus of three solo female voices and a mezzo-soprano to represent the gypsy.

He wrote chamber and solo instrumental works reasonably frequently after 1900 (his first since his student works), mostly for local performances at venues such as the Friends of Art Club, but, like the two operas of this period (Fate and Brouček), most of them were problematic and were subjected to continual revision. He destroyed the final movement of his piano sonata jw VIII/19 (and attempted to destroy the two remaining movements), his Piano Trio was evidently destroyed, and Fairy Tale and the Violin Sonata were both extensively remodelled. Similarly when Janáček succeeded as an operatic composer in his final decade, the chamber works of the period (Youth, Concertino, Capriccio and two string quartets) were all written quickly and confidently.

Apart from a burst of orchestral arrangements of folkdances in the early 1890s as part of his efforts to promote Moravian folk music, Janáček turned to large-scale orchestral compositions only in his 60s. All were tone poems of some sort (Janáček seems to have been unable to finish the Danube symphony because of his lack of clarity about a piece overloaded with programmatic elements). Even the Sinfonietta is programmatic. His original title ‘Military Sinfonietta’ bears witness to the inspiration of the opening movement in a military band display in Písek; its remaining movements, according to a programme that Janáček described (in jw XV/298), were connected with his feelings about his adopted city Brno.

Almost all Janáček’s mature works had a programmatic origin, although purely musical considerations predominated once the piece was begun. Often the programmatic beginnings may seem no more than a curiosity, as in the Concertino and the Sinfonietta: the first, a set of animal scenes; the second, glimpses of Janáček’s Brno and neither essential for understanding these works. Janáček’s strongest creative impulse, however, was erotic. Both his string quartets had powerful erotic origins. It is possible to see the succession of his operatic heroines as a commentary on his attitude to Kamila Stösslová: from wishful thinking in Káťa and The Vixen (the neglected wife who takes a lover; the vixen as fulfilled wife and mother) to sober reality in Makropulos (the fascinating but unmoved Emilia Marty, ‘cold as ice’). In his last opera he turned his back on female stage characters, though he identified Kamila with Akulina, the tragically murdered wife in Šiškov’s tale.

Before the advent of Kamila Stösslová, Janáček’s operas were both less powerfully charged and less successful, the only exception being Jenůfa, where, however, he seemed to have put much of his own relationship with his daughter Olga into the central Jenůfa–Kostelnička relationship. The two operas directly after Jenůfa were built round men, the satirical antihero of Mr Brouček and in Fate the composer Živný, a portrait of himself.

Conventional religion meant little to him. As his wife recorded, he never went to church, never prayed and paid no attention to his children’s religious upbringing. The liturgical pieces of his student days are some of his dullest and least individual and, as in his explanation of the programme of the Glagolitic Mass (see letter to Stösslová, 24–5 December 1926), the urges for this work are partly pan-Slavonic, partly pantheistic and partly erotic (a nuptial mass for himself and Kamila). Some notion of his own attitudes is evident in his choice of opera plots, concerned with death but also with renewal and forgiveness. What could superficially be taken as ‘tragic’ plots are skewed both by Janáček’s libretto changes and by his comforting music. With a few deft additions, including the death of its main protagonist, Janáček turned Těsnohlídek’s lighthearted tale of a vixen and a forester into a profound tragicomic fable which comprehends and comes to terms with death. The death of Emilia Marty (another addition) became one of Janáček’s most magnificent finales, his music investing Čapek’s conversation piece with monumentality and a consoling warmth.

Something of this optimism, coupled with the grit and determination that made Janáček persevere until he won recognition in his 60s, is evident in the subtitle of the Capriccio ‘Vzdor’ (‘Defiance’), and in the nature of the piece, a concerto for piano left hand, perilously poised against a bizarre and ungainly ensemble of brass and flute/piccolo. Old age and fame, however, helped Janáček unbend and relax; these years saw the affectionate wind suite Youth and the cheerful Nursery Rhymes.

6. Musical style.

Although Janáček was born before the last wave of Romantic composers – Mahler, Wolf, Strauss and Reger – his most characteristic music was written at the end of his life, in the 1920s, and belongs in sound and spirit with the music of the younger generation around him. This is not to deny that his musical language was grounded in the 19th century. Despite some modal tendencies from Moravian folk music and the whole-tone inflected passages which began to appear in his music after his flirtation with French music around 1900, his harmony operates functionally, and the dissonance which had grown from the characteristic major 9th formations in Jenůfa and Fate into the increasingly harsh combinations in From the House of the Dead reinforces rather than negates the tonal framework. Janáček’s treatment of tonality was generally instinctive; the tonal plan of a piece is often more the result of his gravitating towards his favourite keys (D♭/C♯, A♭) than of long-range planning. In the mature works a piece seldom ends in the key in which it began. Although key signatures linger on in the instrumental works up to the First String Quartet (in his operas Janáček abandoned them as early as Brouček) their use becomes increasingly haphazard. Some of the later examples – in the Diary or Taras Bulba – are for very short passages in works basically without key signatures where the music has slipped into A♭ and, as if to show he was on home ground, Janáček signalled the fact with a temporary key signature of four flats.

Janáček’s music often operates by contrasting types of harmony. In opera this procedure is particularly useful in enhancing characterization; for example, Káťa’s music stands out against the Kabanicha’s harsher, more dissonant idiom (see ex.1). The lushness of Káťa’s music, typical of Janáček’s poignant ‘dolce’ manner, is not so much one of rife chromaticism (though chromatic alteration has a part in it) but an intensity built up through added chords and appoggiatura formations (creating a type of melody that often seems to overshoot its mark) and by the gentle tension of 6–4 chords. Other harmonic contrasts with a diatonic norm that Janáček employed are whole-tone inflected harmony, octatonic harmony and harmony built up from 4ths, a procedure that gives rise to many of his typical melodic patterns made up of 4ths, 5ths and 2nds (see ex.2). The use of harmonically contrasting blocks to build up a musical structure is found equally in his non-operatic music, as with the ‘normal’ version (ex.3a) of the Adagio tune in the Second String Quartet, third movement, compared with the more dissonant and constricted version that follows it (ex.3b) and with the jubilant, wide-spaced major version (ex.3c).

Ex.1 Káťa Kabanová Act I

View large

Ex.2 String Quartet no.1, 1st movt

View large

Ex.3 String Quartet no.2, 3rd movt

View large

Another type of contrast that Janáček’s music exploits is one of conflicting elements, as for instance in the last movement of the Violin Sonata, where a tiny repetitive fragment on the violin interrupts the would-be broad-arched tune of the piano. Sometimes such ‘interruption motifs’ are repeated to form a disruptive ostinato, as in the overture to Makropulos, where a high degree of tension is generated by the precarious balance of melodic foreground and disruptive background (see ex.4). The tension of these rapid ostinato figures is increased by their generally jagged outlines with awkward jumps. Janáček’s mature music progresses mostly by repetition and juxtaposition; accordingly much of its formal organization consists of piling up repetitive blocks (as in the Sinfonietta) and in a variety of rondo forms. The few sonata forms he employed depend on melodic contrast rather than on tonal tension. He had little sympathy with another feature of Austro-German tradition, counterpoint, and after his student works what little counterpoint there is seems to be the result of a montage of added or staggered parts, for instance in the complex textures of the late choruses.

Ex.4 The Makropulos Affair, Prelude

View large

Janáček’s handling of voice parts is idiosyncratic. Most characteristic are his mercilessly high tenor parts, both for soloists and chorus. His preference for high solo voices is clear from the Glagolitic Mass, where the soprano and tenor have most of the important solos, while the contralto makes her first appearance as late as the ‘Svet’ (Sanctus). It is typical that in Jenůfa the four main solo parts are given to two tenors and two sopranos. Janáček used lower female voices less to depict older women than to suggest provocative eroticism (Zefka in the Diary, Varvara in Káťa, the prostitute in From the House of the Dead) or for travesty roles (in From the House of the Dead and The Vixen). It is in the latter opera, with the complications of its animal world, that he specified children’s voices.

In his non-operatic vocal music, the impact of Janáček’s speech-melody theories is less evident than in his operas. The Diary of One who Disappeared, for instance, despite its embryonic dramatization in the added singer for the gypsy and instructions for lighting, preserves the metrical and rhyme schemes of its poems to such an extent that the voice parts sound more structured and conventionally melodic than those of his operas from the same period. In Nursery Rhymes Janáček made a feature of the obvious sing-song verse, sometimes employing it to achieve a deliberately non-realistic vocal style with two or three voices to each part. The Glagolitic Mass is similarly distanced from realistic word-setting by the use of an archaic text. It is not then surprising that all Janáček’s choral-instrumental music often resorts to instruments at crucial moments. Most of the Nursery Rhymes have an instrumental rather than a vocal climax; the five-movement palindrome of Amarus includes largely orchestral outer movements; at the heart of the ‘Věruju’ (Creed) in the Glagolitic Mass there is a long orchestral commentary on the Incarnation and Crucifixion; the 13th piece of the Diary, where the young man loses his virginity, is a piano solo.

Janáček’s orchestration, one of the most distinctive aspects of his style, took time to evolve. His earliest attempts, as in the Lachian Dances, are unexceptional, overfull with no evidence of a particularly acute ear. Janáček wrote his first two operas in piano score and then orchestrated (the scoring of the third act of Šárka was even undertaken by a pupil) but he wrote his third opera, Jenůfa, straight into full score, a procedure that bespeaks both a greater confidence and the greater importance of the orchestral sound in the initial inspiration. By the time of Káťa he had evolved his charateristic sound: although capable of great sweetness, there is a roughness caused by the unblended layers of orchestra and by the seemingly unidiomatic writing in individual parts (awkward figurations, especially in rapid ostinatos; use of extreme registers). In time he increasingly abandoned the middle ground for the extremes; the first sketches for From the House of the Dead reveal how often he thought instinctively in terms of three low trombones and three high piccolos, a sound image only partly modified in later versions.

Janáček’s orchestration, like most aspects of his music, often has a programmatic origin, for example many of the uses of unusual instruments (the xylophone in Jenůfa and Makropulos, the sleigh bells in Káťa). Dostoyevsky’s From the House of the Dead provided a wealth of ‘natural’ sounds (chains rattling, anvil blows, saws and work tools) which found their way into the final score; several characters are associated with individual instruments. But despite the array of percussive instruments, Janáček’s last opera shares with some of the late instrumental music a frequently spare texture. One reason for this is that with this opera he drew his own staves, a habit that he had adopted many years earlier in his non-operatic works. Although his instrumental writing remained taxing, he became accurate and economical with instrumental effects. The bizarre combinations in the Capriccio and the Sinfonietta are well calculated, and the colouristic devices in the Second String Quartet (e.g. the extensive use of sul ponticello) are all vividly effective in performance.

7. Operatic style and conventions.

A distinctive feature of Janáček’s post-Jenůfa operas is his willingness and ability to explore territory not normally cultivated by opera composers. Káťa Kabanová, Ostrovsky’s tale of adultery on the banks of the Volga, played safe, possibly after the difficulties of Fate and Brouček, but all the others are extraordinary subjects for opera. ‘Soon he’ll even be setting the local column in the newspaper’, Čapek is said to have declared when he heard that Janáček wished to set his play The Makropulos Affair, much of which is taken up with the exposition of a complicated legal case. But that was one of the more conventional. The local Brno newspaper, Lidové noviny, did in fact provide the basis for Janáček’s previous opera, about the adventures of a clever vixen. Dostoyevsky’s prison memoir, lightly disguised as reportage, was the subject of Janáček’s final opera.

Janáček was his own librettist for all the play-based operas (Jenůfa, Káťa and Makropulos; Šárka was intended as an opera libretto from the outset) and made serviceable librettos chiefly by ruthlessly condensing the originals. But for The Beginning of a Romance (based on a short story), Fate (Janáček’s own scenario) and partly in Brouček (two satirical novels), he employed librettists, though taking a steadily increasing part himself. His frustration in failing to find a satisfactory partner for The Excursion of Mr Brouček to the Moon resulted in his writing his own librettos for The Vixen and From the House of the Dead.

Janáček began writing operas in the familiar moulds of Czech nationalist opera. Šárka, a serious opera based on Czech mythic history, was inspired by Smetana’s Libusě (1881; in terms of story Šárka is actually its continuation). The Beginning of a Romance, a comic one-act village opera, Janáček himself likened to Blodek’s In the Well (1867). The serious village opera that Janáček attempted in Jenůfa is sometimes regarded as a new departure but even here there were Czech models at hand, most obviously by J.B. Foerster (e.g. his Debora, composed 1890–91, performed 1893). Foerster’s Eva (composed 1895–7, performed 1899), furthermore, was based on a play by Gabriela Preissová. What set apart Janáček’s Jenůfa and Foerster’s Eva, begun almost simultaneously, were three factors. Though both composers attempted to evoke a Moravian atmosphere, Janáček, with his Moravian roots, his extensive fieldwork, and his absorption of the patterns of Moravian folksong at a deep level, was able to present folk music not as a colourful exoticism but as part of his distinctive style. Second, while Foerster turned Preissová’s prose play into verse before he began work, Janáček left Her Stepdaughter in prose, and thus wrote the first Czech prose opera. This is not to deny that much of Act 1 of Jenůfa in particular falls into regular musical periods, with the text somewhat adapted and lines repeated to generate the equivalent of regular verse lines.

The third factor is that Janáček began to cast adrift from obvious set numbers. The remains are there, ranging from simultaneous duets and a trio, to song-based folk scenes and a full-scale slow concertato ensemble for four soloists and chorus. Ensembles persist into Fate and Brouček, but by Káťa and Makropulos there are few passages where solo voices combine for more than a bar or two. Janáček thus became more dependent on the monologue and most of his librettos from Jenůfa onwards provide many such confessional or narrative opportunities. Their frequency in From the House of the Dead is one reason why he was so attracted to this seemingly unoperatic material.

During the writing of Jenůfa Janáček began to formulate the ideas about ‘speech melody’ which were to influence his approach to the voice line and indeed his whole musical idiom for the rest of his life. He frequently stressed how important such work was to an opera composer. Speech melodies were in no sense potential thematic material for Janáček but, rather, study material to help him produce sung stylizations of the irregular patterns of everyday speech. The result was a gradual move away from regular metrical structure in the voice parts of his operas (regular phraseology generally remains in the orchestra) to a more varied and irregular approach using a greater variety of rhythms. Characteristically, the voice parts begin after the beat and end before it, the notes increasingly bunched over the phrase climax. The process is graphically demonstrated by the revisions that Janáček made in 1918 to the 1888 voice parts of his first opera, Šárka (ex.5).

Ex.5 Šárka, Act 2

View large

In the play-based operas such as Jenůfa, Káťa Kabanová and The Makropulos Affair, Janáček could rely on a ready-made dramatic structure, though he occasionally overrode the act climaxes (Káťa Kabanová). But in the novel-based operas, Brouček and in particular The Vixen and From the House of the Dead, he was able to make tiny scenes cohere by bedding them into the orchestral continuum, a process facilitated by the increasing structural importance of the orchestra in his post-speech-melody works. He made little use of leitmotif and only sporadic use of a few reminiscence themes. Instead his approach was to build up sections – often a whole scene – on a single motif subjected to ostinato and variation techniques. The second half of Act 2 of The Vixen is bonded by the structural arch of the offstage chorus; the first half consists of a set of variations on the theme of the opening prelude.

In Jenůfa Janáček came to terms with Moravian folksong and his notion of speech melody. The next two operas, Fate and The Excursions of Mr Brouček, show a further development in their reactions to fashionable European composers such as Gustave Charpentier and Puccini. Janáček much admired Louise, and learnt from its urban setting and characters (and the urban waltzes that go with them). In Act 1 of Fate Janáček imitated Charpentier’s large individualized chorus. Much longer-lasting, however, was Janáček’s use of offstage symbolic chorus: the ‘voice of the Volga’ in Káťa Kabanová, the ‘voice of the forest’ in The Cunning Little Vixen or the mysterious male-voice chorus that repeats Marty’s words at the end of The Makropulos Affair. All this can be traced back to the ‘call of Paris’ (an offstage chorus) that finally lures Louise away from her home. Puccini’s influence can be detected in Brouček and Káťa Kabanová. Later, Janáček seems to have picked up something of Debussy (in The Vixen) and even of Berg (in From the House of the Dead).

The uncertainty suggested by the extensive revisions that Janáček made to Jenůfa, Fate and The Excursions of Mr Brouček contrasts strikingly with the confidence he showed in the last four operas, by which time he had consolidated an individual style and a set of operatic conventions. The musical language is essentially tonal, though coloured by modal inflections, and in places surprisingly dissonant. But even in the harshest works, such as the final two operas, there are sudden and intense lyrical flowerings: this tension between extremes is one of the sources of Janáček’s creative energy. Janáček’s melodic style was sometimes dismissed by early commentators as ‘short-breathed’. Concision in all aspects is now seen to be one of his chief virtues: most of the operas are over in two hours. The dramaturgy of the later ones is engagingly direct, achieving striking effects by means of stark juxtapositions. In From the House of the Dead, Luka’s tale of his horrific beating is followed by the return of Petrovič after similar treatment by the prison guards. The torment and release of the eagle is juxtaposed with the torturing and release of Petrovič. From the House of the Dead, his slackest libretto in terms of events, is fuelled by music of an intense driving force, startling even for Janáček. The means of his art often seem trivial when analysed, the dramaturgy occasionally clumsy or even amateurish, but such factors pale into insignificance in the light of the immense dramatic instincts that Janáček brought to life in his operas.

8. Writings.

Janáček’s achievements as a composer have overshadowed his work in other fields, yet until his 60s he was as important to the musical life of Moravia as a theorist, teacher and folk music authority. His organ school formed the basis for the Brno Conservatory and trained the next generation of music teachers and administrators in the area. His work on folksong stimulated interest and laid the foundations for a more scholarly and systematic approach. His activities in these fields are documented by the surprising quantity of writings he left. The earliest, an article on his old teacher Pavel Křížkovský (jw XV/1), dates from 1875, two years after his earliest compositions. His career as a writer, however, began in earnest eight years later when he founded the musical periodical Hudební listy and served as its editor and chief contributor. The periodical came out in the six winter months of each year, at first (1884–5) weekly, then (1885–7) fortnightly and in its final year (1887–8) monthly. In it Janáček reviewed the operas and operettas performed at the newly established Provisional Theatre in Brno. Many of his reviews are short and reveal less about his attitude to the works concerned than about their inadequate perfomances, but in a few cases – Gounod’s Faust (jw XV/63) or Rozkošný’s St John’s Rapids (jw XV/73) – Janáček wrote more detailed introductions, and from time to time offered general observations on the state of opera in Brno and recommendations for its improvement.

His earliest theoretical writings were also published in Hudební listy. There were more substantial pieces on topics such as chordal connections, the two-note chord and the triad, and the concept of tonality, serialized over several issues. Many of the ideas expressed were later developed in Janáček’s two books on music theory: O skladbě souzvukův a jejich spojův (‘On the composition of chords and their connections’) jw XV/151 and Nauka o harmonii (‘Harmony manual’) jw XV/202. Janáček’s theoretical writings are little known today, and, despite his reputation as a composer and his impressive equipment as a theorist, have had no impact on Czech theoretical thought. His harmony manual, designed as a 16-month course, was limited to use at the Brno Organ School apart from two years when his pupil Osvald Chlubna tried to use it at the Brno Conservatory. Janáček’s attempt to give it wider currency failed when Universal Edition declined to publish it in a German translation. Part of the reason for its neglect is that it stands outside the traditions of most harmony manuals. Its intellectual roots can be found in Janáček’s wide-ranging readings in aesthetic and experimental psychology (notably Helmholtz and W.M. Wundt) with which he sought to justify some of his theoretical principles. At the time, his conclusions, for instance the free connections of any one chord to another, were considered daring. But today its philosophical basis – which traces its way back through the Czech aestheticians Josef Durdík and Robert Zimmermann to the now forgotten Herbart – seems outmoded. Another obstacle has been that it is difficult to understand because Janáček expressed himself poetically or abstractly more often than concretely, and because he employed a home-made and confusing terminology. Janáček was at his most distinctive in his approach to harmony and rhythm. In harmony the succession of sounds and the momentary confusion in the ear when one chord followed another interested him most. The overlapping combination of sounds and the montage of layers in his own compositions may be seen as practical reflections of this theoretical observation. Rhythmically he saw a piece as a hierarchy of layers, each with a distinctive rhythmic personality. Janáček also published articles in Hudební listy on the organization of music education in schools and on the teaching of singing, the subject of a further manual, his Návod pro vyučování zpěvu (‘Singing-teaching manual’) jw XV/162. This short work concentrates on pitch and rhythm differentiation, progressing through 100 short exercises to longer two-part pieces with piano accompaniment.

Whereas Janáček’s activities as a critic were fitful, confined to three brief periods mostly in three journals – Moravská orlice (1875–7), his own Hudební listy (1884–8) and Moravské listy (1890–92) – he wrote regularly on folk music for over 40 years, from a review in 1886 of a folksong collection by Ludvík Kuba (jw XV/65) to the last article he published, just a few months before he died (jw XV/310). His most substantial and systematic work came in the introductions he wrote to the folksong collections published with Bartoš and his posthumous collection Moravské písně milostné (‘Moravian Love Songs’).

In 1893 Janáček wrote his first article (jw XV/143) for the new Brno daily paper, Lidové noviny. For the next 27 years his contributions were sporadic – there was a ten-year gap after 1896 – but from 1921 he was a regular contributor, publishing 40 articles in the eight years up to his death. Janáček’s feuilletons are short, conceived for a large, popular readership, and deal with every topic that interested him. Some are autobiographical, painting vivid scenes from childhood cut through with reflections from old age; others are pictures of Janáček’s environment, both town and country, and tales from his travels; and there are some amusing and nicely observed descriptions of birds. Many pieces such as his brief account of a lecture on Dante (mostly notations of the few words that Janáček could make out from the Italian, or his touching encounter with Smetana’s elderly daughter, fallen on hard times, are whimsical evocations of tiny scenes brought to life by the inclusion of snatches of notated speech, in effect springboards for his demonstrations of speech melodies, the most constant theme of his occasional writings. Janáček’s feuilletons have much the same spirit as his music. His prose comes in short, abrupt phrases, often too compressed and overloaded to reveal its meaning immediately, but with unmistakable energy and force.

9. Posthumous reputation and scholarship.

Although František Neumann, who had presided over many Janáček premières in Brno, died soon after Janáček, Břetislav Bakala, Neumann’s assistant and Janáček’s pupil, was able to keep alive a Brno performance tradition, duly passed on to conductors such as Milan Sachs and František Jílek. Janáček’s scholarly heritage meanwhile was fostered by Vladimír Helfert, professor of musicology at the Masaryk University in Brno. The university was a major beneficiary of both Janáček’s and Zdenka Janáčková’s wills and by the outbreak of World War II Helfert had assembled for the university a splendid collection of Janáček’s manuscripts and letters (later passed to the Moravian Regional Museum) and had published the first volume of a projected four-volume biography. Activities, halted by the war and by Helfert’s death, resumed a decade later with the publication of eight volumes of Janáček’s correspondence, his collected writings on folk music (1955), his theoretical writings (1968–74) and his critical writings (forthcoming). Much of the research undertaken by Helfert pupils such as Bohumír Štědroň and Theodora Straková was usefully synthesized in Jaroslav Vogel’s biography (1958), which in several editions and languages has remained the standard Janáček biography. In 1978 a collected edition, controversial in its notation policy, was launched and by the end of the century had made available most of Janáček’s music apart from those works whose copyright was held by Universal Edition.

For the first two or three decades after Janáček’s death performances of his music were mainly given by Czech performers. Although most mature Janáček operas had been performed in Germany, none apart from Jenůfa had become repertory works; it was not until 1956 that the legendary Felsenstein production of The Cunning Little Vixen, often regarded as Janáček’s most accessible opera, aroused much interest abroad. Janáček’s operas were first performed in Britain in 1951 but until the 1964 Edinburgh Festival (which featured Janáček) were confined to London and a small band of enthusiasts headed by the Sadler’s Wells company and Charles Mackerras. The late 1970s saw the beginnings of the Welsh National/Scottish Opera cycle, which took Janáček’s main operas to all the major centres in Britain, and the series of recordings under Charles Mackerras, which helped establish Janáček’s operas internationally in a way that the Czech recordings of the 1950s and 60s had failed to do. By the end of the century Janáček had become one of the most performed 20th-century opera composers, particularly in Britain and Germany, and increasingly in the USA, Italy and France.

Scholarly activities ceased to be the prerogative of Czech scholars, with the founding of the Swiss Leoš Janáček-Gesellschaft (1969), a major Janáček conference in the USA (St Louis, 1988) and a new generation of German, English, American and Italian scholars who devoted university dissertations to Janáček. Universal Edition began issuing new scores of the operas, including authentic versions of Jenůfa (hitherto available only in Kovařovic’s revision and reorchestration) and From the House of the Dead (previously issued in a Romanticized reorchestration). Other important events in the last years of the 20th century were the recording of all Janáček’s works, including careful reconstructions of unfinished pieces such as the Danube symphony, the Violin Concerto and Schluck und Jau, and the publication of Janáček’s student letters to his wife, his letters to Kamila Stösslová, the album he kept for Stösslová, Zdenka Janáčková’s memoirs and a systematic Janáček catalogue.



Leoš Janáček: Souborné kritické vydání, ed. J. Vysloužil and others (Prague, 1978) [SKV]


N. Simeone, J. Tyrrell and A. Němcová: Janáček’s Works: a Catalogue of the Music and Writings of Leoš Janáček (Oxford, 1997) [JW]

printed works published in Prague, unless otherwise stated

spurious works not listed

Stage works

unless otherwise stated, first performed at Brno, National Theatre

View large


Title, Genre

Acts, Text


First performance

Remarks, Publication


Šárka, opera

3, after J. Zeyer

by Aug 1887; rev. 1888, 1918–10 Jan 1919, 1925

11 Nov 1925

Act 3 orchd O. Chlubna; fs ed. J. Zahrádka (Vienna, forthcoming), vs, ed. Zahrádka (Vienna, forthcoming)


Valašské tance [Valachian Dances; Dances from Valašsko], idyllic scene, lost

1, V. Kosmák

by May 1889

libretto extant; most music absorbed into I/2


Rákoš Rákoczy, [folk ballet]

1, J. Herben, after V. Hálek: Děvče z Tater [The Girl from the Tatras]

?Jan–5 June 1891

Prague, National Theatre, 24 July 1891

incl. folk choruses, songs and dances; fs, ed. L. Matějka (1957) [hire only], vs (1978) [hire only]


Počátek románu [The Beginning of a Romance], romantic opera

1, J. Tichý [F. Rypáček], after G. Preissová’s story

15 May–2 July 1891, orchd by Dec 1891, rev. ?Feb–March 1892

10 Feb 1894

sections later destroyed by Janáček, reconstructed by B. Bakala; ed. E. Holis (Prague and Kassel, 1978) [hire only]


Její pastorkyňa [Her Stepdaughter; Jenůfa], opera

3, Janáček, after Preissová’s play

Act 1 ?31 Dec 1894–?1896, Acts 2–3 ?Dec 1901–?8 March 1903; rev. Oct 1903, by 10 Jan 1907, by mid-Feb 1908, cNov 1915

21 Jan 1904

vs (Brno, 1908), fs [‘Brno version’], ed. C. Mackerras and J. Tyrrell (Vienna, 2000); vs rev. K. Kovařovic (Vienna, 1917), rev. and reorchd Kovařovic (Vienna, 1918)


Osud [Fate], scenes from a novel

3, F. Bartošová and Janáček

?8 Dec 1903–?12 June 1905; rev. by 26 July 1906, by 19 Nov 1907

excerpts, Brno Radio, 18 Sept 1934; complete, Brno, National Theatre, 25 Oct 1958 [‘flashback version’]

vs [‘flashback version’] (1964), fs and vs, ed. V. Nosek (1978) [hire only]


Výlet pana Broučka do měsíce [The Excursion of Mr Brouček to the Moon], burlesque opera

2 and Epilogue, Janáček, with addns mostly by F. Gellner, V. Dyk and F.S. Procházka, after S. Čech’s novel

Acts 1–2, 27 March 1908–12 Feb 1913, rev. 21 July–5 Nov 1916; Epilogue, 25 Oct 1916–29 March 1917

for Acts 1–2 see I/7; Epilogue, Prague Radio, 22 Sept 1936

for Acts 1–2 see I/7; Epilogue and ‘Čech Ending’ unpubd


Výlety páně Broučkovy [The Excursions of Mr Brouček], opera, 2 parts: 1 Výlet pana Broučka do měsíce; 2 Výlet pana Broučka do XV. století [The Excursion of Mr Brouček to the 15th Century], opera

part 1 as I/6 without Epilogue and ‘Čech Ending’, part 2 Procházka, after Čech’s novel

part 1 as I/6, part 2 5 May–12 Dec 1917; rev. Jan 1918, April–May 1920, 23 Aug 1920

Prague, National Theatre, 23 April 1920

vs, ed. R. Veselý (Vienna, 1919), fs (Vienna, c1920) [hire only]


Káťa Kabanová, opera

3, Janáček, after A.N. Ostrovsky: Groza [The Thunderstorm], trans. V. Červinka

?9 Jan 1920–17 April 1921, rev. Dec 1921; interludes by 9 Nov 1927

23 Nov 1921

vs, ed. B. Bakala (Vienna, 1922), fs (Vienna, 1922); fs, ed. C. Mackerras (Vienna, 1992) [incl. interludes], vs, ed. Mackerras (Vienna, 1993) [incl. interludes]


Příhody Lišky Bystroušky [The Adventures of Vixen Bystrouška (The Cunning Little Vixen)], opera

3, Janáček, after R. Těsnohlídek’s novel

22 Jan 1922–10 Oct 1923; rev. by 31 Oct 1924

6 Nov 1924

vs, ed. Bakala (Vienna, 1924), rev. version (Vienna, 1925); fs (Vienna, 1924) [hire only]


Věc Makropulos [The Makropulos Affair], opera

3, Janáček, after K. Čapek’s play

11 Nov 1923–3 Dec 1925

18 Dec 1926

vs, ed. L. Kundera (Vienna, 1926); fs, ed. Mackerras (Vienna, 1970) [hire only]


Z mrtvého domu [From the House of the Dead], opera

3, Janáček, after F.M. Dostoyevsky’s novel

18 Feb 1927–20 June 1928

12 April 1930 [version by O. Chlubna and Bakala]

ov. = rev. version of Vn Conc. IX/10; rev. and reorchd Chlubna and Bakala, vs and fs (Vienna, 1930); with orig. ending as appx (Vienna, 1964); orig. version, ed. Mackerras and Tyrrell, fs (Vienna, forthcoming)


Schluck und Jau, incidental music, unfinished

G. Hauptmann

?31 May–5 June 1928

Prague, Dům umělců, 13 Sept 1979

fs drafts of 2 movts and part of 3; 2 movts rev. J. Burghauser (Prague and Vienna, 1978)

Projected operas, with musical sketches: Paní mincmistrová [The Mintmaster’s Wife] IX/3 (1, after L. Stroupežnický’s play), Dec 1906–early 1907

Anna Karenina IX/4 (3, after L.N. Tolstoy’s novel), 5–29 Jan 1907

Živá mrtvola [The Living Corpse] IX/6 (after Tolstoy’s play), Sept 1916

Other projected stage works (operas unless otherwise stated), with only scenario, or annotated play or novel extant: Poslední Abencerage XI/1 (3, after F.-C. Chateaubriand: Les aventures du dernier des Abencérages), late 1884–Jan 1885

Pod Radhoštěm [At the Foot of Radhošť] XI/2 (ballet, after V. Hálek: Děvče z Tater [The Girl from the Tatras]), 1888–9

Andělská sonáta [Angelic Sonata] XI/6 (4, after J. Merhaut’s novel), June 1903

Gazdina roba [The Farm Mistress] XI/8 (after Preissová’s play), April 1904, ?Aug 1907

View large


motets unless otherwise stated



Mass, 1872–5, lost


Graduale (Speciosus forma), SATB, 1874


Introitus in festo SS Nominis Jesu, SATB, org, ?Jan 1875


Exaudi Deus [1], SATB, org, 1875


Exaudi Deus [2], SATB, 1875; rev. version in Cecilia, iv (1877), suppl. no.3, p.8


Benedictus, S, A, T, B, SATB, org, 1875


Communio (Fidelis servus), SATB, 1875


Regnum mundi, SATB, ?1875–8


Exsurge Domine, SATB, ?1875–9


Graduale in festo purificationis BVM (Suscepimus), SATB, ?1875–9, rev. 1887, ed. J. Trojan (Prague and Mainz, 1971)


Sanctus, 21–4 Nov 1879, lost


Deset českých církevních zpěvů z Lehnerova mešního kancionálu [10 Czech Hymns from the Lehner Hymnbook for the Mass], org with text incipits, 1881 (Brno, ?1882), rev. as České církevní zpěvy z Lehnerova mešního kancionálu (Brno, 1889) [incl. 3 addl hymns]


Svatý Václave [St Wenceslas], org, ?1902 [acc. to St Václav hymn, II/10 no.7]


Constitues, TTBB, org, ?1903, ed. J. Trojan (Prague and Mainz, 1971); rev. by 15 July 1903, unpubd


Veni sancte spiritus, TTBB, ?by Nov 1903, ed. J. Trojan (1978)


Zdrávas Maria [Hail Mary], T, SATB, vn, org, 1904, arr. S/T, vn, pf/org, 1904; ed. B. Bakala (Vienna, 1978)


Mass, E♭, S, A, T, 4 B, SAATTBB, org, spr. 1908 [Ky, Ag; Cr completed by V. Petrželka, pts (1946), fs (1972); Cr and San completed by P. Wingfield, by 1995]



Naše píseň [1] [Our Song] (S. Čech), SATB, orch, 1–12 June 1890, rev. as Sivý sokol zaletěl [A grey falcon flew away] (trad.), after 12 June 1890 – ?after 7 July 1890 [also used in I/3 no.17; see also IV/21]


Komáři se ženili [The mosquitoes got married] (trad.), SATB, orch/pf, 1891, pubd as part of I/2


Zelené sem seła [I have sown green] (trad.), SATTB, orch, 1892; rev. SATB, reduced orch, 1897, chorus pts (Brno, n.d.) [orig. title Ej, danaj!, see VIII/12; re-used in I/4]


Keď zme šli na hody [As we went to the feast] (trad.), SATB, orch, 1893 [re-used in VI/9]


Hospodine! [Lord, have mercy!] (anon, 10th–11th-century Cz.), S, A, T, B, SSATB, SSATB, 3 tpt, 4 trbn, tuba, hp, org, 1896, ed. J. Trojan (Kassel, 1977); rev. S, A, T, B, SSATB, 2 tpt, 4 trbn, tuba, hp, org, ?1896, unpubd


Amarus (cant., J. Vrchlický), S, T, Bar, SATBB, orch, 1896–7, rev. 1901, 1906, vs, ed. O. Nebuška (1938), fs, ed. (1957); SKV B/4 (forthcoming)


Na Soláni čarták [The Čarták on Soláň] (cant., M. Kurt [M. Kunert]), T, TTBB, orch, 1911, rev. 1920, ed. (1958); SKV B/3 [incl. 1911 version]


Věčné evangelium [The Eternal Gospel] (cant., Vrchlický), S, T, SSATTBB, orch, ?1913–14, ed. (1958); SKV B/4 (forthcoming)


Mša glagolskaja [Glagolitic Mass] (Old Church Slavonic, arr. M. Weingart), S, A, T, B, SSAATTBB, orch, org, 1926–7, vs, ed. L. Kundera (Vienna, 1928), fs (Vienna, 1929)

Other choral

unless otherwise stated settings for TTBB of traditional Moravian texts


Ženich vnucený [The Enforced Bridegroom], perf. 27 April 1873, lost [possibly = Srbská lidová píseň [Serbian Folksong], see JW, 298]


Orání [Ploughing], 1873, pubd in Čtyři lidové mužské sbory (1923); SKV C/1


Válečná [1] [War Song] (anon.), ?by 24 June 1873


Válečná [2]: k svěcení praporu [War Song: for Dedicating the Banner] (anon.), TTBBB, tpt, t trbn, 2 b trbn, 1873


Nestálost lásky [The Fickleness of Love], TTTBBB, 1873, ed. J. Trojan (Vienna and Prague, 1978); SKV C/1


Divím se milému [I wonder at my beloved], 1873–6, ed. in Ohlas národních písní (Prague and Brno, 1937); SKV C/1


Vínek stonulý [The Drowned Wreath], 1873–6, ed. in Ohlas národních písní (Prague and Brno, 1937); SKV C/1


Osámělá bez těchy [1] [Alone without comfort] (Slovak trad.), 1874, ed. J. Trojan (Vienna and Prague, 1978); SKV C/1 [rev. c1898, see IV/26]


Láska opravdivá [True Love], 1876, ed. in Ohlas národních písní (Prague and Brno, 1937); SKV C/1


Osudu neujdeš [You cannot escape your fate], ?by Jan 1876, ed. J. Trojan (Vienna and Prague, 1978); SKV C/1


Zpěvná duma [Vocal Elegy] (F. Čelakovský), 1876, ed. (Brno, 1934); SKV C/1


Na košatej jedli dva holubi seďá [Two pigeons are perching on the bushy fir tree], ?1876, ed. V. Telec (Brno, 1957); SKV C/1


Slavnostní sbor (k položení základního kamene ústavu ku vzdělání učitelů) [Festive Chorus (for Laying the Foundation Stone of the Teachers’ Institute)] (K. Kučera), T, T, B, B, TTBB, SA, 1877, ed. J. Trojan (Prague and Kassel, 1972)


Slavnostní sbor ku svěcení nové budovy c.k. slovanského ústavu ku vzdělání učitelů v Brně [Festive Chorus for the Consecration of the New Building of the Imperial and Royal Slavonic Teachers’ Institute in Brno] (? Kučera), Bar, TTBB, pf, 1878, part pubd in S. Přibáňová (I1987)


Píseň v jeseni [Autumn Song] (J. Vrchlický), SAATTBB, 1880, ed. B. Štědroň (1951)


Na prievoze [On the Ferry] (Slovak trad.), ?1880–84, ed. V. Telec (Brno, 1957); SKV C/1


Ave Maria (Byron, trans. J. Durdík), 1883, Varyto, xiii/1 (1890), suppl.; ed. J. Trojan (1979)


Mužské sbory [Male-Voice Choruses], 1885 (Brno, 1886, 2/1924 as Čtveřice mužských sborů [4 Male-Voice Choruses]): Vyhrůžka [The Warning]; Ó lásko [O love]; Ach vojna, vojna [Ah, the war]; Krásné oči tvé [Your lovely eyes] (J. Tichý [F. Rypáček]); SKV C/1


Kačena divoká [The Wild Duck], SAATTBB, 1885, Zpěvník pro školy střední a měšťanské, ii: Sbory smíšené, ed. B. Žalud and J. Barvič (Brno, 1885), 141–9


3 sbory mužské [3 Male-Voice Choruses], 1888, ed. M. Venhoda (1959): Loučení [Parting] (E. Krásnohorská), TTBB; Holubička [The Dove] (Krásnohorská), TTBBB; Žárlivec [The Jealous Man], TTBarBB; SKV C/1


Královničky [The Little Queens] (‘Staré národní tance obřadné se zpěvy’) [Old Ritual Folkdances with Songs], 10 folksong arrs., unison vv, pf, ?by 21 Feb 1889, ed. B. Štědroň (1954) [collab. F.X. Bakeš]


Naše píseň [2] [Our Song] (S. Čech), SATBB, 1890, ed. B. Štědroň (1951); also with orch, see III/1


Což ta na naše bříza [Our Birch Tree] (Krásnohorská), 1893, Památník Svatopluka (Brno, 1893), also in Čtyři lidové mužské sbory (1923); SKV C/1


Už je slúnko z tej hory ven [The sun has risen above that hill], Bar, SATB, pf, perf. 13 May 1894, partly lost


Odpočiň si [Take your rest] (F. Sušil), funeral chorus, 1894 (1926); SKV C/1


Slavnostní sbor (k svěcení praporu Svatojosefské jednoty) [Festive Chorus for Dedicating the Banner of the St Josef’s Union] (V. Šťastný), TTTBB, 1897, ed. J. Trojan (Prague and Vienna, 1978); SKV C/1


Osamělá bez těchy [2] [Alone without comfort] (Slovak trad.), c1898, rev. 1925, ed. J. Trojan (Prague and Vienna, 1978); SKV C/1


Ukvalské písně [Hukvaldy Songs], 6 folksong arrs., SATB, 1899, ed. B. Štědroň (1949)


Čtvero mužských sborů moravských [4 Moravian Male-Voice Choruses], 1900–06 (1906): Dež viš [If you only knew] (O. Přikryl); Komáři [Mosquitoes]; Klekánica [The Evening Witch] (Přikryl); Rozloučení [Parting]


Otče náš [Our Father] (Moravský Otče náš) [Moravian Our Father], tableaux vivants to paintings by J. Męcina-Krzesz, T, SATB, (pf, hmn)/pf/hmn, 1901; rev. T, SATB, hp, org, 1906, ed. B. Štědroň (1963)


Elegie na smrt dcery Olgy [Elegy on the Death of my Daughter Olga] (after M.N. Veveritsa), T, SATB, pf, 1903; rev. 1904, ed. T. Straková (1958)


Vínek [The Wreath], ?1904–6, pubd in Čtyři lidové mužské sbory (1923)


Lidová nokturna: večerní zpěvy slovenského lidu z Rovného [Folk Nocturnes: Evening Songs of Slovak People from Rovné], 7 folksong arrs., SA, pf, 1906, 26 balad lidových [26 Folk Ballads], ii (1922)


Kantor Halfar [Halfar the Schoolmaster] (P. Bezruč), 1906 (1923)


Maryčka Magdónova [1] (Bezruč), TTTTBBBB, 1906


Maryčka Magdónova [2] (Bezruč), T, B, TTTBBB, 1907 (1909)


70.000 (Sedmdesát tisíc) [70,000 (The Seventy Thousand)] (Bezruč), T, TTBB (solo qt), TTBB, 1909; rev. 1912 (1923)


Pět národních písní [5 Folksongs], folksong arrs., T, TTBB, pf/hmn, 1912, Dvacet šest lidových balad, iv, ed. F.A. Kypta (1950)


Perina [The Eiderdown], ?by 1914, pubd in Čtyři lidové mužské sbory (1923)


Vlčí stopa [The Wolf’s Trail] (Vrchlický), S, SSAA, pf, 1916, ed. J. Ledeč (1968)


Hradčanské písničky [Songs of Hradčany] (F.S. Procházka), 1916 (1922): Zlatá ulička [Golden Lane], SSAA; Plačící fontána [The Weeping Fountain], S, SSAA, fl; Belveder [Belvedere], S, SSAA, hp


Kašpar Rucký (Procházka), S, SSAA (solo qt), SSAA, 1916 (1925)


Česká legie [The Czech Legion] (A. Horák), T, B, TTTBBB (1918)


Potulný šílenec [The Wandering Madman] (R. Tagore, trans. F. Balej), S, T, Bar, TTBB, 1922 (1925)


Naše vlajka [Our Flag] (Procházka), 2 S, 2 T, 5 B, TTBB, 1925–6 (c1926)


Sbor při kladení základního kamene Masarykovy university v Brně [Chorus for Laying the Foundation Stone of the Masaryk University in Brno] (A. Trýb), TTTBBBB, 1928


Pensistům učitelům po 50 letech maturit [To Teacher-Pensioners on 50 Years after Matriculation] (anon.), TTBB, 1928, frag.

Other vocal


Když mě nechceš, což je víc? [If you don’t want me, so what?], song, T, pf, ?1871–2/1875, facs. in JW, 154


Smrt [Death] (M.Y. Lermontov), melodrama, spkr, orch, perf. 13 Nov 1876, lost


Die Abendschatten (? K.F.H. Mayer), ? song cycle, ? 1v, pf, 1879, lost [title mistranscribed as Die Abendschoppen in earlier catalogues]


song for L. Grill, ? 1v, pf, 9 Nov 1879, lost


Frühlingslieder (V. Zusner), song cycle, 9 songs, 1v, pf, 22 April–7 May 1880, lost [text survives]


Moravská lidová poezie v písních [Moravian Folk Poetry in Songs], 53 folksong arrs., 1v, pf, c1892–1901 (Telč, c1892–c1901 as Kytice z národních písní moravských; 2/1908 as Moravská lidová poezie v písních) [with F. Bartoš]


Jarní píseň [Spring Song] (J. Tichý [F. Rypáček]), song, 1v, pf, 1898; rev. 1905, ed. L. Firkušný (Brno, 1944)


Ukvalská lidová poezie v písních [Hukvaldy Folk Poetry in Songs], 13 folksong arrs., 1v, pf, 1898 (Brno, 1899)


Návod pro výučování zpěvu [Singing-Teaching Manual], 104 exx., v/vv, pf, 1899 (Brno, 1899); SKV H/2


5 Moravian dances, folksong arrs., 1v, pf, 1908–12: Ten ukvalský kostelíček: Starodávný lašský [That little Hukvaldy church: Lachian Old-Fashioned Dance]; Tovačov, Tovačov, tovačovské zámek [Tovačov, Tovačov, the castle in Tovačov]; Pilařská: Na pile zme dořezale [Sawdance: We’ve finished cutting at the sawmill]; Aj, ženy: Vrtěná [O women: Whirling Dance]; Krajcpolka: Bratr umřel, já sem zústal [Cross-Polka: My brother died, I remained here]; no.5, facs. in Večery [suppl. to Lidové noviny] (17 Feb 1912), complete, ed. O. Hrabalová and F. Hrabal (1979) as Pět moravských tanců


4 ballads, Moravian folksong arrs., 1v, pf, 1908–12: Tam dole na dole [Down there in the pit]; Seděl vězeň (Seděl jeden vězeň) [A prisoner sat (A prisoner sat in jail)]; Rychtarova Kačenka [The mayor’s daughter Kačenka]; Rodinu mám [I have a family]; no.3 ed. J. Ceremuga in Lidové písně a balady (1978), complete, ed. J. Trojan (1980) as Čtyři balady


Dvě balady [2 Ballads], folksong arrs., 1v, pf, ?1908 – 4 Feb 1912: Vandrovali hudci [Fiddlers were roaming]; A byl jeden zeman [And there was once a farmer]; no.1 ed. J. Ceremuga (1978) in Lidové písně a balady, no.2 unpubd [also with chorus IV/37]


6 národních písní jež zpívala Gabel Eva [6 Folksongs Sung by Eva Gabel], folksong arrs., 1v, pf, 1909, 26 balad lidových [26 Folk Ballads], i (1922)


Podme, milá, podme! [Let’s come, my dear, let’s come], folksong arr., 1v, pf, 1911, facs. in XIII/4


Písně dětvanské [Songs of Detva], zbojnické balady [brigand ballads], 6 folksong arrs. (Slovak and Cz. texts), 1v, pf, Dvacet šest lidových balad, iii, ed. F.A. Kypta (1950)


Zápisník zmizelého [The Diary of One who Disappeared] (O. [J.] Kalda), cycle of 21 songs and intermezzo, A, T, SSA, pf, 1917–20 (Brno, 1921)


Slezské písně (ze sbírky Heleny Salichové) [Silesian Songs (from Helena Salichová’s Collection)], 10 folksong arrs., 1v, pf, 1918 (Brno, 1920)


Ukolébavka [Lullaby], folksong arr., 1v, pf, 1920, in F. Pražák, ed.: Kniha Komenského k 250. výročí smrti J.A. Komenského(Brno, 1920), 42–3


3 Moravian folksong arrs., 1v, tr inst, 1923: Radujte se všichni [Rejoice all of you]; Sklenovské pomezi [Sklenov Border Country]; Poďte, poďte děvčatka [Come, girls], ed. in L. Janáček: ‘Starosta Smolik’, Lidové noviny (18 March 1923); facs. and transcr. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových noviny (Brno, 1958), 24, 26, 28 and unpaginated


Říkadla [1] [Nursery Rhymes] (Cz. and Moravian trad.), 8 songs, 1–3 Mez, cl, pf, 1925, 2 pubd as suppl. to ReM, vii/10 (1926), complete, ed. A. Němcová (Brno and Vienna, 1993) [re-used in V/17]


Říkadla [2] [Nursery Rhymes] (Cz., Moravian and Ruthenian trad.), introduction and 18 songs, 2 S, 2 A, 3 T, 2 B, ocarina, fl, fl + pic, 2 cl, bn, bn + dbn, child’s drum, db, pf, 1926, authorized red. for v/vv, va/vn, pf by E. Stein (Vienna, 1928), fs (Vienna, 1929) [see also V/16]



Zvuky ku památce Förchgotta-Tovačovského (II. oddíl) [Sounds in Memory of Arnošt Förchgott-Tovačovský (pt 2)], 3 vn, va, vc, db, ?March–June 1875, facs. part pubd in T. Straková (J1959)


Suite, str, 1877 (Brno, 1926) [4th movt based on VII/2]


Idylla [Idyll], str, 1878, ed. B. Štědroň (1951)


Scherzo for sym., 1880, lost


Valašské tance [Valachian Dances; Dances from Valašsko], Moravian folkdance arrs., 1889–91: Čeladenský [(dance) from Čeladná]; Dymák [Smoke Dance]; Kožich [Fur Coat]; Pilky [Handsaw]; Požehnaný [Blessed]; Starodávný I [Old-Fashioned]; Starodávný IIa; Starodávný IIb; Troják lašský [Lachian Triple (dance)]; perf. in varying combinations 1889–91, Pilky and Starodávný I pubd as op.2 (1890) [see also VI/17]


[Adagio], ?after 9 Nov 1890, ed. (1958), ed. O. Chlubna (1964)


Suite (Serenade), op.3, 1891, ed. B. Štědroň (1958) [incl. Požehnaný and Dymák, see VI/4]


Moravian dances, 5 folkdance arrs., 1889–91, ed. (1957) as Moravské tance: Kožich; Kalamajka; Trojky [Threes]; Silnice [Road]; Rožek [Little Corner] [from I/2; Kožich also in VI/4]


Dances from Haná, 4 Moravian folkdance arrs., no.4 with TTBB, 1891, nos.2–4 ed. in VI/7 (1957), complete, ed. in I/2 (1957): Kalamajka; Trojky; Silnice; Troják [Triple Dance] [from I/2; title ‘Hanácké tance’ used in reports of 1st perf. on 20 Nov 1892]


České tance, 1. Suita [Czech Dances, Suite no.1], 5 Moravian folkdance arrs., no.3 with SATB, 1893, nos.1, 2 and 5 pubd as VI/17 nos.2, 3 and 5 (1928), no.4 pubd as VI/7 no.1 (1957): Dymák; Požehnaný; Keď zme šli na hody [As we went to the feast]; Křížový [Cross Dance]; Čeladensky [from VI/4 and III/4]


Žárlivost [Jealousy], after Moravian folksong Žárlivec [The Jealous Man], 1895, ed. (1957) [orchd rev. of VIII/16; orig. prelude to I/4]


Požehnaný [Blessed], Moravian folkdance arr., 1899 [different arr. from that in I/2, VI/4 and VI/6]


Kozáček [Cossack Dance], 1899, ed. (1958) in Dva tance, 1–5


Srbské kolo [Serbian Reel], 2 fl, 2 bn, str, 1900, ed. (1958) in Dva tance, 6–8


Šumařovo dítě [The Fiddler’s Child], ballad (sym. poem) after S. Čech, 1913 (Brno, 1914); SKV D/6


Taras Bulba, rhapsody after N.V. Gogol, 1915–18, arr. B. Bakala, pf 4 hands (1925), fs (1927); SKV D/7


Ballada blanická [The Ballad of Blaník], sym. poem after J. Vrchlický, ?Sept–Oct 1919, ed. B. Bakala (1958)


Lašské tance [Lachian Dances; Dances from Lašsko], 6 Moravian folkdance arrs.: Starodávný I; Požehnaný; Dymák; Starodávný II; Čeladenský; Pilky, 1924 (1928); SKV D/4 [from VI/4]


Sinfonietta (Vojenská symfonietta; Sletová symfonietta [Military Sinfonietta; Rally Sinfonietta]), 1926 (Vienna, 1926)


Dunaj [The Danube], sym. after P. Křičková: Utonulá [The drowned woman] and A. Insarov [S. Špálová]: Lola, 1923–5, frag.; completed by O. Chlubna, 1948, and by M. Štědroň and L. Faltus, 1985–6


Violin Concerto ‘Putování dušičky’ [The Pilgrimage of a Little Soul; The Wandering of a Little Soul], ?May–June 1926, sketches [some used in ov. to I/11; completed by L. Faltus and M. Štědroň, 1988, pf score (1991)]



Znělka [1] [Sonnet], A major, 4 vn, 1875, facs. (bars 1–22) in T. Straková (J1959)


Znělka [2] [Sonnet], d, 4 vn, 1875, frag; rev. as 4th movt of VI/2


[7] Romanzen, vn, pf, 27 Oct–17 Nov 1879, all lost except VII/3


4. Romance [Romance no.4], vn, pf, 1879, ed. J. Štědroň (1938); SKV E/1


Dumka, vn, pf, ?1879–80, ed. R. Zika (1929); SKV E/1


Sonata [no.1], vn, pf, 14–18 Jan 1880, 2 movts, lost


Sonata [no.2], vn, pf, 20 April–13 May 1880, 4 movts, lost


String Quartet, 27 May–2 June 1880, 3 movts, lost


Menuetto a Scherzo, cl, pf, perf. 6 Jan 1881, lost


Piano Trio, after L.N. Tolstoy: Kraytserova sonata [The Kreutzer Sonata], by ?Dec 1908, perf. 2 April 1909, lost


Pohádka [Fairy Tale (A Tale)], after V.A. Zhukovsky: Skazka o tsare Berendyeye [The Tale of Tsar Berendyey], vc, pf, 1910, rev. 1912, 1913 (lost), 1923 (1924); SKV E/2 [incl. facs. of 1910 version and part of 1912 version]


[Presto], vc, pf, ?1910/?1924, ed. J. Trojan (Prague and Kassel, 1970); SKV E/2


Sonata, vn, pf, 1914–15, Ballada only (Kutná Hora, 1915), rev. ?aut. 1916–1922 (1922); SKV E/1


Komár [The Mosquito], vn, pf, ?1922–8, lost


String Quartet [no.1] after L.N. Tolstoy: Kraytserova sonata [The Kreutzer Sonata], 1923, ed. J. Suk (1925) [based on Pf Trio X/22]


[Sanssouci (Teskně)] [Sans Souci (Wistfully)], fl, spinet, 1924, frag. in ‘Berlín’ XV/253, Lidové noviny (15 May 1924); facs. and transcr. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových novinách (Brno, 1958), 163 and unpaginated


[Allegro], pic, glock, drums, 1924, frag., in ‘Berlín’ XV/253, Lidové noviny (15 May 1924); facs. and transcr. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových novinách (Brno, 1958), 165 and unpaginated


Pochod Modráčků [March of the Bluebirds], pic, pf, 1924, ed. in Hudební besídka, iv (1927–8), 121–7, ed. J. Burghauser (1970) [based on IX/8 and IX/9]


Mládí [Youth], suite, fl + pic, ob, cl, hn, bn, b cl, 1924 (1925); SKV E/6 [3rd movt incl. material from VII/9]


Concertino, pf, cl, hn, bn, 2 vn, va, 1925 (1926)


Capriccio (‘Vzdor’ [Defiance]), pf LH, fl + pic, 2 tpt, 3 trbn, t tuba, 1926, ed. J. Burghauser (1953)


String Quartet [no.2] ‘Listy důvěrné’ [Intimate Letters], 1928, ed. F. Kudláček and O. Nebuška (1938)


for piano 2 hands unless otherwise stated


exercises in harmony and counterpoint, kbd, 1874–5, 15 pubd in V. Helfert (E1939), 81–6


Předehra [Prelude], org, 1875, ed. M. Buček, Varhanní skladby (1875) (1976), 9–13; SKV F/2


Varyto, org, 1875, ed. M. Buček, Varhanní skladby (1875) (1976), 14–19; SKV F/2


Chorální fantasie [Chorale Fantasy], org, 1875, ed. M. Buček, Varhanní skladby (1875) (1976), 20–26; SKV F/2


exercises in form, kbd, 1877, 5 pubd in V. Helfert (E1939), 104–6


Rondo, 1877, frag., ed. J. Dlouhý and R. Kubik, Klavírní miniatury, i (Brno and Mainz, 1994), no.9


V Oettingenách, 4 VIII 1878 [In Oettingen, 4 August 1878], org, frag., ed. in V. Helfert (E1939), suppl. p.9, no.41; SKV F/2


Dumka, by 8 Sept 1879, lost


Piano Sonata, E♭, ?4–6 Oct 1879, lost


14 fugues, kbd, 9 Oct 1879–14 Jan 1880, lost


Zdenči-menuetto [Zdenka’s Minuet], by 8 Jan 1880, lost


Thema con variazioni (‘Zdenčiny variace’ [Zdenka Variations]), 1880, ed. V. Kurz (1944); SKV F/1


4 rondos, 16–23 Feb 1880, 3–?7 April 1880, lost


piece in sonata form, 10–13 April 1880, lost


[2] Skladby pro varhany [Pieces for Organ], 1884 (Brno, 1884); SKV F/2


Dymák [Smoke Dance], Moravian folkdance arr., after 1885, ed. J. Trojan, Klavírní miniatury, ii (Brno and Mainz, 1995), no.22


Na památku [In memoriam], ?1887 (Brno, c1887), ed. J. Trojan (Prague, 1979)


Národní tance na Moravě [Folkdances in Moravia], 21 folkdance arrs., pf 2 hands, 4 hands, some with cimb, some 1v, 1885–6, 1888–9 (Brno, 1891–3) [collab. L. Bakešová, X. Běhálková and M. Zeman]


Srňátko [The Fawn], Moravian folkdance arr., after 1888, ed. J. Trojan, Klavírní miniatury, ii (Brno and Mainz, 1995), no.24


Ej, danaj!, Moravian folkdance arr., 1892, SKV F/1; also arr. SATTB, orchd as Zelené sem seła III/3


Hudba ke kroužení kužely [Music for Club Swinging (Music for Indian Club Swinging)], 1893 (Brno, 1895); SKV F/1


Řezníček [The Little Butcher], Moravian folkdance arr., ?1893, ed. J. Trojan, Klavírní miniatury, ii (Brno and Mainz, 1995), no.25


Zezulenka [The Little Cuckoo], Moravian folkdance arr., ?1893, ed. J. Trojan, Klavírní miniatury, ii (Brno and Mainz, 1995), no.26


Úvod k Její pastorkyni (Žárlivost) [Prelude to Jenůfa (Jealousy)], pf 4 hands, 1894, ed. A. Němcová (Brno and Mainz, 1995) as Žárlivost


Po zarostlém chodníčku [On the Overgrown Path], 15 miniatures [nos.1, 2, 4, 7, 10 orig. for hmn], 1900–11, i [nos.1–10] (Brno, 1911), ii [nos.11–15], ed. F. Schäfer (1942); SKV F/1 [nos.1, 2 and 10 orig. in Slovanské melodie, v, ed. E. Kolář (Ivančice, nr Brno, 1901); 4 and 7 orig. in Slovanské melodie, vi (1902); no.11 orig. in Večery (30 Sept 1905), suppl. to Lidové noviny]


Moravské tance [Moravian Dances], 2 Moravian folkdance arrs: Čeladenský; Pilky, 1904 (Brno, 1905); SKV F/1


1.X.1905 (Z ulice dne 1. října 1905) [From the Street, 1 October 1905] (‘Sonata’), 1905–6 (1924); SKV F/1 [3 movts, 1 lost]


piece for Po zarostlém chodníčku VIII/17, between 7 May and 6 June 1908, lost


Narodil se Kristus Pán [Christ the Lord is Born], pf with text, 1909, in L. Janáček: ‘Světla jitřní’ [Early morning lights], XV/194, Lidové noviny (24 Dec 1909), ed. J. Dlouhý and R. Kubik, Klavírní miniatury, i (Brno and Mainz, 1994), no.13


[Moderato], by April 1911, facs. in J. Kunc (E1911), ed. J. Dlouhý and R. Kubik, Klavírní miniatury, i (Brno and Mainz, 1994), no.4


V mlhách [In the Mists], by 21 April 1912 (Brno, 1913); SKV F/1


[Moravské lidové písně] [Moravian Folksongs], 15 Moravian folksong arrs., pf with text, by 1 Jan 1922, ed. B. Štědroň (1950)


Ej, duby, duby [O, the oaks, the oaks], Moravian folksong arr., pf with text, by 1 Jan 1922, ed. J. Ceremuga, Lidové písně a balady (1978), no.1


Bratřím Mrštíkům [To the Mrštík Brothers], ?pf, 28 Feb 1925, facs. in JW, 273


untitled piece, ?by 1926, ed. J. Dlouhý and R. Kubik, Klavírní miniatury, i (Brno and Mainz, 1994), no.2


Na starém hradě Hukvalském [At the old castle in Hukvaldy], Moravian folkdance arr., 8 June 1926, facs. in exhibition catalogue Pobeskydí v Místku(?Místek, 1926); facs. in J. Procházka (F1948), 187


Vzpomínka [Reminiscence], 1928, suppl. to Muzika, i (Belgrade, 1928), no.6; SKV F/1


pieces in Kamila Stösslová’s album, pf/hmn, 1927–8, ed. in J. Procházkova: Leoš Janáček: Památník pro Kamilu Stösslovou (1994)

untitled pieces (VIII/25, VIII/26, VIII/27, VIII/31) in Janáček’s feuilletons XV/237, XV/246, XV/249, XV/289, pubd in Lidové noviny, 1922–7; facs. and transcrs. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových novinách (Brno, 1958)

Arrangements and transcriptions


J. Haydn: Gott erhalte den Kaiser!, arr. 1v/?unison vv, org, ?1872–1903


A. Dvořák: Šest moravských dvojzpěvů [6 Moravian Duets], arr. SATB, pf, nos.1–4 by 2 Dec 1877, nos.5–6 by 8 Nov 1884, chorus pt, ed. J. Plavec (1939) [privately printed], vs, ed. P. Jeřábek (1978)


E. Grieg: Landkjending, op.31, transcr. for Bar, TTBB, pf, hmn, by 20 March 1901


F. Liszt: Messe pour orgue (Lat. text), arr. SAATTBB, org, by 16 Oct 1901, ed. J. Burghauser (Vienna, 1978)


Církevní zpěvy české vícehlasné z příborského kancionálu [Czech Hymns for Several Voices from the Příbor Hymnbook], transcr. of 7 hymns for 3–5 mixed vv, c1904

Folk music editions


with F. Bartoš: Kytice z národních písní moravských [A Bouquet of Moravian Folksongs], 174 songs, unacc. (Telč, 1890)


with F. Bartoš: Kytice z národních písní moravských, slovenských a českých [A Bouquet of Moravian, Slovak and Czech Folksongs], 195 songs, unacc. (Telč, 1901)


with F. Bartoš: Národní písně moravské v nově nasbírané [Moravian Folksongs Newly Collected], 2057 songs, mostly unacc., and dances, by 1899 (1899–1901)


with P. Váša: ‘Z nové sbírky národních písní moravských’ [From the new collection of Moravian folksongs], 25 songs, unacc., and dances, Večery, suppl. to Lidové noviny (23 Dec 1911, 6 Jan 1912); repr. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových novinách (Brno, 1958), 295–315


with P. Váša: Moravské písně milostné [Moravian Love Songs], 150 songs, unacc., by 1928 (1930–36)


    For complete list see A: Simeone, Tyrrell and Němcová (1997), 357–445

  • O skladbě souzvukův a jejich spojův [The composition of chords and their connections] (Brno, 1896, 2/1897); ed. in Hudebně teoretické dílo, 1 (1968), 183–296 [jw XV/151]
  • Návod pro vyučování zpěvu [Singing teaching manual] (Brno, 1899); ed. in skv H/2 (1980) [jw XV/162]
  • Nauka o harmonii [Harmony manual] (Brno, 1911; enlarged, 1912–13, 2/1920 as Úplná nauka o harmonii [Complete harmony manual]); ed. in Hudebně teoretické dílo, i (1968), 183–296 [jw XV/202]
  • ed. A. Veselý: Leoš Janáček: Pohled do života i díla [Leoš Janáček: a look at the life and work] (Prague, 1924); annotated edn, ed. T. Straková, OM, 20 (1988), 225–47 [jw XV/258–73]
  • L. Firkušný: Leoš Janáček kritikem brněnské opery [Janáček as a critic of the Brno Opera] (Brno, 1935) [reprs. of Janáček’s reviews in Hudební listy, 1884–8]
  • ed. J. Racek and L. Firkušný: Janáčkovy feuilletony z L.N. [Janáček’s feuilletons from the Lidové noviny] (Prague, 1938; enlarged 2/1958 as Fejetony z Lidových novinách; Ger. trans., 1959, 2/1962; abridged Eng. trans. in Tausky, 1982)
  • O lidové písní a lidové hudbě [Folksong and folk music], Janáčkův archiv, ii/1, ed. J. Vyslouž 49 (Prague, 1955) [Janáček’s collected writings on folk music]
  • ed. M. Hanák: ‘Z přednášek Leoše Janáčka o sčasování a skladbě’ [From Janáček’s lectures on rhythm and composition], Leoš Janáček: sborník statí a studií (Prague, 1959), 137–74 [jw XV/361]
  • Hudebně teoretické dílo [Music theory works], Janáčkův archiv, ii/2, ed. Z. Blažek: i: Spisy, studie a dokumenty [Writings, studies and documents] (Prague, 1968); ii: Studie, Úplná nauka o harmonii [Studies, Complete harmony manual] (Prague, 1974)
  • B. Štědroň: ‘Leoš Janáček kritikem brněnské opery v letech 1890–1892’ [Janáček as a critic of the Brno Opera 1890–92], Otázky divadla a filmu: theatralia et cinematographica, ed. A. Závodsky, 1 (Brno, 1970), 207–48 [with Eng. summary]; Ger. trans. in Leoš Janáček-Gesellschaft: Mitteilungsblatt, nos.3–4 (1971); nos.1–2 (1972) [repr. Janáček’s reviews in Moravské listy, 1890–92]
  • ed. T. Straková: Leoš Janáček: Musik des Lebens: Skizzen, Feuilletons, Studien (Leipzig, 1979)
  • ed. and trans. V. and M. Tausky: Leoš Janáček: Leaves from his Life (London, 1982)
  • ed. and trans. M. Zemanová: Janáček’s Uncollected Essays on Music (London, 1989)
  • ed. J. Procházková: Leoš Janáček: Památník pro Kamilu Stösslovou [Album for Kamila Stösslová] (Brno, 1994; Ger. trans., 1994; Eng. trans., Brno, 1996)


    A Catalogues, bibliographies, discographies, iconographies, lists of performances. B Special periodical issues, collections of essays, conference reports. C Correspondence. D Memoirs. E Life and works. F Biographical and historical studies. G Stylistic, analytical and aesthetic studies. H Stage works. I Vocal. J Instrumental. K Theoretical and pedagogical. L Folk music. M Janáček as writer.

    A: Catalogues, bibliographies, discographies, iconographies, lists of performances
    • J. Racek, ed.: Obraz života a díla Leoš Janáček [A picture of Janáček’s life and works] (Brno, 1948) [incl. list of works (T. Straková and V. Veselý), 31–61; systematic bibliography (O. Fric), 62–88; iconography (J. Raab), 89–104]
    • B. Štědroň: Leoš Janáček v obrazech [Janáček in pictures] (Prague, 1958)
    • B. Štědroň: Dílo Leoše Janáčka: abecední seznam Janáčkových skladeb a úprav [Janáček’s works: an alphabetical catalogue of Janáček’s compositions and arrangements] (Prague, 1959; Eng. trans., 1959, as The Work of Leoš Janáček)
    • T. Straková, ed.: Iconographia janáčkiana (Brno, 1975)
    • W.D. Curtis: Leoš Janáček (Utica, NY, 1978) [discography]
    • J. Procházka: Hudební dílo Leoše Janáčka [Janáček’s musical works] (Frýdek-Místek, 1979)
    • N. Simeone: The First Editions of Leoš Janáček: a Bibliography (Tutzing, 1991)
    • N. Simeone, J. Tyrrell and A. Němcová: Janáček’s Works: a Catalogue of the Music and Writings of Leoš Janáček (Oxford, 1997, Cz. trans., 2000) [incl. further bibliography]
    • S. Přibáňová: ‘Přehled inscenací jevištního díla Leoše Janáčka z let 1894–1998’ [A survey of stage productions of Janáček's works 1894–1998], S. Přibáňová and Z. Lederová-Protivová: Svět Janáčkových oper/The World of Janáček's Operas (Brno, 1998), 97–126
    B: Special periodical issues, collections of essays, conference reports

    see sections H and K for specialized conference reports

    • ‘Janáčkův sborník’ [Janáček volume], Hudební rozhledy, 1/3–4 (1924–5)
    • ‘K jubileu Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček jubilee], Listy Hudební matice, 4/1–2 (1924–5)
    • ‘Janáčkovo číslo’ [Janáček number], Hudební rozhledy, 4/4–8 (1928)
    • J. Racek: Leoš Janáček: poznámky k tvůrčímu profilu [Observations towards a profile of Janáček as a creative artist] (Olomouc, 1936)
    • Tempo [Prague], 20 (1947–8), 235–52
    • V. Helfert: O Janáčkovi [About Janáček], ed. B. Štědroň (Prague, 1949) [collected essays and articles]
    • HRo, 7/14 (1954) [Janáček issue]
    • J. Racek and others, eds.: ‘K stému výročí narození Leoše Janáčka 1854–1954’ [The 100th anniversary of the birth of Leoš Janáček], Musikologie, 3 (1955)
    • HRo, 11/18 (1958) [Janáček issue]
    • Leoš Janáček a soudobá hudba: Brno 1958 [Janáček and contemporary music] [with Ger. summaries]
    • Leoš Janáček: sborník statí a studií [Collection of articles and studies] (Prague, 1959)
    • Sborník: Janáčkovy akademie múzických umění, 5 (1965) [articles on performance and interpretation]
    • Leoš Janáček et musica europaea [: Brno III 1968]
    • Leoš Janáček-Gesellschaft: Mitteilungsblatt (1969–)
    • ‘Leoš Janáček: osobnost a dílo: sborník studií a dokumentů’ [Personality and works: collection of studies and documents], OM, 6/5–6 (1974)
    • HV, 15/4 (1978) [Janáček issue]
    • OM, 10/5–6 (1978) [Janáček issue]
    • ‘Katedra hudební výchovy pedagogické fakulty v Ostravě k 50. výročí smrti Leoše Janáčka dne 12. srpna 1928 v Ostravě’ [The music education department of the Education Faculty in Ostrava on the 50th anniversary of Janáček’s death on 12 August 1928 in Ostrava], Sborník prací pedagogické fakulty v Ostravě, D14 (1978), 81–109 [studies, correspondence, newspaper articles]
    • Leoš Janáček ac tempora nostra: Brno XIII 1978
    • Janáčkiana: Ostrava 1978 and 1979
    • Leoš Janáček, Musik-Konzepte, no.7 (1979) [incl. list of works and bibliography]
    • Živý Janáček: Brno 1979
    • J. Knaus, ed.: Leoš Janáček – Materialien: Aufsätze zu Leben und Werk (Zürich, 1982)
    • Dvořák, Janáček and their Time: Brno XIX 1984
    • Janáček and Czech Music: St Louis 1988
    • Janáčkiana 1977–1986: deset let muzikologických konferencí pořádaných v rámci ostravského hudebního festivalu socialistických zemí Janáčkův Máj [Ten years of musicological conferences organized within the framework of ‘Janáček's May’, the Ostrava music festival of socialist countries] (Ostrava, 1988)
    • P. Wingfield, ed.: Janáček Studies (Cambridge, 1999)
    C: Correspondence
    • Janáčkův archiv, 1st ser., ed. V. Helfert (i) and J. Racek (ii–ix): i: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Artušem Rektorysem, ed. A. Rektorys (Prague, 1934) [enlarged 2/1949 = iv]; ii: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Otakarem Ostrčilem, ed. A. Rektorys (Prague, 1948); iii: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s F.S. Procházkou, ed. A. Rektorys (Prague, 1949); iv: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Artušem Rektorysem, ed. A. Rektorys (Prague, enlarged 2/1949); v: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s libretisty Výletů Broučkových [Janáček’s correspondence with the Brouček librettists], ed. A. Rektorys (Prague, 1950); vi: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Gabrielou Horvátovou, ed. A. Rektorys (Prague, 1950); vii: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Karlem Kovařovičem a ředitelstvím Národního divadla [Janáček’s correspondence with Kovařovic and the directorate of the National Theatre], ed. J. Racek and A. Rektorys (Prague, 1950); viii: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Marií Calmou a MUDr Františkem Veselým, ed. J. Racek and A. Rektorys (Prague, 1951); ix: Korespondence Leoše Janáčka s Maxem Brodem, ed. J. Racek and A. Rektorys (Prague, 1953)
    • T. Straková, ed.: František Bartoš a Leoš Janáček: vzájemná korespondence (Gottwaldov, 1957)
    • I. Stolařík, ed.: Jan Löwenbach a Leoš Janáček: vzájemná korespondence (Opava, 1958)
    • B. Štědroň: ‘Ke korespondenci a vztahu Leoše Janáčka a Karla Kovařovice’ [Correspondence and relations between Janáček and Kovařovic], SPFFBU, F6 (1960), 31–69
    • J. Knaus, ed.: ‘Intime Briefe’ 1879/80 aus Leipzig und Wien (Zürich, 1985)
    • S. Přibáňová, ed.: Dopisy strýci/Dopisy matky [Letters to his uncle/Letters from his mother], pubd as suppl. to V. Janáček (D1985)
    • Z.E. Fischmann, ed. and trans.: Janáček-Newmarch Correspondence (Rockville, MD, 1986)
    • E. Hilmar, ed.: Leoš Janáček: Briefe an die Universal Edition (Tutzing, 1988)
    • S. Přibáňová, ed.: Hádanka života: dopisy Leoše Janáčka Kamile Stösslové [The riddle of life: the letters of Leoš Janáček to Kamila Stösslová] (Brno, 1990)
    • J. Tyrrell, ed. and trans.: Intimate Letters: Leoš Janáček to Kamila Stösslová (London, 1994)
    D: Memoirs
    • O. Chlubna: ‘Vzpomínky na Leoše Janáčka’ [Memories of Leoš Janáček], Divadelní list Zemského divadla v Brně, 7 (1931–2), 101–4, 125–7, 169 only, 172 only, 289–90
    • B. Štědroň, ed.: Janáček ve vzpomínkách a dopisech [Janáček in reminiscences and letters] (Prague, 1946; Eng. trans., 1955)
    • R. Smetana: Vyprávění o Leoši Janáčkovi [Stories about Janáček] (Olomouc, 1948)
    • I. Stolařík, ed.: Leoš Janáček: Ostravsko k 30. výročí úmrtí [The Ostrava district on the 30th anniversary of Janáček’s death] (Ostrava, 1958) [reminiscences]
    • M. Trkanová: U Janáčků: podle vyprávění Marie Stejskalové [At the Janáčeks’: after the account of Marie Stejskalová (Janáček’s housekeeper)] (Prague and Bratislava, 1959, 2/1964)
    • M. Brod: ‘Erinnerungen an Janáček’, Beiträge 1967, ed. K. Roschitz (Kassel, 1967), 30–40
    • F. Kožík: Po zarostlém chodníčku [On the overgrown path] (Prague, 1967, 3/1983) [reminiscences by Křička, Horvátová, Kundera, Kunc, Mikota]
    • F.M. Hradil: Hudebníci a pěvci v kraji Leoše Janáčka [Musicians and singers in Janáček country] (Ostrava, 1981) [incl. Hradil’s reminiscences of Janáček]
    • V. Janáček: Životopis Jiříka Janáčka [The autobiography of Jiří Janáček], ed. J. Sehnal (Brno, 1985)
    • B. Štědroň: Leoš Janáček: vzpomínky, dokumenty, korespondence a studie [Reminiscences, documents, correspondence] (Prague, 1986)
    • B. Rudolf: ‘Meine Erinnerungen an Leoš Janáček (1854–1928)’, Musikerziehung, 42/2 (1988), 69–74
    • M. Trkanová: Paměti: Zdenka Janáčková – můj život [Memoirs: Zdenka Janáčková: my life] (Brno, 1998)
    • J. Tyrrell, ed. and trans.: My Life with Janáček: the Memoirs of Zdenka Janáčková (London, 1998)
    E: Life and works
    • J. Kunc: ‘Leoš Janáček’, HR, 4 (1911), 121–34, 185–9
    • M. Brod: Leoš Janáček: život a dílo [Life and works] (Prague, 1924; Ger. orig., 1925, 2/1956)
    • D. Muller: Leoš Janáček (Paris, 1930/R)
    • A.E. Vašek: Po stopách dra Leoše Janáčka [On the track of Dr Leoš Janáček] (Brno, 1930)
    • V. Helfert: Leoš Janáček: obraz životního a umelečkého boje [Janáček: a picture of his personal artistic struggles] (Brno, 1939)
    • J. Vogel: Leoš Janáček: Leben und Werk (Kassel, 1958; Eng. trans., 1962, 3/1997; Cz. orig., 1963, 2/1997) [expanded version of Leoš Janáček: dramatik (Prague, 1948)]
    • J. Racek: Leoš Janáček: Mensch und Künstler (Leipzig, 1962, 2/1971; Cz. orig., 1963, as Leoš Janáček: člověk a umělec)
    • H. Hollander: Leoš Janáček: his Life and Works (London, 1963; Ger. orig., 1964)
    • M. Černohorská: Leoš Janáček (Prague, 1966) [in Eng.; also in Fr., Ger., Russ., 1966]
    • B. Štědroň: Leoš Janáček: k jeho lidskému a uměleckému profilu [Janáček’s personal and artistic profile] (Brno, 1976)
    • G. Erismann: Janáček, ou La passion de la vérité (Paris, 1980)
    • I. Horsbrugh: Leoš Janáček: the Field that Prospered (Newton Abbot and London, 1981)
    • K. Honolka: Leoš Janáček: sein Leben, sein Werk, seine Zeit (Stuttgart and Zürich, 1982)
    • A.A. Gozenpud: Leosh Yanachek (Moscow, 1984)
    • S. Přibáňová: Leoš Janáček (Prague, 1984)
    • F. Pulcini: Janáček: vita, opere, scritti (Turin and Florence, 1993)
    F: Biographical and historical studies
    • J. Mikota: ‘Leoš Janáček v Anglii’ [Janáček in England], Listy Hudební matice, 5 (1925–6), 257–68
    • B. Štědroň: ‘Leoš Janáček na mužském učitelském ústavě v Brně’ [Janáček at the men’s teachers’ institute in Brno], Tempo, 13 (1933–4), 314–40 [see also Rytmus, xi (1947–8), 140–45]
    • H. Kašlík: Leoš Janáček dirigent [Janáček as conductor] (Prague, 1936)
    • B. Štědroň: ‘Leoš Janáček a Luhačovice’, Vyročni zpráva Městské spořitelny v Luhačovicích za rok 1938 (Luhačovice, 1939)
    • L. Kundera: Janáček a Klub přátel umění [Janáček and the Friends of Art Club] (Olomouc, 1948)
    • L. Kundera: Janáčkova varhanická škola [Janáček’s organ school] (Olomouc, 1948)
    • J. Procházka: Lašské kořeny života i díla Leoše Janáčka [Lachian roots in the life and works of Janáček] (Frýdek-Místek, 1948)
    • J. Racek: ‘Leoš Janáček a Bedřich Smetana’, Slezský sborník, 49 (1951), 433–84
    • B. Štědroň: ‘Janáček a Čajkovskij’ [Janáček and Tchaikovsky], SPFFBU, 2 (1953), 201–17
    • J. Racek: ‘Janáček a Praha’ [Janáček and Prague], Musikologie, 3 (1955), 11–50
    • T. Straková: ‘Setkání Leoše Janáčka s Gabrielou Preissovou’ [Janáček’s meeting with Gabriela Preissová], ČMm, 43 (1958), 145–63 [with Ger. summary]
    • P. Vrba: ‘Janáčkova první cesta do Ruska roku 1896’ [Janáček’s first journey to Russia in 1896], Slezský sborník, 57 (1959), 464–72
    • P. Vrba: ‘Ruský kroužek v Brně a Leoš Janáček’ [The Russian circle in Brno and Janáček], Slezský sborník, 58 (1960), 71–85
    • P. Vrba: ‘Janáčkova ruská knihovna’ [Janáček’s Russian library], Slezský sborník, 60 (1962), 242–9
    • J. Fukač: ‘Leoš Janáček a Zdeněk Nejedlý’, SPFFBU, F7 (1963), 5–29
    • J. Racek: ‘Janáčeks Studienaufenthalt in Leipzig in den Jahren 1879–1880’, 1843–1968: Hochschule für Musik Leipzig, ed. M. Wehnert, J. Froner and H. Schiller (Leipzig, 1968), 187–99; Cz. orig., ČMm, lxii (1977), 75–82
    • J. Knaus: ‘Leoš Janáček und Richard Strauss’, NZM, Jg.133 (1972), 128–30; rev. in Richard-Strauss-Blätter, new ser., no.3 (1980), 74–9
    • O. Chlubna: ‘Vzpomínky na Janáčkův případ’ [Recollections about Janáček’s case], OM, 2 (1970), 281–4; Ger. trans. in Leoš Janáček – Materialien, ed. J. Knaus (Zürich, 1982), 68–73 [on the demise of Janáček’s Organ School]
    • J. Kazda: ‘Janáčkovo svědectví o českých hercích’ [Janáček’s documentation of Czech actors], HV, 15 (1978), 333–9
    • J. Procházka: ‘Leoš Janáček, Václav Talich a Česká filharmonie’, OM, 10 (1978), 184–7; nos.5–6, pp.xix–xxiv
    • V. Gregor: ‘L. Janáček a společnost pro výzkum dítěte v Brně’ [Janáček and the Society for Child Research in Brno], OM, 13 (1981), 265–7
    • A. Závodský: ‘Petr Bezruč a Leoš Janáček’, SPFFBU, D28 (1981), 29–38
    • J. Sajner: ‘Patografická studie o Leoši Janáčkovi’ [A pathological study of Janáček], OM, 14 (1982), 233–5
    • H. Krones: ‘Leoš Janáčeks Studienaufenthalt in Wien’, ÖMz, 39 (1984), 657–61
    • S. Přibáňová: ‘Nové prameny k rodokmenu Leoše Janáčka’ [New sources for Janáček’s family tree], ČMm, 69 (1984), 129–37
    • C. Susskind: Janáček and Brod (New Haven, CT, and London, 1985) [incl. correspondence]
    • Z. Blažek: ‘Janáček, organizátor: neznámé dokumenty z let 1887 až 1919’ [Janáček as organizer: unknown documents 1887–1919], OM, 19 (1987), 196–205
    • P. Macek: ‘Leoš Janáček a František Ondrúšek: přátelství skladatele a malíře’ [Janáček and Ondrúšek: the friendship of composer and painter], OM, 20 (1988), 52–6
    • J. Procházková: ‘Prezident a skladatel’ [President and composer], OM, 22 (1990), 168–82
    • J. Vysloužil: ‘Leoš Janáček und Wien’, SMw, 41 (1992), 257–85
    • V. Kyas: ‘Janáček se neměl o koho opřít? Amálie Wickenhauserová-Nerudová, Leoš Janáček a léta sedmdesátá’ [Did Janáček have no one to rely on? Amálie Wickenhauserová-Nerudová, Janáček and the 1870s], OM, 25 (1993), 33–42
    • J. Procházková and B. Volný: Narozen na Hukvaldech [Born in Hukvaldy] (Brno, 1994; Eng. trans., 1995)
    • J. Vysloužil: ‘Leoš Janáček und das moderne Wien’, Visionen und Aufbrüche: zur Krise der modernen Musik 1908–1933 (Kassel, 1994), 125–38
    • J. Procházková: ‘Leoš Janáček a Česká národní kapela v Brně’ [Janáček and the Czech National Band in Brno], OM, 27 (1995), 91–6
    • M. Stejskalová-Melnikova: ‘Janáčkova sbírka ruských nápěvků mluvy’ [Janáček’s collection of Russian speech-melodies], HV, 34 (1997), 333–57 [with Ger. summary]
    • J. Bártová: ‘Janáčkovo působení na učitelském ústavu v Brně a hudební obzor venkovského učitele na přelomu 19. a 20. století’ [Janáček’s activity at the teachers’ institute in Brno and the musical horizons of a country teacher at the end of the 19th century], HV, 35 (1998), 337–83 [with Ger. summary]
    • J. Bártová: ‘Leoš Janáček, c.k. učitel hudby’ [Janáček, imperial and royal music teacher], OM, 30 (1998), 131–9
    • J. Porter: ‘Bartók and Janáček: Contact, Context, and Confluence’, Ethnologische, Historische und Systematische Musikwissenschaft: Oskár Elschek zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. F. Födermayr and L. Burlas (Bratislava, 1998), 407–15
    • J. Procházková: ‘Leoš Janáček jako organizátor orchestrálních koncertů v Brně 1889–1914’ [Janáček as organizer of orchestral concerts in Brno], OM, 30 (1998), 50–59
    • N. Zlámalová: ‘Olga Janáčková – dcera skladatele’ [Olga Janáčková: the daughter of the composer’], OM, 31 (1999), 30–41
    G: Stylistic, analytical and aesthetic studies
    • J. Racek: ‘Slovanské prvky v tvorbě Leoše Janáčeka’ [Slav elements in Janáček’s works], Časopis Matice moravské, 70 (1951), 364–417; pubd separately (Brno, 1952)
    • L. Podéšť: ‘O harmonické prácí ve sborové tvorbě Leoše Janáčka’ [Harmonic practice in Janáček’s choral works], HRo, 10 (1957), 137–9, 189–91
    • P. Gülke: ‘Versuch zur Ästhetik der Musik Leoš Janáčeks’, DJbM, 12 (1967), 5–39; repr. in Leoš Janáček, Musik-Konzepte, no.7 (1979), 4–40
    • A. Sychra: ‘K Janáčkově tematické práci’ [Janáček’s thematic work], HRo, 23 (1970), 14–20
    • J. Tyrrell: ‘Janáček and the Speech-Melody Myth’, MT, 111 (1970), 793–6
    • O. Chlubna: ‘O kompozičním myšlení Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček’s compositional thought processes], HRo, 24 (1971), 121–6
    • R. Gerlach: ‘Leoš Janáček und die Erste und Zweite Wiener Schule: ein Beitrag zur Stilistik seines instrumentalen Spätwerks’, Mf, 24 (1971), 19–34
    • P. Gülke: ‘Protokolle des schöpferischen Prozesses: zur Musik von Leoš Janáček’, NZM, Jg.134 (1973), 407–12, 498–505
    • N.S. Josephson: ‘Formale Strukturen in der Musik Leoš Janáčeks’, ČMm, 59 (1974), 103–18
    • D. Ströbel: Motiv und Figur in den Kompositionen der Jenufa-Werkgruppe Leoš Janáčeks: Untersuchungen zum Prozess der kompositorischen Individuation bei Janáček (Munich and Salzburg, 1975)
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Dramatické rysy Janáčkova klavírního stylu’ [Dramatic traits in Janáček’s writing for the piano], OM, 10 (1978), 139–48; repr. in J. Jiránek: Muzikologické etudy (Prague, 1981), 88–100
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Janáčkova estetika’, Estetika, 15 (1978), 193–207; repr. in J. Jiránek: Muzikologické etudy (Prague, 1981), 101–13; abridged Eng. trans., MZ, xvi (1980), 51–61
    • K. Steinmetz: ‘Vliv některých slezských fenomenů na utváření Janáčkova vyzrálého kompozičního stylu sborového’ [The influence of certain Silesian phenomena on the shaping of Janáček’s style in his mature choral works], Časopis Slezského muzea, B27 (1978), 134–45; see also HRo, 31 (1978), 137–9; no.4, pp.228–30
    • J. Tyrrell: ‘Janáček a viola d'amour’, Leoš Janáček ac tempora nostra: Brno XIII 1978, 303–8; enlarged Eng. version in J. Tyrrell: Leoš Janáček: Káťa Kabanová (Cambridge, 1982), 154–61
    • J. Volek: ‘Leoš Janáček und die neue Art der Auswertung spontaner Elemente der musikalischen Kreativität im XX. Jahrhundert’, Leoš Janáček ac tempora nostra: Brno XIII 1978, 41–75
    • A. Gozenpud: ‘Janáček a Musorgskij’, OM, 12 (1980), pp.101–9; no.5, suppl. pp.i–v, vii–viii; Ger. trans. in Leoš Janáček-Gesellschaft: Mitteilungsblatt 1984
    • N.S. Josephson: ‘Conflicting Polarities and their Resolution in the Music of Leoš Janáček’, ČMm, 65 (1980), 141–7
    • A. Sychra: ‘Janáčkovy názory na programní hudbu’ [Janáček’s views on programme music], Studia aesthetica: Acta Universitatis Carolinae, philosophica et historica, 3/2 (1980), 119–31
    • Z. Blažek: ‘Janáčkovy skladebné veličiny a skladba komplikační’ [Janáček’s greatness as a composer and complication-type composition], OM, 13 (1981), 65–70
    • M. Kaňková: ‘Sonátová forma v díle Leoše Janáčka’ [Sonata form in Janáček’s works], OM, 14 (1982), 135–40
    • V. Karbusický: ‘The Experience of the Indexical Sign: Jakobson and the Semiotic Phonology of Leoš Janáček’, American Journal of Aesthetics, 20/3 (1983), 35–58
    • P. Wingfield: ‘Unauthorised Recomposition in Leoš Janáček's Music: Guidelines for a New Approach to a Complex Problem’, JMR, 7 (1987), 187–214
    • P. Wingfield: Source Problems in Janáček’s Music: their Significance and Interpretation (diss., U. of Cambridge, 1988)
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Intonace řeči jako zdroj Janáčkovy vokální hudby’ [Speech intonation as a source of Janáček’s vocal music], OM, 22 (1990), 257–63
    • J. Kulka: Leoš Janáček’s Aesthetic Thinking (Prague, 1990)
    • J. Knaus: ‘Dvořákova aktuálnost pro Janáčka’ [Dvořák’s topicality for Janáček], HRo, 64 (1991), 472–5; Ger. orig. as ‘Dvořáks Aktualität für Janáček’, Dvořák-Studien: Saarbrücken 1991, 40–46
    • M. Kundera: Les testaments trahis (Paris, 1993; Eng. trans., 1995) [incl. two chaps. on Janáček]
    • K. Steinmetz: ‘Analytické sondy do artikulace hudebního času Janáčkových děl Úvod k opeře Z mrtvého domu a sboru Potulný šílenec’ [Analytical soundings on the articulation of musical time of Janáček’s works: Introduction to the opera From the House of the Dead and the chorus The Wandering Madman], Acta Universitatis palackianae Olumucensis, Facultas paedagogica, Musica IV: Hudební věda a výchova, 6 (1993), 87–111
    • K. Steinmetz: ‘K Janáčkovu pojetí metra a rytmu z doby působení na varhanické školy’ [On Janáček’s concept of metre and rhythm from the time at the Organ School], OM, 25 (1993), 79–83
    • K. Steinmetz: Artikulace času v Janáčkově hudbě: příspěvek k analýze časově pohybových struktur Janáčkových děl a k využití těchto analýz v hudební praxi [The articulation of time in Janáček’s music: contribution to the analysis of the structures of Janáček’s works moving in time and for the use of these analyses in musical works] (Olomouc, 1994)
    • P. Wingfield: ‘Unlocking a Janáček Enigma: the Harmonic Structure of Kudrjáš's “Waiting Song”’, ML, 75 (1994), 561–75
    • M. Štědroň: ‘Janáčkova melodika: některé specifické rysy’ [Janáček’s melody: some specific traits], SPFFBU, H30 (1995), 93–108
    • M. Štědroň: Leoš Janáček a hudba 20. století: paralely, sondy, dokumenty [Janáček and 20th-century music: parallels, soundings, documents] (Brno, 1998) [incl. ‘Janáček a verismus’, 15–54; ‘Janáček a impresionismus’, 55–87; ‘Janáček a expresionismus’, 89–111; ‘Janáček a avantgarda 20. let’, 113–26]
    • R. Holloway: ‘Expressive Sources and Resources in Janáček's Musical Language’, Janáček Studies, ed. P. Wingfield (Cambridge, 1999), 1–17
    • P. Wingfield: ‘Janáček, Musical Analysis, and Debussy's Jeux de vagues’, Janáček Studies (Cambridge, 1999), 183–280
    H: Stage works
    • GroveO (J. Tyrrell) [incl. further bibliography]
    • M. Brod: Sternenhimmel: Musik- und Theatererlebnisse (Prague and Munich, 1923, 2/1966 as Prager Sternenhimmel: Musik- und Theatererlebnisse) [incl. chaps. on Jenůfa and Káťa Kabanová]
    • L. Firkušný: Odkaz Leoše Janáčka české opeře [Janáček’s legacy to Czech opera] (Brno, 1939)
    • Musikologie, 3 (1955) [incl. F. Pala: ‘Jevištní dílo Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček’s stage works], 61–210; J. Burjanek: ‘Janáčkova Káťa Kabanová a Ostrovského Bouře’ [Janáček’s Káťa and Ostrovsky’s The Storm], 345–416; T. Straková: ‘Janáčkovy operní náměty a torsa’ [Janáček’s operatic projects and fragments] 417–49]
    • T. Straková: ‘Janáčkova opera Osud’, ČMm, 41 (1956), 209–60, 42 (1957), 133–64 [with Ger. summary]
    • V. Nosek, ed.: Opery Leoše Janáčka na brněnské scéně [Janáček’s operas on the Brno stage] (Brno, 1958) [articles on each opera, incl. O. Chlubna on his revisions to Šárka and From the House of the Dead]
    • B. Štědroň: ‘K Janáčkově opeře Osud’, Živá hudba, 1 (1959), 159–83
    • Z. Sádecký: ‘Celotónový charakter hudební řeči v Janáčkově “Lišce Bystroušce”’ [The whole-tone character of the musical language of Janáček’s Cunning Little Vixen], Živá hudba, 2 (1962), 95–163 [with Ger. summary]
    • O. Fiala: ‘Libreto k Janáčkově opeře Počátek románu’ [The libretto of Janáček’s The Beginning of a Romance], ČMm, 49 (1964), 192–222 [with Ger. summary]
    • Operní dílo Leoše Janáčka: Brno 1965 [Janáček’s operatic works]
    • J. Procházka: ‘Z mrtvého doma: Janáčkův tvůrčí i lidský epilog a manifest’ [From the House of the Dead: Janáček’s creative and human epilogue and manifesto], HV, 3 (1966), 218–43, 462–83
    • J. Tyrrell: ‘The Musical Prehistory of Janáček’s Počátek románu and its Importance in Shaping the Composer’s Dramatic Style’, ČMm, 52 (1967), 245–70 [with Cz. summary]
    • A. Mazlová: ‘Zeyerova a Janáčkova Šárka’ [Zeyer’s and Janáček’s Šárka], ČMm, 53–54 (1968–9), 71 [with Eng. summary]
    • L. Polyakova: Opernoye tvorchestvo Leosha Yanachka [Janáček’s operas] (Moscow, 1968)
    • Z. Sádecký: ‘Výstava dialogu a monologu v Janáčkově Její pastorkyni’ [Dialogue and monologue structure in Janáček’s Jenůfa], Živá hudba, 4 (1968), 73–146 [with Ger. summary]
    • B. Štědroň: Zur Genesis von Leoš Janáčeks Oper Jenufa (Brno, 1968, 2/1971); extracts in Eng. in SPFFBU, H3 (1968), 43–74; H5 (1970), 91–101 [incl. further bibliography]
    • J. Tyrrell: ‘Mr Brouček’s Excursion to the Moon’, ČMm, 53–54 (1968–9), 89–124 [with Cz. summary]
    • L. Polyakova: ‘Russkiye operï Yanacheka’ [Janáček’s ‘Russian’ operas], Puti razvitiya i vzaimosvyazi russkovo i chekhoslovatskovo, ed. Institut istorii iskusstv (Moscow, 1970), 190; Cz. trans. in Cesty rozvoje a vzájemné vztahy ruského a československého umění (Prague, 1974), 247–69
    • T. Kneif: Die Bühnenwerke von Leoš Janáček (Vienna, 1974)
    • A. Němcová: ‘Brněnská premiéra Janáčkovy Její pastorkyně’ [The Brno première of Janáček’s Jenůfa], ČMm, 59 (1974), 133–46 [with Eng. summary]; Ger. trans. in Knaus (B1982), 7–22
    • R. Cígler: Příhody Lišky Bystroušky: příspěvek k poznání díla a původnosti nové Janáčkovy operní koncepce [The Cunning Little Vixen: a contribution to knowledge of the work and the originality of Janáček’s new operatic conception] (diss., U. of Brno, 1975)
    • M. Ewans: Janáček’s Tragic Operas (London, 1977; enlarged Ger. trans., 1981, as Janáčeks Opern)
    • J. Burghauser: ‘Janáčkovo poslední hudebně dramatické torso’ [Janáček’s last musico-dramatic fragment], HV, 15 (1978), 317–25 [incid. music to Schluk und Jau]
    • C. Dahlhaus: Musikalischer Realismus: zur Musikgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1982; Eng. trans., 1985), 121–35 [contains discussion of Jenůfa]
    • J. Tyrrell: Leoš Janáček: Káťa Kabanová (Cambridge, 1982) [incl. letters and other documents]
    • M. Melnikova: ‘Interpretace Dostojevského textu v libretu poslední Janáčkovy opery’ [The interpretation of Dostoyevsky’s text in the libretto of Janáček’s last opera], HV, 23 (1986), 43–55
    • J. Tyrrell: Czech Opera (Cambridge, 1988)
    • B. Marschner: ‘Natur og menneskelighed som motiv i Leoš Janáček’s musikdramatic’ [Nature and humanity as a motive in the musico-dramatic works of Janáček], Festskrift Søren Sørensen, ed. F.E. Hansen and others (Copenhagen, 1990), 111–34; Cz. trans. in HV, xxxiii (1996), 3–20
    • J. Tyrrell: Janáček’s Operas: a Documentary Account (London, 1992) [incl. further bibliography]
    • N. Simeone: ‘A Tale of Two Vixens: Janáček’s Relationship with Emil Hertzka at Universal Edition and the 1924 and 1925 Editions of The Cunning Little Vixen’, Sundry Sorts of Music Books: Essays on the British Library Collection presented to O.W. Neighbour, ed. C. Banks, A. Searle and W. Turner (London, 1993), 319–29
    • N. Simeone: ‘Zamyšlené uvedení Janáčkovy Věci Makropulos v Berlíně roku 1928’ [The proposed Berlin production of Janáček’s The Makropulos Affair in 1928], OM, 25 (1993), 245–8
    • A. Němcová: ‘Horňácké vzory Janáčkovy Její pastorkyňa’ [Horňácko models in Janáček’s Jenůfa], OM, 26 (1994), 57–67
    • J. Knaus and J. Vysloužil, eds.: Die Ausflüge des Herrn Brouček: Dokumente, Materialen, Wertungen (Zürich, 1995)
    • M. Audus: ‘Chybějící pojítko: rekonstrukce Její pastorkyně z r. 1904’ [The missing link: a reconstruction of the 1904 Jenůfa], OM, 28 (1996), 186–96
    • V. Karbusický: ‘Skutečný život v Janáčkově “Broučkovi”’ [Real life in Janáček’s Brouček], HV, 33 (1996), 103–8
    • W. Bernhart, ed.: Leoš Janáček: Konzeption und Rezeption seines musikdramatischen Schaffens (Anif-Salzburg, 1997)
    • I. Kobán, ed.: ‘Das schlaue Füchslein’ von Leoš Janáček: ‘Und doch ist in der musik nur eine Wahrheit’: zu Walter Felsensteins Inszenierung an der Komischen Oper Berlin (1956) (Anif-Salzburg, 1997)
    • D. Katz: ‘Janáček a tradice’ [Janáček and tradition], HV, 25 (1998), 360–76
    • G. Chew and R. Vilain: ‘Evasive Realism: Narrative Construction in Dostoevsky's and Janáček's From the House of the Dead’, Janáček Studies, ed. P. Wingfield (Cambridge, 1999), 56–78
    I: Vocal
    • B. Štědroň: ‘Janáček, upravovatel Lisztovy mše’ [Janáček: the arranger of a Mass by Liszt], Cyril, lxxii (1947), 90–94; Ger. trans. as ‘Leoš Janáček und Ferenc Liszt’, SPFFBU, F7 (1963), 139–43
    • Č. Gardavský: ‘Chrámové a varhanní skladby Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček’s church and organ works], Musicologie, 3 (1955), 330–42
    • S. Přibáňová: ‘Neznámý slavnostní sbor Leoše Janáčka z roku 1878’ [An unknown festive chorus by Leoš Janáček from 1878], ČMm, 72 (1987), 205–14
    • J. Vysloužil: ‘K původu a vzniku, formě a ideji Janáčkovy Glagolské mše’ [On the origin and genesis, the form and idea of Janáček’s Glagolitic Mass], HV, 28 (1991), 91–100 [with Ger. summary]
    • P. Wingfield: Janáček: Glagolitic Mass (Cambridge, 1992)
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Leoš Janáček: Glagolitische Messe’, Werkanalyse in Beispielen: Grosse Chorwerke, ed. S. Helms and R. Schneider (Regensburg, 1994), 139–63
    • J. Vičar: “‘Zápisník zmizelého” Leoše Janáčka’, HV, 33 (1996), 203–32
    • J. Demel: ‘Kdo je autorem Zápisníku zmizelého’ [Who is the author of The Diary of One who Disappeared?], OM, 29 (1997), 93–6
    • J. Mikeska: Tajemství P.S. aneb Odhalení autora textu Janáčkova Zápisníku zmizelého [The mystery of the p.s., or The revelation of the author of the text of Janáček’s Diary of One who Disappeared] (Vizovice, 1998)
    • J.K. Novák: ‘Janáčkova Říkadla jako kompendium skladetelova kompozičního stylu’ [Janáček's Nursery Rhymes as a compendium of the composer's compositional style], HV, 36 (1999), 49–66
    J: Instrumental
    • B. Štědroň: ‘K Janáčovým národním tancům na Moravě’ [On Janáček’s Folk Dances in Moravia], SPFFBU, F2 (1958), 44–54; see also OM, vi (1974), 165–71
    • T. Straková: ‘Neznáme nástrojové skladby Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček’s unknown instrumental works], ČMm, 44 (1959), 163–78 [with Ger. summary]
    • J. Bek: ‘Neznámý fragment Janáčkovy kvarteta’ [An unknown fragment of a Janáček quartet], Slezský sborník, 58 (1960), 374–8
    • B. Štědroň: ‘Die Inspirationsquellen von Janáčeks Concertino’, Musica cameralis: Brno VI 1971, 423–34; Cz. orig. in Na křízovatce umění: sborník k poctě šedesátin prof. dr. Artura Závodského, ed. Z. Srna and J. Krystýnek (Brno, 1973), 363–8
    • J. Uhde: ‘Ein musikalisches Monument (zu Leoš Janáčeks Klaviersonaten-Fragment “1.10.1905”)’, Zeitschrift für Musiktheorie, 6/2 (1975), 89–95; repr. in J. Knaus (B1982), 81–9
    • M. Kuna: ‘Interpretace Janáčkova I. smyčcového kvarteta’ [The interpretation of Janáček’s First String Quartet], HV, 14 (1977), 99–144; xv (1978), 340–57; xvi (1979), 43–65 [quantitative analyses of performances of first two movts]
    • L. Lébl: ‘Janáčkova Sinfonietta’, HV, 15 (1978), 305–15
    • D. Holland: ‘Kompositionsbegriff und Motivtechnik in Janáčeks Streichquartetten’, Leoš Janáček, Musik-Konzepte, no.7 (1979), 67–74
    • V. Felix: ‘Příspěvek k poznání specifických rysů Janáčkova sonátového slohu: analýza Sonáty pro housle a klavír’ [The recognition of specific features of Janáček’s sonata style: analysis of the Violin Sonata], Živá hudba, 7 (1980), 127–44 [with Ger. summary]
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Janáčeks Klavierkompositionen vom Standpunkt ihres dramatischen Charakters: Versuch einer semantischen Analyse’, AMw, 39 (1982), 179–97
    • M. Wehnert: ‘Das Instrumentarium und seine Behandlung in Janáčeks “Capriccio”: eine Caprice?’, SPFFBU, H19–20 (1984), 127–35; also in BMw, xxviii/4 (1986), 277–83
    • M. Wehnert: ‘Imagination und thematisches Verständnis bei Janáček: dargestellt an Taras Bulba’, Acta Janáčkiana, 2 (1985), 76–90
    • H. Naito: ‘K problematice výrazové hudební formy Janáčkových “Našich večerů”’ [On the problems of expression in the musical form of Janáček’s Our Evenings], SPFFBU, H21 (1986), 61–72 [with Eng. summary and Jap. trans.]
    • P. Wingfield: ‘Janáček's “Lost” Kreutzer Sonata’, JRMA, 112 (1987), 229–56
    • P. Wingfield: ‘Janáček's V mlhách: towards a new Chronology’, ČMm, 72 (1987), 189–204
    • M. Štědroň and L. Faltus: ‘Janáčkův Houslový koncert: torzo nebo vrcholné dílo posledního údobí skladatele?’ [Janáček’s Violin Concerto: torso or culminative work of the composer's final period?’, OM, 20 (1988), 89–96 [on the original version of the overture to From the House of the Dead]
    • J. Procházková: ‘Duše v očarovaném kruhu’ [The soul in the charmed circle], OM, 21 (1989), 200–207 [on the Violin Concerto and the original version of the overture to From the House of the Dead]
    • H. Naito: ‘L. Janáček no Concertino wo weguru kenkyu: 20 seiki shoto no cheko ongaku nikoerku goyu no yoshikika’ [A study of Janáček’s Concertino: towards individual stylization in early 20th-century Czech music], Ongaku-gaku, 36 (1990), 16–28
    • C. Speck: ‘Bild und Symbol in Märchen für Violoncello und Klavier von Leoš Janáček’, Festschrift Rudolf Bockholdt, ed. N. Dubowy and S. Meyer-Eller (Pfaffenhofen, 1990), 389–412
    • J. Knaus: ‘Leoš Janáčeks Violinkonzert: die späte Entdeckung eines bemerkenswerten Werkes’, NZM, Jg.152, no.1 (1991), 41–55
    • J. Knaus: ‘Klaviermusik von Leoš Janáček’, Jb der Bayerische Akademie der Schönen Künste, 6 (1992), 468–75
    • Z.D. Skoumal: Structure in the Late Instrumental Music of Leoš Janáček (diss., CUNY, 1992)
    • J. Procházková: ‘Geneze Janáčkovy symfonie Dunaj’ [The genesis of Janáček’s symphony The Danube], OM, 25 (1993), 8–15
    • J. Procházková: ‘Inspirační zdroje a geneze Janáčkovy nedokonečné symfonie Dunaj’ [The inspirational sources and genesis of Janáček’s unfinished symphony The Danube], ČMm, 78/1–2 (1993), 239–48
    • J. Hermand: ‘Listy důvěrné (Intime Briefe): Janáčeks 2. Streichquartett’, Die Semantik der musiko-literarischen Gattungen: Methodik und Analyse: eine Festgabe für Ulrich Weisstein, ed. W. Bernhart (Tübingen, 1994), 117–34
    • J.K. Novak: The Programmatic Orchestral Works of Leoš Janáček: their Style and their Musical and Extramusical Content (diss., U. of Texas, Austin, 1994)
    • N.S. Josephson: ‘Cyclical Structures in the Late Music of Leoš Janáček’, MQ, 79 (1995), 402–20
    • K. Steinmetz: ‘Strukturální a sémantická analýza Janáčkovy Balady blanické’ [Stuctural and semantic analysis of Janáček’s Ballad of Blaník], HV, 33 (1996), 203–32
    • M. Štědroň: ‘Listy důverné: analytické poznámky ke skice Janáčkova II. smyčcového kvartetu’ [Intimate Letters: analytical remarks on the sketch of Janáček’s String Quartet no.2], HV, 34 (1997), 90–99 [with Ger. summary]
    • J. Trojan: ‘Milenec a nevolník okamžíku: nad klavírními črtami Leoše Janáčka’ [Lover of and bondsman to the occasion: on Leoš Janáček’s piano sketches], OM, 29 (1997), 16–23
    • J. Doubravová: ‘Janáčkova III. houslová sonata’ [Janáček’s Violin Sonata no.3], OM, 30 (1998), 10–18
    K: Theoretical and pedagogical
    • O. Chlubna: ‘Teoretické učení Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček’s theoretical teachings], Hudební rozhledy, 1 (1924–5), 57–63, 77–8, 114–16, 129–32
    • M. Černohorská: ‘K problematice vzniku Janáčkovy theorie nápěvků’ [Problems about the origin of Janáček’s speech-melody theory], ČMm, 42 (1957), 165–78; see also 43 (1958), 129–44 [both with Ger. summaries]
    • J. Volek: ‘Janáčkova Úplná nauka o harmonii’ [Janáček’s Complete Harmony Manual], Novodobé harmonické systémy z hlediska vedecké filosofie (Prague, 1961), 231–78
    • Z. Blažek: ‘Janáčkova hudební teorie’, Leoš Janáček: hudební teoretické dílo, 1 (Prague, 1968), 21–45 [further bibliography in J. Racek’s introduction, 9–20]
    • B. Dušek: ‘Janáčkovy názory na hudební harmonii v letech 1884–1912’ [Janáček’s views on harmony in music in the years 1884 to 1912], HV, 5 (1968), 374–404 [summaries in Eng., Ger., Russ.]
    • J. Blatný: ‘Janáček učitel a teoretik’ [Janáček as teacher and theorist], OM, 1 (1969), 97–100
    • Z. Blažek: ‘Polyphonie und Rhythmik in Janáčeks Musiktheorie’, SPFFBU, H4 (1969), 107– 16 [with Cz. summary]
    • F. Řehánek: ‘Ke spojovacím formám a spojům v Janáčkově učení o harmonii’ [Forms of combination and links in Janáček’s theories of harmony], HV, 6 (1969), 439–43
    • F. Řehánek: ‘Janáček a funkčnost v jeho teorii’ [Janáček and harmonic function in his theories], ČMm, 59 (1974), 97–102
    • Leoš Janáček ve škole: Hukvaldy 1975 [OM, 8/7–8 (1976)] [Janáček as teacher]
    • F. Řehánek: ‘K Janáčkově terminologii’ [Janáček’s terminology], OM, 8 (1976), 108–11
    • M. Beckerman: ‘Janáček and the Herbartians’, MQ, 69 (1983), 388–407; Cz. trans. in SPFFBU, H21 (1986), 17–29
    • J. Burghauser: ‘Hudební metrika v Janáčkovo teoretickém díle’ [Musical metre in Janáček’s theoretical works], SPFFBU, H19–20 (1984), 137–53 [with Ger. summary]
    • Z. Blažek: ‘Leoš Janáček o skladbě a hudebních formách na varhanické škole’ [Leoš Janáček on composition and musical forms at the Organ School], OM, 20 (1988), 107–11
    • M. Beckerman: Janáček as Theorist (Stuyvesant, NY, 1994)
    • K. Steinmetz: ‘Janáčkův názor o sčasování (rytmu)’ [Janáček’s view about sčasování (rhythm)], HV, 34 (1997), 100–15
    L: Folk music
    • J. Vysloužil: ‘Hudebně folkloristické dílo Leoše Janáčka’ [Janáček’s work on folk music], Leoš Janáček: o lidové písni a lidové hudbě, ed. J. Vysloužil (Prague, 1955), 29–78
    • K. Vetterl: ‘Lidová píseň v Janáčkových sborech do roku 1885’ [Folksong in Janáček’s choruses to 1885], SPFFBU, F9 (1965), 365–78 [with Ger. summary]; see also ‘Janáček’s Creative Relationship to Folk Music’, Leoš Janáček et musica europaea[: Brno III 1968], 235–42
    • M. Malura: ‘Rozbor Janáčkových Lašských tanců z hlediska folklórní provenience tematického materiálu’ [Analysis of Janáček’s Dances from Lašsko based on the provenance of the themes], Časopis Slezského muzea, ser.B, 20/1 (1971) 22–7
    • A. Geck: Das Volksliedmaterial Leoš Janáčeks: Analysen der Strukturen unter Einbeziehung von Janáčeks Randbemerkungen und Volkstudien (Regensburg, 1975)
    • O. Hrabalová and F. Hrabal: ‘K některým Janáčkovým úpravám lidových písní z let 1908–1912’ [On some of Janáček’s folksong arrangements 1908–12], Časopis Slezského muzea, ser.B, 25 (1976), 14–28
    • Z. Misurec: ‘Činnost Leoše Janáčka jako organizátora národopisné práce’ [Janáček’s activities as an organizer of ethnographic activities], Český lid, 65 (1978), 221–9
    • J. Mazurek: ‘Národopisné vystavy na vychodní Moravě a ve Slezsku před rokem 1891: podíl Leoše Janáčka na prípravě’ [National exhibitions in eastern Moravia and in Silesia before 1891: Janáček’s part in their preparation], Sborník prací pedagogické fakulty v Ostravě, D15 (1979), 93–102
    • J. Trojan: ‘Janáčkovy klavírní doprovody Moravských lidových písni’ [Janáček’s piano accompaniments to his Moravian Folksongs], Živý Janáček: Brno 1979, 25–31
    • J. Trojan: Moravská lidová píseň [Moravian folksong] (Prague, 1980)
    • O. Hrabalová: ‘Leoš Janáček o třídění moravských lidových písní’ [Janáček on the classification of Moravian folksongs], Národopísné aktuality, 25/4 (1988), 217–27
    • L. Kunz: ‘Komentář k Janáčkovu studiu mečového tance ze Strání’ [Commentary on Janáček’s study of the sword dance from Strání], Slovácko, 30 (1988), 155–70
    • D. Holý: ‘Janáčkovy redakce záznamů písňových nápěvů’ [Janáček’s edition of folksong notations], Studie o Těšínsku, 14 (1989), 30–44
    • O. Hrabalová: ‘Janáčkovy fonografické záznamy slovenských lidových písní’ [Janáček’s phonographic recordings of Slovak folksongs], Studie o Těšínsku, 14 (1989), 17–29
    • L. Kunz: ‘Zbojný (šavlový) tanec ze Strání v hudebně folklórním zájmu Leoše Janáčka’ [The war (sword) dance from Strání in Leoš Janáček’s folkloristic interest], Studie o Těšínsku, 14 (1989), 45–51
    • L. Tyllner: ‘Některé prvky stavby lidových písní a jejich vztah k tektonice děl L. Janáčka a V. Nováka’ [Some elements of the construction of folksongs and their relationship to the structure of the words of Janáček and Novák], Studie o Těšínsku, 14 (1989), 57–62
    • J. Procházková: ‘Janáčkovy tance: České, Moravské, Valašské, Lašské, Hanácké a Národní’ [Janáček’s dances: Czech, Moravian, Valachian, Lachian, Haná and folk], OM, 24 (1992), 311–18; xxv (1993), 104–11, 164–71
    • M. Toncrová: ‘“Das Volkslied in Österreich”, aneb Ke zrodu Ústav pro etnografii a folkloristiku v Brně’ [‘Das Volkslied in Österreich’, or The birth of the Institute for Ethnography and Folklore Studies in Brno], OM, 27 (1995), 242–53
    • J. Nečas and others: Nejstarší zvukové záznamy moravského a slovenského lidového zpěvu (z folkloristické činnosti Leoše Janáčka a jeho spolupracovníků)/The Oldest Recordings of Moravian and Slovak Folk Singing (on Folkloristic Activities of Leoš Janáček and his Collaborators) (Brno, 1998)
    • J. Procházková: ‘Janáčkovy záznamy lidových písní a tanců z Horácka’ [Janáček’s notations of folksongs and dances from Horácko], OM, 31 (1999), 31–8
    M: Janáček as writer
    • A. Novák: ‘Leoš Janáček spisovatel’ [Janáček as writer], in J. Racek and L. Firkušný: Janáčkovy feuilletony z L.N. (Brno, 1938), 15–21; repr. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových novin (Brno, 1958), 265–72
    • V. Helfert: ‘Kořeny Janáčkova kritického stylu’ [The roots of Janáček’s critical style], in J. Racek and L. Firkušný: Janáčkovy feuilletony z L.N. (Brno, 1938), 22–8; repr. in L. Janáček: Fejetony z Lidových novinách (Brno, 1958), 273–81
    • P. Eisner: ‘Janáček spisovatel’ [Janáček as writer], HRo, 11 (1958), 762–5
    • A. Sychra: ‘Janáčkův spisovatelský sloh, klíč sémantice jeho hudby’ [Janáček’s style as a writer: a key to the semantics of his music], Estetika, 1 (1964), 3–30, 109–25
    • J. Kvapil: ‘K problému Janáčkova literárního slohu’ [The problem of Janáček’s literary style], Janáčkiana: Ostrava 1978 and 1979, 102–9
    • J. Kvapil: ‘Janáček skladatel a beletrista’ [Janáček as composer and writer], OM, 11 (1979), 134–7
    • ‘Janáček a literatura’, Hudba a literatura, ed. R. Pečman (Frýdek-Místek, 1983), 98–114 [incl. articles by A. Němcová, S. Přibáňova, K. Steinmetz and T. Straková]
Hudební rozhledy
Opus musicum
Casopis Moravského musea [muzea, 1977-]
Studien zur Musikwissenschaft
The New Grove Dictionary of Opera
Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft
Music & Letters
Musical Quarterly
Österreichische Musikzeitschrift
Hudební revue
Archiv für Musikwissenschaft
Musical Times
Hudební veda
Deutsches Jahrbuch der Musikwissenschaft
Sborník prací filosofické [filozofické] fakulty brnenské university [univerzity]
Journal of Musicological Research
Muzikološki zbornik
Die Musikforschung
Neue Zeitschrift für Musik
Journal of the Royal Musical Association