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).

Smetana, Bedřich [Friedrich]free

(b Leitomischl, Bohemia [now Litomyšl, Czech Republic], 2 March 1824; d Prague, 12 May 1884).
  • Marta Ottlová,
  • Milan Pospíšil,
  • John Tyrrell
  •  and Kelly St Pierre

Czech composer, conductor, teacher, and music critic often described as the ‘father’ or ‘inventor’ of Czech national music. While his first language was German and his first nationalist compositions were based on Swedish narratives, Smetana asserted himself as composer of specifically Czech music from the 1860s, and his music posthumously became synonymous with a Czech national musical style. Today, Smetana’s eight operas, including Prodaná nevěsta (‘The Bartered Bride’), as well as his cycle of symphonic poems Má vlast (‘My Fatherland’) form the foundation of the Czech classical musical canon. His opera Libuše is also frequently cited as an ‘apotheosis’ of Czech music, especially in conjunction with the first movement of Má vlast, entitled ‘Vyšehrad’.

After his death, Smetana was transformed in the minds of his audiences and advocates from a composer of nationalistic music to a national symbol himself; he and his works became enduring points of reference for Czechs’ ever-shifting borders, politics, administrations, ethnicities, and imagined futures through the 20th century. For this reason, the actual Smetana in many ways has become inseparable from the myth of ‘Smetana’, as later critics and historians molded his life and work to match their needs. The composer’s supposed greatness, genius, Czechness, tragic deafness, and heroism all give voice to the shifting needs, anxieties, and interests of his audiences as much as to the composer himself.

1. Youth, training, and early career: 1824–56

Smetana was born into a relatively rich family in the city of Litomyšl. His father, František (Franz) Smetana (1777–1857), was a master brewer who rented the Litomyšl brewery from the estate owner Count Waldstein. After František’s first two wives passed away, he married Barbora Lynková, Bedřich’s mother, and Bedřich became his father’s first male heir. As was appropriate for their middle-class home, music was an important part of the family’s domestic and social life. František played the violin in a local string quartet, and Barbora was well known for her dancing. František also introduced Bedřich to the violin at the age of four, and Bedřich began piano and violin lessons with Jan Chmelík (1777–1849), organizer of local music events for Count Waldstein, shortly thereafter. Bedřich proved a gifted pianist, and first performed in public at the age of six, playing a piano arrangement of the overture to Auber’s La muette de Portici.

Smetana was not a particularly successful student, in no small part because of his continued attention to social, and, by extension, musical life. He attended several gymnasiums (Neuhaus (now Jindřichův Hradec) 1834–5, Iglau (Jihlava) 1835–6, Deutschbrod (Německý Brod, now Havlíčkův Brod) 1836–9, and finally Prague 1839–40), but abandoned his classes in Prague against his father’s wishes, drawn instead to the city’s cultural and social scenes. He performed in a quartet with fellow students, arranging pieces he heard at promenade concerts played by military bands. His first list of compositions, as noted in his diary in 1841, similarly consists of works for social occasions; his Louisen-Polka for the piano, which he wrote for his cousin, is the only of these to survive intact.

Smetana returned to school at his father’s insistence in 1840, this time at the Premonstratensian Gymnasium in Pilsen (Plzeň) and under the watch of his cousin, Josef František Smetana, who taught at the institution. Here, Smetana got to know Kateřina (Katherina) Kolářová (Kollar), who would later become his first wife, and continued writing works for social occasions, especially dance and salon pieces for the piano ‘in total ignorance of a spiritual musical education’, as he later stated in a note on the score of the Overture in C minor for piano duet. He completed his studies in 1843, and declared in his diary on 23 January that he had decided to dedicate himself to music: ‘By the grace of God and with his help I will one day be a Liszt in technique and a Mozart in composition’.

With his father’s approval (though with little financial support, as his father had fallen on hard times), Smetana returned to Prague in October 1843 to pursue a career as a musician. Through an introduction provided by Kolářová’s mother, Smetana established a relationship with Josef Proksch, who ran a music institute in the city, with whom Kateřina studied the piano. Smetana began composition lessons with Proksch at the beginning of 1844, studying from the latest textbook, Die Lehre von der musikalischen Komposition by Adolf Bernhard Marx (1837), and many of Smetana’s assignments from this period survive, capped in 1846 by his Piano Sonata in G minor. Smetana also wrote piano pieces during this period inspired by the refined salon and virtuoso output of Henselt, Chopin, and Schumann and completed his first piano cycle, Bagatelles et impromptus.

Smetana benefited greatly from Proksch’s local connections. Through Proksch and on official recommendation of Johann Friedrich Kittl, then director of the Prague Conservatory, Smetana gained a position as music teacher to the family of Count Leopold Thun, which he started at the beginning of 1844. Proksch also introduced Smetana to Liszt (whom Smetana had first seen perform in Prague in 1840) and Berlioz (who gave three concerts, including a performance of his Symphonie Fantastique, in Prague in January 1846). Count Thun, too, entertained Robert and Clara Schumann (who gave concerts in Prague in 1847), at which point Smetana proudly showed the couple his G minor Piano Sonata, though Clara’s diaries reveal that she found it too Berlioz-like.

Smetana completed his studies with Proksch and ended his teaching in the Thun household in the middle of 1847, explaining in his diary for that year, ‘I wanted to travel the world as a virtuoso, accumulating money and gaining a public position as a Kapellmeister, conductor, or teacher’. His ensuing concert tour to Western Bohemia, in which he performed Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Chopin, and Liszt and his own piano fantasy Böhmische Melodien, failed. Instead, he returned to Prague to open a music institute, which he called Lehr-Institut im Pianoforte-Spiele (‘Teaching Institute for Piano Playing’). He requested permission for the institute from the Provincial Government on 28 January 1848, and it opened its doors on 8 August of that year. Smetana supplemented his income with private lessons to aristocratic families, a project which included visits to the castle to play for the by-then-deposed Emperor Ferdinand V.

Smetana’s compositional output in 1848 reflected the political tensions of the day. He composed works dedicated both to revolutionaries and to groups representing the very specific political platforms of aristocratic Germans. He titled his March of the Prague Students’ Legion, for example, after a radical student organization ultimately banned by the state, but his March of the National Guard (in Czech, Svornost) was named for a group that both helped blockade the Charles Bridge during the uprising and became a means through which aristocratic German Bohemians could protect their own estates. These marches were Smetana’s first compositions to be published in Prague, the bandleader Jan Pavlis also arranging one for his ensemble. Smetana also composed his only work up to 1860 on a Czech text, his Píseň svobody (‘Song of Freedom’) on a poem by Josef Jiří Kolár, during 1848, though it never came before the public.

Smetana continued developing his music career in Prague during the 1850s. He completed his first substantial orchestral work, his Jubel-Ouvertüre, during 1848 and 1849, as well as his first and only symphony, his Triumf-Sinfonie, during 1853 and 1854. Smetana’s Trois polkas de salon and Trois polkas poétiques became his next works to be published in Prague, during 1854 and 1855. These polkas initiated a whole series ‘in the manner of Chopin’s mazurkas’, as described by Smetana in his 1859 diary and culminating near the end of the 1870s with his České tance (‘Czech Dances’). Smetana also composed albumleaves, which he later arranged into cycles and, in some instances, submitted to Clara Schumann and Liszt for feedback; he participated in the 1854 Beethoven celebration and the even more extensive 1856 Mozart celebrations, when his piano playing was widely praised by the critics; and on 26 February 1855 he organized his first successful independent concert where he made his début as a conductor, giving the première of his Triumf-Sinfonie.

Despite his success, Smetana moved to Göteborg in Sweden in 1856. His move likely reflected at least in part a response to Alexander Bach’s neo-absolutist rule that followed the 1848 uprisings. But Smetana also retroactively explained in a letter to his parents on 23 December 1856 that ‘Prague did not wish to acknowledge me, so I left it’. Smetana accepted an offer facilitated by the pianist Alexander Dreyschock to work as music teacher to the city of Göteborg, arriving on 16 October 1856.

2. In search of recognition abroad: Sweden, 1856–61

Apart from giving private lessons, Smetana immediately opened a music institute upon his arrival in Göteborg and, one year later, established a ladies’ singing school. Smetana also directed the amateur music society, Harmoniska Sällskap, whose programmes included works by Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Liszt, Wagner, Verdi, Rubinstein, Gade, and, unsurprisingly, Smetana.

Smetana had married Kateřina on 27 August 1849, and the couple had four daughters, though three had died by 1856. In Göteborg, the northern climate affected Kateřina’s tuberculosis, and she died on a return trip to Bohemia in Dresden on 19 April 1859. When Smetana returned to Sweden that same year, he departed already with the promise of a second marriage, this time to his brother Karel Smetana’s sister-in-law, Bettina (Barbara) Ferdinandi. Smetana and Ferdinandi were married on 10 July 1860, and when Smetana returned to Sweden for his final season in the autumn of 1860, he did so with both Bettina and Žofie, the surviving daughter from his first wife.

Smetana’s travels to and from Göteborg facilitated his development of an important relationship with Liszt over the next few years. Smetana had previously contacted Liszt in a letter from 23 March 1848 asking that Liszt accept the dedication of Smetana’s new piano cycle, Six morceaux caractéristiques, op.1, and help find a publisher for it. Smetana also asked for a loan of 400 gulden to support the opening of his music institute in Prague. Liszt had accepted the dedication, but provided no loan; and only after Smetana reminded Liszt personally in Prague in December 1848 did he recommend the Six morceaux to the Leipzig publisher F. Kistner, who published the work in 1851. Smetana also met Liszt upon Liszt’s return to Prague in September 1856, to conduct his Missa solemnis zur Einweihung der Basilika in Gran, at which point Liszt presented Smetana with a copy of his symphonic poem, Tasso.

If Smetana had begun to build a relationship with Liszt before, his stops twice on the way to Göteborg to visit Liszt in Weimar cemented it. Smetana’s first trip coincided with Archduke Carl August’s jubilee festivities held from 3 to 7 September 1857, which represented the culmination of Liszt’s efforts to establish the city as a center for the avant-garde. During the events, Smetana met prominent members of Liszt’s circle, including Hans von Bülow (with whom Smetana maintained a friendship), and attended a series of important performances celebrating Liszt’s works, in particular a performance of Liszt’s symphonic poem, Die Ideale, as well as the first performance of Liszt’s Faust Symphony. Smetana began experimenting by the end of 1857 with his own single-movement work based on Shakespeare’s Richard III (ultimately sharing the play’s title) that was much in keeping with Liszt’s symphonic poems. He also began another programmatic work based on Schiller’s Valdštýnův tábor (‘Wallenstein’s Camp’) by October 1858.

Smetana’s second visit to Liszt on the way to Göteborg began in Leipzig on 29 May 1859, where Liszt had organized the first of what became his annual Tonkünstler-Versammlungen. This was a landmark occasion for Liszt and his students; Franz Brendel identified Liszt’s movement as the ‘New German School’ for the first time during the festival’s keynote address. Smetana heard the prelude to Wagner’s Tristan und Isolde, Liszt’s Missa solemnis, and Schumann’s opera Genoveva while in Leipzig, and then travelled to Weimar where he and several of Liszt’s friends were guests in the senior composer’s home for ten days. Smetana showed the scores for Richard III and Wallenstein’s Camp to Liszt during his time there, and Liszt proposed a number of cuts to each.

Smetana would identify himself as a Liszt advocate throughout the rest of his career. As he famously wrote to Liszt on 24 October 1858, ‘Regard me as your most passionate supporter of our artistic direction who in word and deed stands for its holy truth and also works for its aims’. Smetana also indicated in his diary on 31 March 1861 that Göteborg was no longer the place for such work: ‘I follow other goals.…I cannot bury myself in Göteborg.…I must attempt finally to publish my compositions and create for myself the opportunity to gain new ideas.…Therefore up into the world and soon!’ Smetana followed with two last tours as a travelling piano virtuoso, visiting Stockholm, Norrköping, Cologne, and Leiden. Neither tour was successful.

3. Years 1861-74

The end of the Alexander Bach era as well as the emperor’s promulgation of his ‘October Diploma’ of 1860 cultivated a greater sense of optimism in Prague. Along with these changes, two announcements about the city’s musical life drew Smetana back to Bohemia: the first was the announcement in February 1861 of a competition hosted by Count Jan Harrach for one comic and one serious Czech opera; the second was the indication of the upcoming availability of a conductorship at the brand new Provisional Theatre, the first professional Czech stage, opening in 1862.

Smetana returned to Prague at the beginning of that same year and announced his arrival with two concerts in the city’s Žofín Palace. The first took place on 2 January 1862 and displayed Smetana as a virtuoso pianist. The second took place on 5 January and showcased Smetana’s compositions, including the premières of his Richard III and Wallenstein’s Camp. Smetana also reportedly began searching for a librettist to join him in creating a work for Harrach’s competition during his first full day back in the city, ultimately collaborating with the poet Karel Sabina to produce his Braniboři v Čechách (‘The Brandenburgers in Bohemia’). Smetana submitted the finished opera to the competition anonymously under the motto: ‘Music—the language of feeling, word—the language of thought’.

Despite Smetana’s enthusiasm, neither of his concerts was particularly well attended, no winner was named in the competition, and Jan Nepomuk Maýr, not Smetana, was named the conductor of the Provisional Theatre. Smetana also failed to be chosen in 1865 as director of the Prague Conservatory in succession to Kittl and was not awarded the Austrian state scholarship for which he applied. Still, Smetana did succeed in opening a new music institute in October 1863 alongside his friend, the experienced teacher Ferdinand Heller; the school remained active until 1866. Smetana’s biography was also published for the first time in the journal Dalibor in 1863, and he took a position from May 1864 to April 1865 as a music critic for the liberal paper Národní listy, from which post he actively criticized Maýr.

More than through his professional work, Smetana gained recognition in Prague through his social engagements. Ludevít Procházka, one of Smetana’s previous piano students, facilitated introductions, and Smetana began participating in organizations like the Měšťanská beseda (‘Burghers’ Club’, a Czech social society) and the Hlahol (a 120-member men’s singing group, which Smetana directed from 1863 to 1865) from 1862. Smetana also helped to found an important arts organization called the Umělecká beseda (‘Artistic Circle’, or UB) in 1863, serving as director of its music division that year, in 1865, 1869, and 1870. One of the UB’s most spectacular events was their celebration of the 300th anniversary of Shakespeare’s birth on 23 April 1864, at which Smetana conducted Berlioz’s Roméo et Juliette and his own march for a procession of 230 characters from Shakespeare. On 20 April 1866 and at Liszt’s request, Smetana also conducted the latter’s oratorio Die Legende von der heiligen Elisabeth in a UB-organized concert.

Smetana’s participation in Prague’s social scene also made him more familiar with the fashions and politics of the day. A National Revival (Národní obrození) dominated Prague’s middle classes – Smetana among them – especially from the second half of the 19th century. At its earliest beginnings, the Revival focused on asserting the autonomy of a uniquely Czech nation within the Habsburg Empire, but its thinkers as the century progressed became increasingly concerned with the formation of supposed boundaries between ‘Czechs’ and ‘Germans’ (where none had previously existed). Despite the claim of Czech enthusiasts for the National Revival to speak on behalf of ‘the Czech people’, the movement belonged primarily to the elite, and bypassed rural communities in Bohemia. But Smetana’s German-Bohemian, middle-class upbringing aligned him well with the primary thinkers of the Revival. To that end, he only began consistently using Czech, and with great difficulty, in his 40s. ‘In the newly growing self-awareness of our nation I too must also make an effort to complete my study of our beautiful language so that I, educated from childhood only in German, can express myself easily, in speech and in writing, just as easily in Czech as in German’ (Smetana’s diary, December 1861). Because the Revival was primarily an elite movement, opera also became particularly important in its conversations: participants claimed that Czech-language works made opera accessible even to the illiterate, even though attendees would still need to afford a ticket to gain entrance.

Nationalistic Czech opera became the genre that would define Smetana’s career, beginning with the successful première of The Brandenburgers in Bohemia on 5 January 1866. Though no winner to Harrach’s competition was initially announced, Smetana was named its winner in the wake of the opera’s success on 25 March 1866. In part because of the opera’s success, too, Smetana was also named Maýr’s successor as the conductor at the Provisional Theatre on 15 September 1866. From this post, Smetana performed classics of operatic literature (Gluck, Mozart, Beethoven), Slavic operas (Glinka, Moniuszko), and a large number of new works by Czech composers (Blodek, Bendl, Rozkošný, Šebor, and others). He also organized subscription concerts with his theatre orchestra, beginning on 5 December 1869, later with the combined orchestras of the Czech and German theatres (from 1873 calling the ensemble the Filharmonia and alternating on the podium with the German theatre conductor Ludwig Slansky). In 1872 Smetana established the first singing school attached to the Provisional Theatre.

The successful première of The Brandenburgers in Bohemia also led to the administration of the Provisional Theatre immediately accepting a second opera by Smetana, Prodaná nevěsta (‘The Bartered Bride’). With its supposed folk character – especially as evidenced in its skočná, or flying polka – this opera was so enthusiastically received that it was performed 100 times between its première (30 May 1866) and 1883; and Derek Sayer in his Coasts of Bohemia counts nearly 3,000 performances in Prague’s National Theatre alone between 1883 and 1983. Still, the première met with mixed reviews, due in part to low attendance (the Seven Weeks’ War was threatening Prague). At the same time, Smetana also revised the opera extensively over the next few years in response to a variety of suggestions and criticisms.

As with The Bartered Bride, the audience at Smetana’s third opera, Dalibor, was sparse, this time because its première on 16 May 1868 coincided with one of the greatest national demonstrations of the Revival: the celebrations for the laying of the foundation stones of the new Czech National Theatre (Národní divadlo). The celebrations lasted three days from 15 to 17 May that year and attracted an estimated 60,000 attendees. Smetana was an honoured guest at the festival’s main ceremony, and made his famous pronouncement, ‘Music – the life of the Czechs!’ while striking one of the stones. As only a smaller part of a much greater celebration, the première of Dalibor was not particularly well attended. Still, the opera became infamous among Smetana’s output, not because it was through-composed (and therefore more ‘Wagnerian’ than his previous two operas), but in response to a piece of criticism written by Smetana’s fellow UB member František Pivoda, nearly two years after the opera’s première.

Pivoda initially supported Smetana’s work. He praised The Brandenburgers in Bohemia, and even hailed The Bartered Bride as an ideal model for national opera. But in February 1870 and in response to Dalibor, Pivoda argued in the journal Pokrok that Czech opera should remain independent from international models, warning that it might otherwise be ‘taken over’ by a ‘foreign entity’. Pivoda’s anxieties lay in part in concern for his own vocal students, trained in bel canto traditions, but more immediately reflected the conflicts in the reception of Wagner’s aesthetic theories in Bohemia: On one hand, embracing a Wagnerian model in Czech opera would allow Czechs to remain not just relevant on an international stage, but cutting-edge. On the other hand, Wagner – a German radical – was aligned with the Czechs’ cultural oppressors, and therefore unsuitable as a model. Pivoda’s writing and the charged conversations that followed came to be known as the ‘music battles’ of the 1870s, within which (and over the course of his career) Smetana variously aligned and distanced himself from Wagner. Smetana’s first response, however, was to claim in the pages of Národní listy that Pivoda was not knowledgeable enough to discuss Wagner, and that there was more national character in Dalibor than in any other opera.

The polemics of the ‘music battles’ and the ensuing polarized reception of Smetana generally affected his work at the Provisional Theatre; the composer felt so much resistance that he prepared to resign and leave for a concert tour. In October 1872, however, several of Smetana’s advocates, including Ferdinand Heller and composers like Zdeněk Fibich and Dvořák, submitted a petition calling for his reappointment as director. Though still controversial, Smetana’s position at the theatre from that point on became more secure; he even gained a raise and, though challenged in a second performance review in February 1874, remained conductor.

Smetana completed his fourth opera, Libuše, in 1872, but withheld the score for the opening of the National Theatre in 1881. This circumstance meant that Smetana brought no new opera before the public between Dalibor’s première in 1866 and the première of his fifth opera, Dvě vdovy (‘The Two Widows’) in 1874, after which a group of Smetana’s advocates presented him with a gilded baton. Smetana began work on another opera, Hubička (‘The Kiss’), which he hoped would be a ‘sister’ to The Bartered Bride shortly thereafter. The successful première of The Kiss, on 7 November 1876, as well as those of his seventh and eighth completed operas, Tajemství (‘The Secret’, 1878) and Čertova stěna (‘The Devil’s Wall’, 1882), reflected not only Smetana’s success in meeting the interests of his audiences, but also the onset of his deafness in 1874, which softened responses to his works.

4. Final years, 1874–84

Smetana recorded the sound of ringing in his ears – the most obvious symptom of his syphilis – for the first time in July 1874. The following September he submitted what became his letter of resignation to the Provisional Theatre and in time was granted an annual pension of 1200 gulden in exchange for permission to stage his operas without payment. To save money, Smetana moved his family in June 1876 from Prague to live with his eldest daughter, Žofie, by then married to the forester Josef Schwarz, in Jabkenice near Mladá Boleslav. Smetana had already completed the first two movements of Má vlast, ‘Vyšehrad’ and ‘Vltava’, in 1874, but he wrote the cycle’s remaining four movements in Jabkenice over the next five years. He also completed his last three operas while living in Jabkenice, as well as his autobiographical String Quartet No. 1 ‘Z mého života’ (‘From my Life’), in which the first violin’s sustained harmonic E during the fourth movement illustrated the ringing he had heard at the beginning of his hearing loss. Smetana also composed both series of Czech Dances for the piano and the song cycle Večerní písně (‘Evening Songs’) at Jabkenice, as well as the choruses Píseň na moři (‘Song of the Sea’), Věno (‘Dedication’), and Modlitba (‘Prayer’), the latter two of which were written for the 20th anniversary of the Prague Hlahol.

In the Czech musical and cultural world Smetana gradually became recognized as the chief representative of a Czech national music. The process of equating Smetana’s personal style with a national style was consolidated through the second half of the 1870s, and continued after his death. Smetana himself was fully aware of the role some of his works had begun to fill; the more the Czech public grew to know his compositions, the greater became his sense of obligation, as he acknowledged in a letter to Ludevít Procházka (31 August 1882); in this he also refused to add a comic supplement for The Two Widows:

I must seek to keep that honorable and glorious position which my compositions have gained for me in my nation and in my country. – According to my merits and according to my efforts I am a Czech composer and the creator of the Czech style in the branches of dramatic and symphonic music – exclusively Czech…. I cannot work with such a frivolous text; such music disgusts me and, if I were to do it, I would only prove to the whole world that I write whatever they want from me for money.

Smetana was made an honorary member of several musical societies and became the occasion for numerous celebrations through the end of his life. A gala concert, on 4 January 1880, commemorated the 50th anniversary of his first appearance as a performer. The evening’s festivities included the premières of his symphonic poems ‘Tábor’ and ‘Blaník’ (the final two movements of Má vlast) as well as his Evening Songs. In September of that year, Smetana’s birthplace organized the ceremonial unveiling of a plaque in his honour. The 100th performance of The Bartered Bride on 5 May 1882 was such a popular event that an encore, second ‘100th performance’, also had to be given. The first collective performance of Má vlast on 5 November 1882 was significantly remarkable in Smetana’s career, as was the ceremonial opening of the National Theatre on 11 June 1881 with his Libuše, which had won the competition for this purpose. Smetana’s concert in Písek on 4 October 1881 in aid of rebuilding the theatre after a fire was his last appearance as a pianist; the theatre reopened with another performance of Libuše on 18 November 1883.

In 1884 a banquet celebrating Smetana’s 60th birthday took place without him. His worsening health meant that in April he had to be transferred to the Prague Lunatic Asylum, where he died on 12 May 1884. The orchestral cycle Pražský karneval (‘The Prague Carnival’) and the opera Viola based on Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night (which he had begun in 1874 before The Kiss and resumed in 1883) remained incomplete at his death.

5. Operas

Smetana was not the first composer to write operas in Czech, but his were the first to find a permanent place in the Czech repertory and thus to form the basis for a continuous tradition that has lasted to this day. Composers such as František Škroup had written operas in Czech from the 1820s onwards (Škroup himself was preceded by half a century of semi-amateur attempts), but apart from Škroup’s The Tinker, none was given more than a few times.

The opening of the Czech Provisional Theatre in 1862 provided the greatest incentive towards the establishment of a permanent Czech operatic tradition. The first opera given there was Cherubini’s Les deux journées – there was no suitable Czech piece. Even before Smetana’s The Brandenburgers was staged in 1866, a German opera by his older contemporary Vladimír Skuherský had been translated into Czech and given at the Provisional Theatre, and The Templars in Moravia by Smetana’s younger contemporary Karel Šebor had narrowly anticipated Smetana’s première. As well as Šebor, other Czech composers of the new generation such as Karel Bendl, Richard Rozkošný, and Vilém Blodek were all enthusiastically composing operas – their premières mingled with those of Smetana – but of their operas only one, Blodek’s unassuming one-act In the Well, has maintained a place in the Czech repertory. It is the canon of Smetana’s eight completed operas which dominates the early history of Czech opera, and they provided explicit models for his contemporaries and successors.

As Smetana’s first four operas were some of the first attempts to create specifically Czech works in the genre, the stakes surrounding them were particularly high. The choices of operatic model made by the composer, especially Wagnerian models – how, why, and when he called on them – were interpreted in terms of his political alliances or assumptions about the Czech nation as much as in terms of his aesthetic preferences or pragmatic decisions. The quotation of folksong (not unrelated to the reception of Wagner) also became a charged point of discussion among his audiences. Because Smetana composed operas that were deeply eclectic in style, and because he spoke inconsistently over the course of his career about Wagner and folksong quotation, he became a particularly malleable subject for scholars through the 20th century.

Smetana’s first opera, The Brandenburgers in Bohemia, well illustrates his eclecticism. The opera called on the French grand opera tradition of situating individual dramas against large-scale historical events: it is set during the 13th-century occupation of Bohemia by Margrave Otto V of Brandenburg and his armies. It also featured Italian, especially Rossinian, aria forms, including several cantabile-cabaletta pairs, and the outer acts followed a concertato-stretta formula. As scholars Marta Ottlová and Milan Pospíšil also point out, the opera includes sections of ‘quasi-Wagnerian arioso’. Altogether, this means that Smetana’s first opera – the work he submitted to Count Harrach’s competition as the best serious Czech opera – was deeply international. Its Czechness was based on internationalism.

On the subject of folksong, Smetana is famously said to have declared during his preparations of The Brandenburgers in Bohemia that quoting folksongs in opera would result in a pastiche of melodies, rather than a unified work. Yet Smetana’s operas are saturated with pseudo-folksongs and/or choruses, usually in the forms of strophic structures, repetitive tunes, and variable meters or tempos (a slow, ruminative beginning accelerating into a more regular and faster continuation, e.g. Ludiše’s ‘folksong’ in The Brandenburgers in Bohemia). And though Smetana may not have named specific folksongs in his works, he did name a number of dance forms, for instance the skočná and the furiant in The Bartered Bride. In fact, fast 2/4 pieces with well-stressed beats and polka-like rhythmic figures underlie many of Smetana’s operas from The Bartered Bride onwards.

Rather than through Smetana’s use of specific folksongs, his works’ apparent ‘Czechness’ – like any form of nationalism – was a process of invention; listeners instilled the sounds with meaning, rather than the meaning emerging strictly from the sounds themselves. This process was particularly important for Smetana’s fourth completed opera, Libuše. Smetana considered Libuše his greatest and most nationalistically Czech work, though Libuše was also – even in the wake of the ‘music battles’ of the 1870s – the work most in dialogue with Wagnerian discourses in Smetana’s output. Leitmotives not only brought unity to and helped develop the drama of his work, but even extended into the first two symphonic poems of Má vlast. The opera’s plot was similarly in keeping with Wagner’s model of invoking a mythical past as a means of commenting on current politics and projecting a brighter future. Libuše ends with a series of tableaux vivants depicting the title character’s prophecies (Libuše was the mythological founder of Prague), beginning in 10th-century Czech history, but stopping just before Bohemia yielded to Austrian rule in the 16th century. At this point, Libuše declares, ‘My dear Czech people shall never perish, they will resist all of hell’s horrors!’ Even outside the music itself, Smetana’s decision to withhold the opera’s score for the opening of the National Theatre was consistent with Wagner’s own withholding of his Ring cycle for the opening of Bayreuth. For Czechs, the opening of the National Theatre marked their beginning of a utopian future, and, at least according to Smetana’s advocates, the performance of Libuše would initiate it.

Outside of its monumentalism, Smetana’s Libuše was also the first opera in which the composer was able to avoid mis-stressings in the Czech language – an aspect of his nationalistic works that is often mentioned. It is understandable that Smetana might have struggled with setting the Czech language in his earliest operas, since he did not deliberately cultivate the Czech language until the 1860s. At the same time, his librettists deserve a fair share of attention for their part in the matter. Karel Sabina, Smetana’s librettist for his first two operas is often quoted as apologizing for the poor libretto he provided for The Bartered Bride; the poet was also a political traitor, informing for the secret police as early as 1859, and this has made him an exceptional target for Czech historians. The librettos of Dalibor and Libuše, written by Joseph Wenzig, also had to be translated from German into Czech by a third party, Ervín Špindler, though the Czech text in these works still followed the rhythms and meters of their German originals. Eliška Krásnohorská similarly featured high-style iambics (alien to Czech’s distinctive first-syllable stress) prominently in her librettos for Smetana’s last three operas, which led to less natural-sounding word-setting than Smetana had achieved earlier with the trochees in The Two Widows.

Smetana’s last four operas were particularly well received, in no small part because they received their premières during and after the onset of his deafness. All of these were comedies, the later ones increasingly serious, and all concerned the healing of a central relationship, especially through the passage of years; Smetana’s later central couples are distinctly middle-aged, one of them usually a widow or a widower, or long unmarried. Healing is achieved in The Two Widows, on a text by Emaneul Züngel, by shock treatment, but in the remaining operas, all on texts by the poet Krásnohorská, the healing takes place internally and is suggested by physical metaphor: in the deep forest (The Kiss), in the dark tunnel (The Secret), or by a perilous crossing of the swollen waters of the Vltava (The Devil’s Wall). Such plots had little to do with contemporary operatic models and much more to do with Shakespeare’s comedies and romances or with Mozart’s Die Zauberflöte: the Viennese musical and magical ‘quest’ plays transplanted easily to the Prague stage, and their Czech successors were a dominant strain in Czech theatre of the generation before Smetana and Krásnohorská.

6. Orchestral works

Smetana continued to study symphonic writing even after completing his first extended orchestral composition, the Jubel-Ouvertüre (1848–9). His copies survive of orchestral excerpts from a variety of sources (Beethoven’s Symphonies nos.2 and 9 and Leonora Overture no.1 op.138, Mendelssohn’s overtures Die schöne Melusine and Meeresstille und glückliche Fahrt, Weber’s Jubel-Overtüre and overture to Der Freischütz, and Berlioz’s arrangement of Léopold de Meyer’s Marche marocaine), as do fragments and sketches that preceded the composition of his Triumf-Sinfonie (1853–4). Smetana wrote this symphony to celebrate the marriage between Emperor Franz Joseph I and Elisabeth of Bavaria, though the Viennese court never officially accepted his dedication; as was appropriate to the occasion, Smetana used Haydn’s melody for the Austrian National Anthem of the day as a unifying theme for the symphony. The tune first appears briefly at the conclusion of the development of the first movement; it is transformed to become the second subject of the slow movement; and its full version is displayed in the grandiose coda of the finale. Smetana’s incorporation of the melody was aligned with the tradition of composing variations and overtures from hymn melodies, but its presence, especially within the later politics of the Revival, and later in the first half of the 20th century, made the work fairly unpopular. Smetana performed the symphony at his début as a conductor on 26 February 1855 and for the second time in Göteborg in 1860. It was performed in 1882 by Adolf Čech, at whose instigation Smetana, who continued to value the work, revised it and gave it the Czech title of Slavnostní symfonie.

Smetana’s symphonic poems form the core of his orchestral output. He began composing his first two, Richard III and Wallenstein’s Camp, in Göteborg just after visiting Liszt in Weimar in 1857. His Hakon Jarl, which he also composed while in Sweden, was the first work he specifically labelled a ‘symphonic poem’ (he had described Richard III as a ‘musical illustration’ in a letter to Josef Proksch on 9 September 1858, and as a ‘fantasia for full orchestra’ at its première) and the composer’s first deliberately nationalistic work in the genre – though on a Swedish, not Czech, narrative. All three symphonic poems received their premières in their full orchestral versions only once Smetana had returned to Prague; the first two on 5 January 1862, and the last on 24 February 1864.

He completed the first two movements of what would later be named Má vlast, titled ‘Vyšehrad’ (named for the mythological founding place of Prague) and ‘Vltava’ (or ‘Die Moldau’ in German, the river that runs through Prague and alongside the cliffs of Vyšehrad) in full score in 1874. These first two movements share important connections with Smetana’s fourth composed opera, Libuše, which he completed in 1872. All three works are set in mythical locations and correspondingly feature common leitmotives, especially to coincide with utterances of the word ‘Vyšehrad’ in Libuše and to illustrate running water in ‘Vltava’. (The leitmotive’s iteration in ‘Vltava’ also closely resembles Wagner’s ‘Rhine’ leitmotive in the Ring.) Smetana’s use of overlapping programmatic and musical content, then, spans both multiple works and genres.

Smetana added to his collection of nationalistically Czech symphonic poems with a second pair, ‘Šárka’ (the name of a female warrior, well known from early Czech legends) and ‘Z českých luhů a hájů’ (‘From Bohemian Fields and Groves’), which he completed in 1875. He added two more symphonic poems, ‘Tábor’ (the name of a Hussite camp) and ‘Blaník’ (named for a mountain in which, according to legend, Czech warriors lie in waiting to rescue their homeland), again from 1878–9. These last two movements share the Hussite hymn ‘Ktož jsú Boží bojovníci’ (‘Ye Who Are Warriors of God’; the Hussites were 15th-century religious warriors considered Czech heroes by nationalists during the Revival) – the same hymn Smetana had also scored into the fifth and sixth tableaux of Libuše’s prophesies in Libuše. Má vlast, comprising these six symphonic poems in a single cycle, did not receive a première as a whole until 5 November 1882.

Smetana indicated his interest in writing a second cycle of symphonic poems in a letter to Ludevít Procházka on 25 February 1880: ‘I would write…orchestral symphonic poems under the title “Böhmischer Karneval” or “Prager Karneval”, in which not only Czech dances would occur but also small scenes and characters, for example from my operas, as masques’. In 1883 he began composition, but managed to complete only the first section, the Introduction and Polonaise.

7. Chamber music

Smetana wrote his Piano Trio in G minor in response to the death of his first-born child, Bedřiška (Friederike), whom he considered musically talented. The work’s three movements are unified by thematic variations, reminiscences, and transformations, and it received its première on 3 December 1855, with the composer at the piano. Some critics argued that its ‘rhapsodic’ structure was inappropriate to chamber music, but the work was generally warmly received. In May 1857 Smetana shortened its first and third movements and in 1858 gave this new version its première in Göteborg.

The First String Quartet ‘Z mého života’ (‘From my Life’) was composed in 1876, 20 years after the Piano Trio. Smetana’s advocate Ludevít Procházka, who helped found the Czech-German Chamber Music Society in Prague, is likely to have suggested such a work; Smetana’s start on the piece was announced at the society’s first concert on 19 February 1877. Five programmes exist for the work, Smetana providing the first of these in a letter to Josef Srb on 12 April 1878: ‘I wanted to depict in music the course of my life…the composition is almost only a private one and so purposely written for four instruments which, as in a small circle of friends, talk among themselves about what has oppressed me so significantly’. In lieu of a scherzo, the outer parts of the second movement feature a polka, following the precedent of Fibich’s and Dvořák’s string quartets. In other works, Smetana called on the polka as a symbol of Czech country life and Czech local colour; here it harks back to Smetana’s love of dancing in his youth. In the coda of the finale, before the reminiscence of the lyrical theme from the first movement, a very high sustained note (E′″) is heard, illustrating the onset of Smetana’s deafness. As Smetana explained in the same letter to Srb on 12 August 1878, ‘I allowed myself this little trifle because it was so crucial for me’. The work received its public première on 29 March 1877 at a UB-hosted concert and received several international performances during Smetana’s lifetime (in 1880 in Weimar on Liszt’s initiative, but also in Hamburg, Vienna, Meiningen, Magdeburg, Paris, Dresden, Moscow, and overseas).

Procházka is also likely to have requested Smetana’s last substantial chamber work, his Second String Quartet in D minor. Smetana composed the quartet in 1882–3, at a time when his deteriorating health meant that he was able to compose only in snatches. This circumstance has informed many commentators’ views on the work, which extends beyond the norms of the genre. The work is remarkable for its shortwindedness, its aphoristic character, and the density of its musical expression (for instance the first movement is a carefully thought out miniature double-function form). It is significant that a comment by Arnold Schoenberg (although not substantiated) has been handed down in Smetana literature from the 1920s that it was this quartet which ‘opened the world to him’.

8. Piano works

A wide variety of piano works are reflected in Smetana’s compositions from the 1840s and 50s. During his self-taught period, standard dance genres, especially polkas, are most common. Smetana’s piano works date from his composition studies with Josef Proksch from the beginning of 1844. Smetana completed his first piano cycle, Bagatelles et impromptus, at this time; his use of poeticized salon pieces and songs without words in the cycle link the collection with works by Mendelssohn, Henselt, and Schumann. Smetana did not assign his first opus number until after completing his studies, identifying his Six morceaux caractéristiques as op.1 probably to add weight to their dedication to Liszt. Smetana also composed in a wide range of genres. He planned to write a cycle of albumleaves in all 24 major and minor keys during this period, though he never completed the project. Instead, he grouped some of the albumleaves into his opp.2 and 3 as well as the Skizzen opp.4 and 5, which he dedicated to Clara Schumann. Smetana wrote increasingly stylized polkas from 1848 to 1854. Works like his Trois polkas de salon, op.7 and the Trois polkas poétiques, op.8 both reflect this trend, and the impulse culminated in his Souvenir de Bohême en forme de polkas, opp.12–13 (1859–60). Smetana also wrote virtuosic compositions for his own performances. These pieces included a transcription of Schubert’s Der Neugierige from Die schöne Müllerin; the concert etude Am Seegestade: eine Erinnerung; and cadenzas for Mozart’s and Beethoven’s piano concertos. His other virtuosic works included a fantasia on Böhmische Melodien and a Fantasie na české národní písně (Fantasia on Czech Folksongs).

Smetana returned to piano music again only decades later with his cycle Rêves (1875). Its movements were dedicated to his former female aristocratic pupils, who in 1874 organized a benefit concert for his trip to foreign ear specialists. Smetana’s two sets of Czech Dances (1877 and 1879), the first of which were polkas, were inspired by Chopin’s mazurkas. Smetana also explained in a letter to his publisher, Velebín Urbánek, in April 1879, ‘I suggest publishing folkdances under the title Czech Dances. Every dance under its own name, e.g. “Furiant”, “Skočná”, “Rejdovák and Rejdovačka”, “Sousedská”, “Hulán”, etc.… Dvořák gives his pieces only the general name “Slawische Tänze” with people not knowing which they are, and whether [such genres] exist at all; we should show which dances with real names we Czechs have’.

9. ‘Smetana’, scholarship, and the composer’s legacy

Smetana became his own monument of Czech nationalism in the minds of his advocates after his death, and as such, his legacy warranted protection. Eliška Krásnohorská famously burned several of Smetana’s letters that included poor Czech grammar so that the composer appeared more ‘Czech’, and the important music critic Václav Juda Novotný altered some of Smetana’s harmonies in publications of the composer’s scores. Smetana’s 19th- and turn-of-the-century advocates, then, fundamentally manipulated the composer’s source materials. In other instances, individuals like Otakar Hostinský moved to disparage other composers in order to enhance Smetana’s legacy. Hostinský had been Smetana’s voice in the ‘music battles’ of the 1870s, and vilified Dvořák for breaking from Smetana’s model upon the première of Dvořák’s Dimitrij in 1882. Hostinský gained a privileged position in promoting his interpretations when he became one of the first ten lecturers in the arts faculty of the newly established University in Prague that same year.

If Smetana’s supporters had already fundamentally shaped how the composer would appear to future generations, the radical Smetana advocate and looming political figure Zdeněk Nejedlý further monumentalized the composer’s myth. Nejedlý began his career as a musicologist, completing his studies with Hostinský at Prague University. But during the early 20th century, and especially following the formation of the new, democratic First Czechoslovak Republic in 1918, scholars and intellectuals like Nejedlý also acted as the nation’s policy makers. Nejedlý’s unfinished, four-volume Smetana biography (1924–33, the work never passed beyond Smetana’s childhood) speaks to such formulations of scholars-as-politicians: the author’s supposedly ‘true’ renderings of the composer – both factually and moralistically – also represented Nejedlý’s ‘true’ ability to think on behalf of the Czech nation. He was a man whose research (including his helping to found the Bedřich Smetana Museum, still in operation today) proved that he belonged in political office.

And Nejedlý did enjoy a successful political career. He was awarded the position of Minister of Education seving from 1945 to 1946 and again under the Communist administration, serving from 1948 to 1952. Nejedlý enacted a variety of diverse and sometimes devastating policies while in political office, but he also used the office towards reinforcing his understandings of Smetana for the whole nation. Under the policies of Nejedlý’s so-called ‘Czech realism’, middle-school and university curricula were to incorporate units on the composer; cities and towns were to host Smetana-focused ‘public education’ events; radio stations were to broadcast Smetana’s works; and television studios were to feature the composer in their films. Nejedlý’s policies persisted even after his death and through the last decades under communism for a number of reasons, but partly because the Czechoslovak Communist Party remained one of the most hard-line after Normalization in 1968 and up to 1989.

Smetana’s prominence under the Soviet administration made him a logical point of reference upon the regime’s end in 1989. In 1990 the conductor Rafael Kubelík, who fled Czechoslovakia in 1948, famously returned to conduct the Czech Philharmonic in performances of Má vlast among others of Smetana’s works during that year’s Prague Spring Music Festival. Even then, Smetana had become so enmeshed in state ideology by that point that he also became a kind of empty signifier – a monument so fundamentally Czech that the composer was left relatively unexamined in scholarship, if not part of a past legacy to shed.

This history has important consequences for modern Smetana researchers. Not only were his primary sources carefully manipulated (they also remain unpublished, a problem that the scholars Olga Mojžíšová and Milan Pospíšil have been working to remedy), but discussions of Smetana in secondary sources are framed by careful and subtly shifting political subtexts – from authors on both the supposed ‘Eastern’ and ‘Western’ sides of the Cold War. As a result, Smetana today exists primarily as an ever-unfolding discourse – a ‘Smetana’ in relation to a nearly unattainable Smetana that once existed in history. This circumstance provides researchers with the opportunity to learn about the changing needs, interests, and anxieties of Smetana scholars through history as much as the thinking of Smetana himself. It also means, however, that research on the composer is especially prone to participating in and reinscribing the discourses that have framed Smetana himself and his compositions since the 19th century, whether concerning Smetana’s ‘greatness’ or ‘genius’ or even in interpreting his positions on Wagnerism or ‘Czechness’.



Z pozůstalých skladeb Bedřicha Smetany [Compositions from Bedřich Smetana’s estate], vol.1–13, ed. O. Hostinský and others (Prague, 1903–12) [PS]

Souborná díla Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s collected works], vol.1, ed. Z. Nejedlý (Prague, 1924), vols.2–4, ed. O. Ostrčil (Prague, 1932–6) [SD]

Studijní vydání děl Bedřicha Smetany [Study scores of Smetana’s works], vols.1–15, ed. F. Bartoš and others (Prague, 1940–77) [SV]

Klavírní dílo Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s piano works], vols.1–5, ed. M. Očadlík and others (Prague, 1944–73) [KD]

B. Smetana: Písně [Songs], ed. J. Plavec (Prague, 1962) [P]

Facsimile editions

Prodaná nevěsta: klavírní výtah dle originálu Bedřicha Smetany [The Bartered Bride: vs according to Smetana’s original], ed. J.B. Foerster (Prague, 1923)

Zápisník motivů Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s notebook of motifs], ed. M. Očadlík (Prague, 1942)

Prodaná nevěsta: první náčrtek Bedřicha Smetany [The Bartered Bride: Smetana’s first draft], ed. M. Očadlík (Prague, 1944)

Ouvertura k opeře Prodaná nevěsta: klavírní výtah [Overture to the opera The Bartered Bride: vs], pf 4 hands, ed. M. Očadlík (Prague, 1950)

Printed works were published in Prague unless otherwise stated; principal MS source in CZ-Pnm; titles have been taken from autographs or first editions. Where titles were not in Czech originally, Czech titles supplied by the composer or editors are given in parentheses. Where different versions of compositions exist only those which differ substantially from one another are listed. The list does not include sketches for finished compositions and tiny fragments of unfinished compositions.

JB nos. from J. Berkovec’s MS catalogue; B nos. from Bartoš catalogue (by 1973 [MS frags. to May 1868]); T nos. from Teige catalogue (1893); PT Provisional Theatre


all first produced in Prague

View large





Genre, acts



First Performance






Braniboři v Čechách [The Brandenburgers in Bohemia]

op, 3

K. Sabina


PT, 5 Jan 1866

vs (1899)

SV vol.9



Prodaná nevěsta [The Bartered Bride]

comic op



1st version



PT, 30 May 1866

SV vol.1, 2nd ed.


2nd version



PT, 29 Jan 1869


3rd version



PT, 1 June 1869

vs (1872)

4th (definitive) version



PT, 25 Sept 1870

fs (Berlin, 1892)

SD vols.2–4, SV vol.1




op, 3

J. Wenzig [Ger.], Cz. trans. E. Špindler


1st version


New Town, 16 May 1868

SV vol.5

2nd version


PT, 2 Dec 1870

vs (1884)

SV vol.5



festival op, 3

Wenzig [Ger.], Cz. trans. Špindler


National, 11 June 1881

vs (1881)

SV vol.6


Dvě vdovy [The Two Widows]

comic op, 2

E. Züngel, after P.J.F. Mallefille: Les deux veuves

1st version


PT, 27 March 1874

2nd (definitive) version


PT, 15 March 1878

vs (1914)

SV vol.7

addns for 1st publication of Ger. version


vs unauthorized version (Berlin, 1893)


Hubička [The Kiss]

folk op, 2

E. Krásnohorská, after K. Světlá


PT, 7 Nov 1876

vs (1880)

SV vol.3


Tajemství [The Secret]

comic op, 3



New Czech, 18 Sept 1878

vs (1892)

SV vol.10


Čertova stěna [The Devil’s Wall]

comic-romantic op, 3



New Czech, 29 Oct 1882

vs (1903)

SV vol.12

Viola, frag.

romantic op

Krásnohorská, after W. Shakespeare: Twelfth Night

1874–5 1883–4

concert perf., 15 March 1900; stage, National, 11 May 1924

vs (1903)

View large


View large





Píseň svobody [Song of Freedom] (J.J. Kolár), unison vv, pf, 1848; PS vol.12, SV vol.2


Zdráv budiž Josefe (Hymna ku cti českého krále) [Hail Joseph (Hymn in Honour of the Czech King)] (V. Pok-Poděbradský ), sketch, ?1848


Píseň česká [Czech Song] (J. z Hvězdy [J.J. Marek]), TTBB, op.17, 1860, arr. SATB; SV vol.2




Tři jezdci [The Three Riders] (J.V. Jahn), TTBB, 1862 (1862); SV vol.2




Odrodilec [The Renegade] (A.L. Metlińskij, trans. F.L. Čelakovský), 1st version, TTTTBBBB, 1863 (1864), arr. TTBB, 1864; SV vol.2


Odrodilec [The Renegade], 2nd version, T, T, B, B, TTBB, 1864, ed. (1923); SV vol.2




Rolnická [Farming] (V. Trnobranský), TTBB, 1868 (1869); SV vol.2


Česká píseň [Czech Song] (z Hvězdy), SATB, pf, 1868 (1870); SV vol.2


Slavnostní sbor [Ceremonial Chorus] (E. Züngel), TTBB, 1870 (1871); SV vol.2


Píseň na moři [Song of the Sea] (V. Hálek), TTBB, 1876–7 (1881); SV vol.2


Sbory trojhlasné pro ženské hlasy [Three-Part Choruses for Women’s Voices], SSA, 1878 (1881); SV vol.2: Má hvězda [My Star] (B. Peška), Přiletěly vlaštovičky [Return of the Swallows] (J.V. Sládek), Za hory slunce zapadá [The Sun Sets behind the Mountain] (Sládek)


Česká píseň [Czech Song] (z Hvězdy), SATB, orch, 1878, ed. (1923); SV vol.2


Věno [Dedication] (J. Srb-Debrnov), TTBB, 1880 (1881); SV vol.2


Modlitba [Prayer] (Srb-Debrnov), TTBB, 1880, ed. (1909); SV vol.2


Heslo [Motto] (Srb-Debrnov), 2 settings, TTBB, 1882, (?1884); SV vol.2


Naše píseň [Our Song] (Srb-Debrnov), TTBB, 1883, ed. (1924); SV vol.2

View large


all for solo voice and piano

View large





Der Pilgrim (Poutník) (F. von Schiller), unfinished, 1840, lost


Hymne zum h. Johannes von Nepomuk, 1841, lost




Schmerz der Trennung (Bolest odloučení) (C.M. Wieland), 1846 (London, 1883); P




Einladung (Vyzvání) (J.G. Jacobi), 1846; PS vol.12; P


Nehleď bolně dívko na mne [Don’t Look, my Girl, Painfully at Me], Smutně včela v poušti [Sadly the Honey-Bee in the Desert], Když se slunko zas usmívá [When the Sun Smiles Again] (F.B. Květ), sketch, frag., ?1848–9




Liebesfrühling (Jaro lásky) (F. Rückert), 1853, (1885) in Humoristické listy, suppl.28; P




Song for the tragedy Baron Goertz (E. Bozděch), 1867–8; P


Večerní písně [Evening Songs] (V. Hálek), 1879 (1880); P: 1 Kdo v zlaté struny zahrát zná [He Who Can Play the Golden Strings], 2 Nekamenujte proroky! (Do Not Stone the Prophets!), 3 Mně zdálo se [I Once Dreamed], 4 Hej, jaká radost v kole [O What Joy When Dancing], 5 Z svých písní trůn ti udělám [I’ll Build You a Throne from my Songs]

View large


View large







Minuet, B♭, ?1842; SD vol.1, SV vol.13




Bajaderen Galopp (Galop bajadérek) (Kvapík bajadér), C, ?1842; SD vol.1, SV vol.13


Overture, d, sketch, frag., ?1847; SV vol.13


Nationalgarde-Marsch (Pochod národní gardy), frag. of vn 1, 2, 1848; SV vol.13




Jubel-Ouvertüre (Velká předehra) [Grand Ov.], Slavnostní ouvertura [Ceremonial Ov.], Jásavá ouvertura [Celebratory Ov.], D, op.4, 1848–9, rev. 1883; SV vol.13


Ouverture, later title Vikinger-Fahrt (Plavba Vikingů), c, sketch, frag., ?1850; SV vol.13


Synfonie, a, sketch, frag., ?1850–53; vol.1




Triumf-Sinfonie mit Benützung der österreichischen Volkshymne (Slavnostní symfonie) (Triumfální symfonie), E, op.6, 1853–4, rev. 1881; SV vol.11


untitled work, c, sketch, frag., ?1854–6; SV vol.13




Richard III, sym. poem after W. Shakespeare, op.11, 1857–8, ed. pf 4 hands (1891), fs (Berlin, 1896); SV vol.4




Wallensteins Lager (Valdštýnův tábor), sym. poem after F. von Schiller, op.14, 1858–9, ed. (Berlin, 1896); SV vol.4




Hakon Jarl, sym. poem after A. Oehlenschläger, op.16, 1860–61, ed. (Berlin, 1896) [orig. op.15]; SV vol.4




Doktor Faust, prelude to puppet play by M. Kopecký, small orch, 1862, ed. (1945); SV vol.13


125/i, ii


Polka [called Našim děvám [To our Girls] in 1880], D, c. 1863, ed. pf arr. (1888); SV vol.13 [performed as Třasák Svoboda [Freedom] in 1865, cf JB 5:1]




Oldřich a Božena, prelude to puppet play by M. Kopecký, small orch, 1863, ed. (Brno, 1924); SV vol.8




Pochod k slavnosti Shakespearově [March for Shakespeare Festival], E, op.20, 1864, pf 4 hands (1864); SV vol.8




Fanfáry k Richardovi III. [Fanfares for Richard III], brass, timp, 1867; SV vol.8




Slavnostní předehra [Ceremonial prelude], C, 1868, ed. (1919); SV vol.8




Der Fischer (Rybář), music to tableau vivant after Goethe, hmn, hp, str, 1869, ed. (1923); SV vol.8




Libušin soud [Libuše’s Judgment], music to tableau vivant after poem from the spurious Zelenohorský MS, 1869, ed. (1923); SV vol.8


Má vlast [My Fatherland], cycle of sym. poems; SV vol.14


1 Vyšehrad, c. 1872–4, pf 4 hands (1879), fs (1880)


2 Vltava (Moldau), 1874, pf 4 hands (1879), fs (1880)


3 Šárka, 1875, pf 4 hands (1880), fs (1890)


4 Z českých luhů a hájů [From Bohemian Fields and Groves], 1875, pf 4 hands (1880), fs (1881)


5 Tábor, 1878, pf 4 hands (1880), fs (1892)


6 Blaník, 1879, pf 4 hands (1880), fs (1894)

untitled work, d, frag., 1874–8; SV vol.13


Venkovanka [The Peasant Woman], polka, 1879, pf arr. (1880); SV vol.8


Pražský karneval [The Prague Carnival], introduction and polonaise, 1883; PS vol.11 (pf 4 hands), fs (1924); SV vol.8

Grosse Sinfonie Viola als Muster, sketch, frag., 1884

View large


View large





Polka, str qt, ?1839–40, lost


Osmanen-Poka, str qt, ?1839–40, lost




String Quartet, d♭, ?1839–40, lost


Waltz, F, str qt, 1840; SD vol.1, SV vol.15 [1st vn part extant]


Overture, str qt, 1840, lost [written ‘according to Mozart’s method’]


Fantasia on opera motifs, str qt, frag., ?1840; SD vol.1, SV vol.15




Fantaisie sur un air bohémien, g, vn, pf, 1843; SD vol.1, SV vol.15


Composition, F, ob, pf, frag., ?1846–7; SV vol.15

String trio, B♭, frag., ?1850


Piano Quartet, A, sketch, frag., ?1852–3; SV vol.15


96, 104


Piano Trio, g, op.15 [MS op.9], 1855, rev. 1857 (Hamburg, 1880); SV vol.15


String Quartet [no.1] ‘Z mého života’ [From my Life], e, 1876 (1880); SV vol.15


Z domoviny [From the Homeland], 2 pieces vn, pf, 1880 (1881): 1 A, 2 g; SV vol.15


String Quartet no.2, d, 1882–3, parts (1889), score (Berlin, 1896); SV vol.15

View large

Piano solo

View large







Waltz, c. 1829–31, lost




Galop, c. 1829–31, lost


Galopp (Kvapík), D, inc., c. 1831; SD vol.1, facs.


untitled works, c. 1835–40, lost


Variations on a Theme from I Capuletti ed i Montecchi, inc., 1839–40; SD vol.1




Louisen-Polka (Louisina Polka), E♭, 1840; SD vol.1, KD vol.2




Georginen-Poka (Jiřinkova Polka) [Dahlia Polka], D, 1840; SD vol.1, KD vol.2




Galopp di bravoura, B♭, 1840; SD vol.1, KD vol.5


Variationen über ein Motiv aus der Oper Montecchi e Capuletti (Variace na thema z Belliniho opery Montecchi e Capuletti), inc., 1840; SD vol.1


Adagio, A♭, inc., ?1839–1841; SD vol.1




Marien-Polka (Mariina Polka), F, frag., 1841; SD vol.1, KD vol.2




Grosse Polka (Velká Polka) (Polčinka), b♭, inc. sketch, 1841; SD vol.1, KD vol.2 [orig. composition lost]

11:10, 12

[2] Waltzes, both A♭, 1841, lost


Galop, B, 1841, lost


Katharinen-Polka, 1841, lost


Elisabethen-Galopp, F, 1841, lost



6, 7, 11

[3] Impromptus, e♭, b, A♭, 1841–2; SD vol.1


Aus dem Studentenleben (Ze studentského života), polka, C, ?1842, rev. 1858; PS vol.13, SD vol.1, KD vol.2


Etüde, c, inc., 1842; SD vol.1




Duo sans mots (Duo beze slov), E, 1842; SD vol.1




Quadrille (Kadryla, Čtverylka), B♭, 1843; SD vol.1




untitled (Rhapsodie), A♭, frag., 1843; SD vol.1




untitled (Mazurkové capriccio), c♯, frag., 1843; PS vol.13




Quadrille, F, c. 1843; SD vol.1




Erinnerung an Pilsen (Vzpomínka na Plzeň), polka, E♭, 1843; KD vol.2




Walzer (Valčíky), 1844; PS vol.13: 1 c/E♭, 2 A♭, 3 E♭/G, 4 c, 5 A♭, ?frag.


40 ?48


Bagatelles et impromptus (Bagately a impromptus), 1844, ed. (1903); KD vol.1: 1. L’innocence (Nevinnost), C; 2. L’abattement (Sklíčenost), a; 3. Idylle (Idyla), G; 4. Le desir (Touha), e; 5. La joie (Radost), D; 6. Le conte (Pohádka), b; 7. L’amour (Láska), A; 8. La discorde (Nesvár), f♯




Moderato (Lístek do památníku Kateřině Kolářové) [Albumleaf for K. Kolářová], B, 1844, ed. (1924); KD vol.4


untitled, B♭, C, inc., 1844; KD vol.4


untitled, A♭, inc., 1844


In ein Stammbuch der Fräulein Josephine Finke (Josefině Finkeové), E, 1845; KD vol.4


untitled, F, f, inc., 1845; KD vol.4


Ins Stammbuch dem Jean Kunz (Jeanu Kunzovi), C, 1845; KD vol.4


In ein Stammbuch dem Ulwer (Václavu Ulverovi), e♭; PS vol.13, KD vol.4


Pensée fugitive, d, 1845, ed. (1954); KD vol.4


Allegro (Alžbětě Felicii Thunové), A♭, 1845, ed. (1907); KD vol.4




Polka, E♭, 1846; PS vol.4, KD vol.2




Lesní city a dojmy: nocturno [Woodland Feelings and Impressions], f, 1847, rev. 1883 (1883) [org. title Impromptu]


Romanza (Romance), B♭, ?1847, rev. 1883; PS vol.9




Rondo capriccio (Allegro capriccioso), b, ?1847; PS vol.9, KD vol.5


Fantasie na narodní písně [Fantasia on National Songs], E, frag., 1847; KD vol.5


Charakterstück (Charakteristická skladba), C♭, 1847–8; PS vol.13, KD vol.1




Six morceaux caractéristiques (Šest charakteristických skladeb), op.1, 1847–8 (Leipzig, 1851); KD vol.1: 1. Im Walde (V lese), C; 2. Erwachende Leidenschaft (Vznikající vášeň), c; 3. Das Schäfermädchen (Pastýřka), G; 4. Die Sehnsucht (Touha), g; 5. Der Krieger (Válečník), D; 6. Die Verzweiflung (Zoufalství), d




Caprice, g, frag., 1848; PS vol.10, KD vol.5 [orig. title Rhapsodie]




Marsch der Prager Studenten-Legion (Studenten-Marsch) (Pochod pražské studentské legie), F, 1848 (1848)




Nationalgarde-Marsch (Pochod národní gardy), D, 1848 (1848); SV vol.3 [orch. J. Tarlis]


Polka, f, 1848; KD vol.2 [orig. version of op.7 no.2]


Polka, C, frag., 1848; KD vol.2


Polka, e, sketch, frag., 1848–9; KD vol.2


untitled albumleaves (lístky do památníku), both D, inc., ?1848–9; KD vol.4


untitled albumleaves (lístky do památníku), G, g, b, ?1848–9; PS vol.1, KD vol.4




Hochzeitsszenen (Svatební scény), 1849, ed. (Berlin, 1898); KD vol.1: 1. Der Hochzeitszug (Svatební průvod), C; 2. Das Brautpaar (Ženich a nevěsta), A♭; 3. Das Hochzeitsfest: der Tanz (Svatební veselí: tanec), A


Übungen in den ersten rhythmischen Bildungen, C, c. 1844–9, partly lost


Acht rhythmische Übungen, C, c. 1844–9


Thema mit Veränderungen, G, c. 1844–9


Fingerübungen auf der Grundlage der Tonleiter, C, c. 1844–9, partly lost


[16] Höhere Bildungen, c. 1845–9, nos.1–12 lost


untitled albumleaves, A [orig. version of op.5 no.1, cf 1:67], B♭, 1849, ed. (London, 1958); KD vol.4

2:25, 26, 22

untitled albumleaves (lístky do památníku), d, G♭, F♯, all frags., ?1848–50; KD vol.4




Melodien-Schatz (Poklad melodií) [i], c. 1849–50, ed. (1923): 1. Preludium, C; 2. Capriccio, a; 3. G


Melodien-Schatz (Poklad melodií) [ii] 1849–50, ed. (1967): 1. Moderato, C; 2. G; 3. Toccata, D; 4. Moderato, A; 5. Tempo di marcia, E




Stammbuch-Blätter (Lístky do památníku), op.2, 1849–50 (Leipzig, 1851); KD vol.4: 1. Prélude, C; 2. Chanson, a; 3. G; 4. c; 5. D; 6 b


untitled albumleaf (lístek do památníku), b♭, ?1848–52; PS vol.1, KD vol.4



untitled albumleaf (lístek do památníku), g, frag., ?1849–54; KD vol.4




Toccatina, B, ?1849–54, rev. 1883; PS vol.1, KD vol.4 [orig. albumleaf]


untitled albumleaf (lístek do památníku), e♭, ?1849–54; PS vol.1, KD vol.4




Polkas, E, g, A, 1850–53; PS vol.3, KD vol.2


Polka, F♯, before 1853; KD vol.2 [orig. version of op.7 no.1]




Trois polkas de salon (Tři) salonní polky), op.7, 1848–54 (1854–5); KD vol.2: 1. F♯; 2. f; 3. E




Trois polkas poétiques (Tři poetické polky), op.8, 1848–54 (1854–5); KD vol.2: 1. E♭; 2. g; 3. A♭


97, 79


Andante, E♭, 1849–52 (1856); KD vol.4 [incl. 1st version]


Polka, f, 1853–5; PS vol.4, KD vol.2


100, 82


3 Stücke (Tři skladby) (Lístky do památníku), op.3, 1848–56, nos.1–2 (Stuttgart, 1857); no.3 PS vol.1; KD vol.4 [incl. 1st version of no.1]: 1. An Robert Schumann (Robertu Schumannovi), E; 2. Wanderlied (Píseň pocestného), A; 3. Es siedet und braust (Je slyšet sykot, hukot a svist), c♯ [after Schiller: Der Taucher]


101, 81, 83


Skizzen (Črty), op.4, 1848–57 (1858); KD vol.4 [incl. 1st versions of nos.1, 4]: 1. Preludium, f♯; 2. Idylle (Idyla), B; 3. Erinnerung (Vzpomínka), A♭; 4. Beharrliches Streben (Vytrvalá snaha), g♯




Skizzen (Črty), op.5, 1848–57 (1858); KD vol.4: 1. Scherzo-Polka, F♯; 2. Schwermut (Zádumčivost), g♯; 3. Freundliche Landschaft (Přivětivá krajina), D♭; 4. Rhapsodie, f


Polka, G, sketch, ?1850; PS vol.4, KD vol.2 [used in orch polka Venkovanka, 1879, cf 1:115]


untitled, f, frag., ?1850–53

Erinnerung an Weimar, A♭, 1857


Cid campeador – Ximene, tone poem, sketch, frag., 1857–8; KD vol.5




transcriptions, op.10, of Schubert’s Die schöne Müllerin, 1858: 1. Trockne Blumen, lost; 2. Der Neugierige (Zvědavý); PS vol.6, KD vol.5




Ballade (Balada), e, sketch, frag., 1858; KD vol.5




Ball vision, Polka-Rhapsodie (Vidění na plese, Vision at the Ball), a/C, 1858; PS vol.13, KD vol.2


Polka, C, 1858; KD vol.2 [alternative (?later) version of 1:71a]


113, 108

75, 71

Konzert-Etüde (Koncertní etuda), C, 1858, ed. (1962); KD vol.5 [orig. version, PS vol.5, KD vol.5]

1:74a, b,



Bettina Polka, C, 1859; 2nd version 1883, ed. (1944); PS vol.4 [1st version], KD vol.2 [both versions]




Macbeth (Skica ke scéně Macbeth a čarodějnice ze Shakespeara) [Sketch to the Scene Macbeth and the Witches], 1859; PS vol.13, KD vol.5




Souvenir de Bohême en forme de polkas (Vzpomínky na Čechy ve formě polek), op.12, a, e, op.13, e, E♭, 1859–60 (1865); KD vol.2




Am Seegestade—eine Erinnerung (Na břehu mořském—Vzpomínka), concert study, g♯, 1861 (1864); KD vol.5


Grosse Fantasie (Skladba a moll), a, frag., before 1862; KD vol.5 [title from the last rev.]


Ins Stammbuch des Fräulein Marie Proksch (Marii Prokschové), C, 1862; KD vol.4

Cantabile, A, 1862




Fantasie na české národní písně [Fantasia on Czech Folksongs], B, 1862 (1867); KD vol.5


Rêves (Sny), characteristic pieces, 1875 (1879): 1. Le bonheur éteint (Zaniklé štěstí), E♭; 2. La consolation (Útěcha), A♭; 3. En Bohême: scène champêtre (V Čechách: vesnický výjev), a/A; 4. Au salon (V saloně), e; 5. Près du château (Před hradem), B; 6. La fête des paysans bohémiens (Slavnost českých venkovanů), g

112/i, ii

České tance [Czech Dances], vol.1, 1877 (1879): 1. Polka, f♯; 2. Polka, a; 3. Polka, F; 4. Polka, B♭; vol.2, 1879 (1880–81): 1. Furiant, a; 2. Slepička [The Little Hen], B♭; 3. Oves [Oats], A♭; 4. Medvěd [The Bear], C; 5. Cibulička [The Little Onion], g; 6. Dupák, D; 7. Hulán [The Uhlan], A; 8. Obkročák, E♭; 9. Sousedská, B; 10. Skočná, F [1, 6, 8–10 are names of dances]


Andante, f, 1880, facs. (1880); KD vol.4


Romanza (Romance), g, 1881 (1882); KD vol.4

View large


View large





for Mozart’s Pf Conc. in d, k466, 1st and 3rd movts, 1856; KD vol.5


for Mozart’s Pf Conc. in c, k491, 1st movt, ?1856; KD vol.5


for Mozart’s Pf Conc. in B♭, k595, 1st and 3rd movts, ?1864; KD vol.5




for Beethoven’s Pf Conc. in c, op.37, 1st movt, 1st version, 1857–61, ed. (1951), 2nd version, 1872; KD vol.5

View large

Other keyboard

for piano 4 hands unless otherwise stated

View large





Erinnerung an Neustadt (Vzpomínka na Nové Město nad Metují), polka, 1840, lost




Overture, c, 1842; SD vol.1




Overture, A, 1842; SD vol.1




untitled, g, 2 pf, 8 hands, 1845




6 Preludes, C, c, G, g, D, F, org, 1846, ed. (1967)




Sonatensatz, e, 2 pf, 8 hands, 1849; PS vol.7




Jugend-Rondo (Rondo pro mládež), C, 2 pf, 8 hands, 1850; PS vol.8


Sonata, E♭, 2 pf, sketch frag., c. 1850



pf arrs. of the works of Smetana and others (Beethoven, Bertini, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Wagner), partly lost

View large

Compositional studies


View large





1 Komposition für Holzblasinstr. mit doppeltem Rohrblatt, 2 cls, bns, hns, 1846–7; SV vol.13


Fantasia da Mozart. Versuch einer Instrumentierung, 1846–7; SV vol.13

View large

Piano solo

View large





harmony, counterpoint, melody, 1844–5; song form, marches, fugues, canons, 1845; KD vol.3 [selection]




[2] Studies, 1846; PS vol.5, KD vol.3: 1. C [in prelude form]; 2. a [in song form]




variations, rondo form, sonata form, 1846; KD vol.3 [selection]




Sonata, g, 1846, ed. (1949); KD vol.3

View large

Solo voice and piano

View large







Liebchen’s Blick (Pohled mé dívky) (B. Breiger), 1846; PS vol.12, P




Lebewohl! (Sbohem!) (W. Melhop), 1846; PS vol.12, P

View large

Other vocal

View large





Jesu meine Freude, chorale, SATB, 1846; SV vol.2


Ich hoffe auf den Herrn, fugue, SATB, 1846; SV vol.2


Lobet den Herrn, introduction and fugue, SATB, 1846; SV vol.2


Heilig ist der Herr Zebaoth (Isaiah vi.3), SATB, SATB, 1846; SV vol.2


Scapulis suis obumbrabit tibi Dominus, off, SATB, hns, str, org, 1846; SV vol.2


Meditabitur in mandatis tuis (Offertorium à la Händel), off, SATB, hns, str, org, 1846; SV vol.2


recitative, 1846


Aus Mozarts Titus: Duettino on the text of the op, 1847

View large


A: Catalogues, bibliographies, and discographies
  • K. Teige: Příspěvky k životopisu a umělecké činnosti Mistra Bedřicha Smetany, vol.1: Skladby Smetanovy: kommentovaný katalog všech skladeb Mistrových v chronologickém postupu [Contributions to the biography and artistic activities of Maestro Bedřich Smetana, vol.1: Smetana’s compositions: annotated catalogue of all the Maestro’s works in chronological order] (Prague, 1893)
  • M. Očadlík: Smetanovská diskografie (Prague, 1939)
  • J. Bartoš: Smetanova hudba na gramofonových deskách [Smetana’s music on gramophone records] (Prague, 1947)
  • H. Séquardtová: ‘Soupis rukopisů Bedřicha Smetany’ [List of Smetana manuscripts], Sborník Musea Bedřicha Smetany, 1 (1959), 41–113
  • M. Očadlík: ‘Soupis dopisů Bedřicha Smetany’ [List of Smetana’s letters], MMC, no.15 (1960) [whole issue]; see also F. Bartoš: ‘Příspěvky k soupisu dopisů Bedřicha Smetany’ [Contributions to the list of Smetana’s letters], HV, vol.1 (1964), 645–82
  • R. Budiš and V. Kafková: Bedřich Smetana: výběrová bibliografie [Smetana: selective bibliography] (Prague, 1963)
  • F. Bartoš: Tematický soupis díla Bedřicha Smetany [Thematic catalogue of the works of Bedřich Smetana], MS frag. [to May 1868], c. 1973, CZ-Pnm
  • J.R. Bennett: Smetana on 3000 Records (Blandford, 1974)
  • O. Polcarová: Bedřich Smetana: 2.3.1824–12.5.1884 (Plzeň, 1978) [list of works]
  • O. Čechová and J. Fojtíková: Bedřich Smetana (inventář fondu): S 217 [List of sources] (Prague, 1984)
  • D. Vanišová, ed.: Soupis autografů Bedřicha Smetany … v archívních fondech mimo Muzeum české hudby [A list of autographs by Bedřich Smetana … in archival collections other than the Muzeum české hudby] (Prague, 1984)
  • J. Berkovec: Tematický katalog skladeb Bedřicha Smetany [Thematic catalogue of the works of Bedřich Smetana] (MS, 1999), CZ-Pnm
  • O. Mojžíšová and M. Ottlová: The Bedřich Smetana Museum: a Guidebook (Prague, 1999) [also in Cz., Ger.]
B: Source materials
    • Z. Nejedlý, ed.: Kresby Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s drawings] (Prague, 1925)
    • M. Očadlík: Rok Bedřicha Smetany, v datech, obrazech, zápisech a poznámkách [Bedřich Smetana’s year in dates, pictures, reports, and notes] (Prague, 1950)
    • J. Plavec: Bedřich Smetana v obrazech [Smetana in pictures] (Prague, 1956, 2/1964)
    • Z. Wirth and A. Waisar: ‘Smetanova tvář’ [Smetana’s face], Sborník Musea Bedřicha Smetany, vol.1 (1959), 9–40
    • J. Kotalík: ‘Bedřich Smetana a výtvarné umění’ [Bedřich Smetana and the visual arts], Průvodce výstavami Národní galerie v Praze, vol.1 (Prague, 2/1974)
    • M. Kuna: ‘Geneze Švabinského portrétu Bedr̆icha Smetany’ [The genesis of Max Švabinský’s portrait of Bedřich Smetana: a history], HV, vol.28 (1991), 134–9
    • O. Hostinský, ed.: ‘Smetanovy dopisy’ [Smetana’s letters], Dalibor, vol.7 (1885), 18–48 passim; vol.87 (1886), 18–35 passim; vol.9 (1887), 30–48 passim
    • K. Teige: Příspěvky k životopisu a umělecké činnosti Mistra Bedřicha Smetany, vol.2: Dopisy Smetanovy: kommentovaný výbor šedesáti čtyř Mistrových dopisů [Contributions to the biography and artistic activities of Maestro Bedřich Smetana, vol.2: Smetana’s letters: a selection with commentary on 64 of the Maestro’s letters] (Prague, 1896)
    • L. Zelenka-Lerando: B. Smetana a E. Züngel (Nymburk, 1903)
    • J. Löwenbach: Bedřich Smetana a dr. Ludevít Procházka: vzájemná korespondence [Mutual correspondence] (Prague, 1914)
    • V. Balthasar: Bedřich Smetana, vol.2: Dopisy B. Smetany J. Srbovi-Debrnovovi [Smetana’s letters to Josef Srb-Debrnov] (Prague, 1924), 93–269
    • A. Dolenský: Výbor dopisů Bedřicha Smetany [Selection of Smetana’s letters] (Prague, 1928)
    • Z. Nejedlý and F. Ruth: Dopisy Bedřicha Smetany do Litomyšle [Smetana’s letters to Litomyšl] (Litomyšl, 1938)
    • M. Očadlík, ed: Eliška Krásnohorská—Bedřich Smetana: vzájemná korespondence [Mutual correspondence] (Prague, 1940)
    • F. Bartoš and Z. Němec: Z dopisů Bedřicha Smetany [From Smetana’s letters] (Prague, 1947)
    • I. Belza: ‘Pis′ma B. Smetany i St. Moniuszko k E.F. Napravniku’ [Letters of Smetana and Moniuszko to Nápravník], Akad. nauk SSSR Inst. slavyanovedeniya: Kratkiye soobscheniya, vol.14 (Moscow, 1955), 72–8
    • O. Pulkert: ‘Neznámé dopisy Bedřicha Smetany’ [Unknown letters from Bedřich Smetana (to F.B. Ulm)], HRo, vol.12 (1959), 137–40 [unabridged version in Respicio (Prague, 2000), 181–201]
    • P. Pražák: ‘Nad dopisem Žofie Schwarzové, dcery Bedřicha Smetany’ [A letter of Smetana’s daughter Žofie], Ročenka universitní knihovny v Praze 1959 (Prague, 1961), 120–47
    • F. Bartoš: ‘Několik netištěných dopisů Bedřicha Smetany’ [Some unpublished letters of Bedřich Smetana], HRo, vol.16 (1963), 476–80, 525–8
    • W. Suppan: ‘Eine Smetana-Miszelle’, SPFFBU, vol.14 (1969), 127–30
    • Z. Vokurka: ‘Ještě k vavřínům Smetanovy Hubičky (netištěný dopis Bedřicha Smetany)’ [Once more to the laurels of Smetana’s The Kiss (an unpublished letter of Bedřich Smetana)], OM, vol.2 (1970), 198–203
    • K. Mecklenburg: ‘Caveat emptor, oder Falsche Smetana-Briefe’, Festschrift Albi Rosenthal, ed. R. Elvers (Tutzing, 1984), 231–8
    • M. Kuna: ‘Žádosti Bedřicha Smetany o umělecké stipendium’ [Bedřich Smetana’s petitions for an artist’s stipend], HV, vol.25 (1988), 120–31 [with Ger. summary]
    • Smetana, Bedřich. Korespondence Correspondence I: (1840-1862), vol. 1 of Smetaniana, edited by Olga Mojžíšová, Milan Pospíšil, and Jiří Kroupa. Prague: Koniasch Latin Press and Národní muzeum, 2016.
    • Other letters in Dalibor, vol.23 (1901), 317–8; vol.25 (1903), 156–8; vol.30 (1908), 13–15, 69–70; vol.31 (1909), 29–30, 45, 95–6, 119–20, 199; vol.40 (1924), 128–31; Smetana, vol.1 (1906), 221–4, 233–8, 247–50, 259–69, vol.2 (1911), 105–8, 142–5; Světozor, vol.43 (1909), 546–834 passim; HR, vol.2 (1909), 233–46; vol.7 (1914), 277–84; vol.9 (1916), 193–8, 323–4, vol.11 (1918), 150–51; Česká hudba, vol.34/12 (1931), 67–9
    Diaries and personal statements
    • J. Srb-Debrnov: Z denníků Bedřicha Smetany (1856–1861) [From Smetana’s diaries 1856–61] (Prague, 1902); orig. pubd in Dalibor, vol.23 (1901), 39–45, 301–51 passim
    • L. Dolanský: ‘Bedřich Smetana v letech studentských, 1840–1847’ [Smetana in his student years], Naše doba, vol.10 (1903), 241–6, 360–65 [diary extracts 1840–47]
    • Z. Nejedlý: ‘Opera Tajemství ve Smetanových dennících’ [The opera The Secret in Smetana’s diaries], HR, vol.1 (1908), 377–9
    • A. Rektorys: ‘Z psaných rozmluv s B. Smetanou’ [From written interviews with Smetana], Dalibor, vol.31 (1909), 30–31
    • Z. Nejedlý: ‘Smetanovy politické záznamy z let 1868–73’ [Smetana’s diary entries on politics 1868–73], Smetana, vol.9 (1918–19), 4–6
    • F. Bartoš, ed.: Studentské vánoce Bedřicha Smetany r. 1840–41 [Smetana’s student Christmases] (Prague, 1939) [diary extracts]
    • M. Očadlík, ed.: Bedřich Smetana: To, co my, komponisté, jako v mlhách tušíme (Prague, 1940) [Smetana’s statements on creating a national style]
    • V.H. Jarka, ed.: Kritické dílo Bedřicha Smetany, 1858–1865 [Smetana’s writings as a critic, 1858–65] (Prague, 1948)
    • M. Očadlík: Zápisky Bedřicha Smetany o Mladé Boleslavi [Smetana’s diary entries concerning Mladá Boleslav] (Mladá Boleslav, 1949)
    • J. Kazda: ‘Smetana Bearing Testimony on the Theatre’, Interscaena: acta scaenographica, vol.4/2 (1974), 35–9
    • V. Bokůvková: ‘Studentské deníky Bedřicha Smetany’ [Bedřich Smetana’s student diaries], Čechy rezervoár hudebnosti: Benátky nad Jizerou 1976, 87–90
    • K. Honolka: Bedřich Smetana in Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten (Reinbek, 1978)
    • M. Očadlík, ed.: Bedřich Smetana: zápisník motivů [Notebook of motifs] (Prague, 1942) [facs.]
    • M. Očadlík, ed.: Prodaná nevěsta: první náčrtek Bedřicha Smetany [The Bartered Bride: Smetana’s first sketch] (Prague, 1944) [facs.]
    • M. Očadlík: Závišův zpěv z náčrtku k Čertově stěně [Záviš’s (omitted) song from the sketch for The Devil’s Wall] (Prague, 1944) [incl. transcr.]
    • J. Clapham: ‘Smetana’s Sketches for “Dalibor” and “The Secret”’, ML, vol.61 (1980), 136–46
    • J. Smolka: ‘Nově nalezené skici Bedřicha Smetany k Mé vlasti, Viole a Snům’ [Newly discovered sketches by Bedřich Smetana for My Fatherland, Viola and Dreams], Sborník Národního muzea v Praze, ser.A, vol.40/4 (1986), 171–202 [with Ger. summary]
    Archive sources
    • J. Löwenbach: ‘Smetaniana v úředních archivech pražských’ [Smetaniana in the official Prague archives], HR, vol.7 (1913–14), 301–7
    • V. Herold: ‘Smetanova Má vlast a Praha: několik neznámých smetanovských dokumentů z Archivu hlavního města Prahy’ [Smetana’s My Fatherland and Prague: some unknown Smetana documents from the Prague City Archive], HRo, vol.16 (1963), 711–13
    • M. Malý: ‘Smetanovská muzeologie’, OM, vol.14 (1982), 127–8, viii
    • P. Daněk and J. Vyšohlídová: ‘Dokumenty k operní soutěži o cenu hraběte Harracha’ [Documents for the opera competition for Count Harrach’s prize], MMC, no.30 (1983), 147–55
    • I. Horová: ‘Operní konkursy vypsané v souvislosti s otevřením Národního divadla v Praze’ [The opera competitions held for the opening of the National Theatre in Prague], HV, vol.27 (1990), 152–9 [with Ger. summary]
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘Smetanovské prameny – stav 1994’ [The state of Smetana source materials, 1994], HV, vol.32 (1995), 19–27; Eng. trans. in Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 243–51
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘Současný stav kritických edicí smetanovských pramenů’ [The Current State of Critical Editions of Smetana’s Source Materials], Kritické edice hudebních památek [Critical Editions of Music Collections], ed. A. Burešová and J. Vičar (Olomouc 1996), 86–92
    • E. Krásnohorská: ‘K vavřínům Smetanovy Hubičky’, Ženské listy, vol.22 (1894), 71–219 passim
    • V.V. Zelený: O Bedřichu Smetanovi [On Smetana] (Prague, 1894)
    • Vzpomínky na Bedřicha Smetanu (Prague, 1917) [Reminiscences of Smetana by J. Schwarz, A. Heller, J. Jiránek, E. Chvalovský, E. Veil, E. Maislerová, A. Vávra, and F. Maisler]
    • J. Löwenbach: ‘Studentská léta Smetanova’ [Smetana’s student years], HR, vol.10 (1917), 304–10, 351–7
    • L. Dolanský: Hudební paměti [Musical memoirs], ed. Z. Nejedlý (Prague, 1918, 2/1949)
    • E. Krásnohorská: ‘Vzpomínky půlstoleté’ [Memories of half a century], Co přinesla léta [What the years brought] (Prague, 1928), 1, 5–147
    • E. Krásnohorská: ‘Ze vzpomínek na Bedřicha Smetanu’ [From my reminiscences of Bedřich Smetana], Co přinesla léta (Prague, 1928), 2, 5–46; orig. pubd in Ruch, vol.2 (1913–14); ‘Doplňky ku pamětem o B. Smetanovi’ [Additions to my memoirs of Bedřich Smetana], Ženské listy, vol.43 (1915)
    • J. Srb-Debrnov: Vzpomínky starého muzikanta na Smetanu a Dvořáka [An old musician’s reminiscences of Smetana and Dvořák] (Prague, 1930)
    • F. Bartoš, ed.: Smetana ve vzpomínkách a dopisech [Smetana in reminiscences and letters] (Prague, 1939, enlarged 9/1954; Ger. trans., 1954; Eng. trans., 1955)
    • J. Jiránek: Smetanův žák vzpomíná [Smetana’s pupil remembers] (Prague, 1941, 2/1957 as Vzpomínky a korespondence s Bedřichem Smetanou [Reminiscences of and correspondence with Bedřich Smetana])
    • B. Čapková: Z jabkenické myslivny [From the Jabkenice hunting lodge] (Prague, 1964, 6/1982)
    • J. Boříková: ‘Kateřina Smetanová v zrcadle svého deníku z let 1854–55’ [Kateřina Smetanová as reflected in her diary 1854–55], OM, vol.24 (1992), 111–18
C: Biographical studies
  • O. Meliš: ‘Bedřich Smetana’, Lumír, vol.7 (1857), 1240–41; Dalibor, vol.5 (1863) 185–7
  • E. Krásnohorská: ‘Bedřich Smetana: v pamětní dobu padesátiletého působení mistrova’ [Smetana: in commemoration of 50 years of the master’s activity], Osvěta, vol.10 (1880), 16–31
  • E. Krásnohorská: Bedřich Smetana: nástin života i působení jeho uměleckého [Smetana: an outline of his life and artistic work] (Prague, 1885); repr. in Výbor z díla [Selected works], ed. Z. Pešat and J. Křesálková, vol.2 (Prague, 1956), 363–90
  • B. Wellek: ‘Friedrich Smetana’s Leben und Wirken’, Österreichisch-ungarische Revue, vol.17 (1894–5); pubd separately (Prague, 1895, 2/1900); repr. in Musikblätter der Wiener Philharmoniker, vol.42/4 (1987), 101–19
  • B. Kalenský: Bedřich Smetana a Milij Balakirev: jejich význam pro vývoj hudby slovanské, jejich osobní i umělecké styky [Smetana and Balakirev: their significance for the development of Slavonic music, their personal and artistic relations] (Prague, 1897)
  • F.V. Krejčí: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1900, 2/1924)
  • W. Ritter: Smetana (Paris, 1907/R)
  • L. Bráfová: Rieger, Smetana, Dvořák (Prague, 1913)
  • K. Hoffmeister: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1915)
  • Z. Nejedlý: Smetaniana, (Prague, 1922)
  • V. Balthasar: Bedřich Smetana, vol.1: Studie osobnosti a díla z hlediska psychologického a psychopathologického [A study of the personality and work from a psychological and psychopathological viewpoint] (Prague, 1924)
  • V. Helfert: Tvůrčí rozvoj Bedřicha Smetany: preludium k životnímu dílu [Smetana’s creative development: a prelude to his life’s work] (Prague, 1924, 2/1953; Ger. trans., 1956)
  • A. Hnilička: Rozhledy po životě a významu Bedřicha Smetany [A survey of Smetana’s life and significance] (Prague, 1924)
  • Z. Nejedlý: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1924; Eng. trans., 1924, as Bedřich Smetana: the Great Master) [short account]
  • Z. Nejedlý: Bedřich Smetana: doba zrání [Smetana: time of development] (Prague, 1924, 2/1962)
  • E. Rychnovsky: Smetana (Stuttgart, 1924)
  • Z. Nejedlý: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1924–33, 2/1950–54) [covers 1824–43]
  • L. Haškovec: O Hlavovu diagnosu choroby Smetanovy [On Hlava’s diagnosis of Smetana’s illness] (Třeboň, 1925)
  • A. Kraus: Smetana v Göteborgu [Smetana in Göteborg] (Prague, 1925)
  • J. Tiersot: Smetana: biographie critique illustré (Paris, 1926)
  • V. Helfert: Pohled na Bedřicha Smetanu [A view of Bedřich Smetana] (Brno, 1934)
  • A. Hnilička: Smetanovské kapitoly [Smetana chapters] (Chrudim, 1935)
  • A. Hnilička: Studie k etapám vývoje Bedřicha Smetany [Studies in the stage of the evolutionary epochs of Bedřich Smetana] (Prague, 1937)
  • M. Očadlík: Ženy v životě Bedřicha Smetany [Women in the life of Bedřich Smetana] (Prague, 1941)
  • J. Teichmann: Bedřich Smetana: život a dílo [Smetana: life and works] (Prague, 1944, 2/1946)
  • J. Čeleda: Smetanův druh sděluje: život a dílo Josefa Srba-Debrnova [Smetana’s companion communicates: Josef Srb-Debrnov’s life and work] (Prague, 1945)
  • M. Očadlík: Tvůrce české národní hudby Bedřich Smetana [Smetana, founder of Czech national music] (Prague, 1945, 2/1949)
  • J. Racek: Bedřich Smetana a Morava [Smetana and Moravia] (Brno, 1946)
  • M. Mrázek: ‘Bedřich Smetana a Plzeň’, Sborník Pedagogického institutu v Plzni: umění, vol.3 (1960), 187–270
  • H. Feldmann: ‘Die Krankheit Friedrich Smetanas in otologischer Sicht auf Grand neuer Quellenstudien’, Monatsschrift für Ohrenheilkunde und Laryngo-Rhinologie, vol.98 (1964), 209–26; Eng. trans., MR, vol.32 (1971), 233–47
  • B. Karásek: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1966; Ger. and Fr. trans., 1967)
  • C. Thörnqvist: Smetana in Göteborg 1856–1862 (Göteborg, 1967) [in Eng.]
  • B. Large: Smetana (London, 1970)
  • B. Smutný: ‘Soutěž o Harrachovu cenu’ [The competition for the Harrach prize], HV, vol.7 (1970), 209–11
  • J. Clapham: ‘The Smetana–Pivoda Controversy’, ML, vol.52 (1971), 353–64
  • J. Clapham: Smetana (London and New York, 1972)
  • R. Budiš: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1974)
  • L. Reznicek: Smetana in Skandinavien (Oslo, 1974)
  • V. Holzknecht: Bedřich Smetana: život a dílo [Smetana: life and works] (Prague, 1979, 2/1984)
  • Z. Nejedlý: O Bedřichu Smetanovi [On Bedřich Smetana], ed. J. Jiránek (Prague, 1980)
  • O. Bořík, R. Khel, and J. Boříková: ‘Ušní onemocnění Bedřicha Smetany’ [Smetana’s ear disease], OM, vol.16 (1984), 294–304
  • O. Čechová: ‘Bedřich Smetana a východní Čechy’ [Bedřich Smetana and eastern Bohemia], Muzikologické dialogy: Chrudim 1984, 213–32
  • H. Séquardtová: Bedřich Smetana (Leipzig, 1985)
  • R. Khel: ‘Bedřich Smetana, čtenář’ [Bedřich Smetana, reader], OM, vol.18 (1986), 104–18
  • H. Séquardtová: Bedřich Smetana (Prague, 1988)
  • E. Vlček and L. Cigánek: ‘Zrak Bedřicha Smetany’ [Smetana’s sight], Časopis Národního muzea v Praze, ser.A, vol.97/3–4 (1988), 159–63
  • A. Neumayr: Musik und Medizin: Chopin – Smetana – Tschaikowsky – Mahler [Music and medicine: Chopin – Smetana – Tchaikovsky – Mahler] (Vienna, 1991)
  • G. Erismann: Smetana l’éveilleur (Arles, 1993)
  • J. Berkovec: ‘Presumpce Smetanovy originality: úvod k úvahám o umělcově originalitě’ [Presumptions of Smetana’s originality: an introduction to reflections on the originality of an artist], HV, vol.32 (1995), 3–9; Eng. trans. in Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 26–29
  • J. Smolka: Osudové lásky Bedřicha Smetany [Fateful loves of Bedřich Smetana] (Prague, 1998)
  • K. St Pierre: Bedřich Smetana: Myth, Music, and Propaganda. (Rochester, NY, 2017)
D: Works, style, influences
    • E. Rychnovsky: Dalibor (Berlin, 1907)
    • Z. Nejedlý: Zpěvohry Smetanovy [Smetana’s operas] (Prague, 1908, 3/1954)
    • O. Zich: Smetanova Hubička: hudebně esthetický rozbor [Smetana’s The Kiss: a musico-aesthetical analysis] (Prague, 1911)
    • M. Očadlík: Čertova stěna: výklad opery [The Devil’s Wall: an account of the opera] (Prague and Brno, 1938)
    • M. Očadlík: Smetana – Dalibor: výklad opery [Smetana’s Dalibor: an account of the opera] (Prague and Brno, 1938)
    • M. Očadlík: Smetana: Tajemství [Smetana: The Secret] (Prague and Brno, 1938)
    • M. Očadlík: Libuše: vznik Smetanovy zpěvohry [Libuše: the origin of Smetana’s opera] (Prague, 1939, 2/1949)
    • M. Očadlík: Smetanovi libretisté [Smetana’s librettists] (Prague, 1948)
    • M. Očadlík: Smetanova Prodaná nevěsta [Smetana’s The Bartered Bride] (Prague, 1951, 3/1953)
    • M. Očadlík: Smetanovi Braniboři v Čechách [Smetana’s The Brandenburgers in Bohemia] (Prague, 1952)
    • F. Pala: Smetanův Dalibor [Smetana’s Dalibor] (Prague, 1952)
    • F. Bartoš: ‘Ke genesi Smetanovy Prodané nevěsty’ [On the genesis of The Bartered Bride], Musikologie, vol.4 (1955), 7–31
    • J. Zich: Instrumentace Smetanova Dalibora: esteticko-theoretická studie [Instrumentation of Smetana’s Dalibor: an aesthetic and theoretical study] (Prague, 1957)
    • H. Stoffels: Die verkaufte Braut von Friedrich Smetana (Berlin, 1977)
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Sabinovo libreto ke Smetanově první opeře’ [Sabina’s libretto to Smetana’s first opera], Česká literatura, vol.27 (1979), 206–18 [with Eng. summary]
    • M. Ottlová and M. Pospíšil: ‘Český historismus a opera 19. století (Smetanova Libuše)’ [Czech historicism and 19th-century opera (Smetana’s Libuše)], Uměnovědné studie, vol.3 (1981), 83–99; Ger. trans. in Festschrift Heinz Becker, ed. J. Schläder and R. Quandt (Laaber, 1982), 237–48
    • M. Ottlová and M. Pospíšil: ‘K problematice české historické opery 19. století’ [The problem of 19th-century Czech historical opera], HRo, vol.34 (1981), 169–72; Ger. trans. in The Musical Theatre: Brno XV 1980, 267–81 [on The Brandenburgers in Bohemia]
    • P. Vít: ‘Libuše: proměny mýtu ve společnosti a v umění’ [Libuše: the transformations of myth in society and art], HV, vol.29 (1982), 269–73; Ger. trans. in The Musical Theatre: Brno XV 1980, 282–91
    • J. Jiránek: Smetanova operní tvorba [Smetana’s operatic works] (Prague, 1984–9)
    • B. Srba: ‘Bedřich Smetana a soudobá divadelní konvence’ [Bedřich Smetana and contemporary theatrical conventions], OM, vol.17 (1985), 71–81, 97–107
    • J. Smaczny: ‘Smetana’s Romantic Comedy’, Opera, vol.38 (1987), 134–9 [on The Devil’s Wall]
    • J. Tyrrell: Czech Opera (Cambridge, 1988; Cz. trans., 1991–2)
    • M. Ottlová and M. Pospíšil: ‘Francouzská veselohra v kontextu české opery: Smetanovy Dvě vdovy’ [French comedy in the context of Czech opera: Smetana’s The Two Widows], Proudy české umělecké tvorby 19. století: Plzeň 1989, ed. M. Ottlová (Prague, 1991), 156–67 [with Ger. summary, 269–70]
    • V. Zvara: ‘Príznačné motívy v Smetanovom Daliborovi’ [Leitmotivs in Smetana’s Dalibor], HV, vol.29 (1992), 316–26 [with Ger. summary]
    • I. Vojtěch: ‘K dramaturgii Prodané nevěsty’ [On the dramaturgy of The Bartered Bride], OM, vol.26 (1994), 195–200; Ger. trans. in Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 185–91
    • H. Jung: ‘Wagner und Smetana: zur musikdramatischen Konzeption in “Lohengrin” und “Dalibor”’, Richard Wagner – Nationalkulturen – Zeitgeschichte: Brno XXX 1995, 109–23
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘Bedřich Smetana: Dvě vdovy: Faksimilové vydání pramenů na CD-ROM’, Kritické edice hudebních památek II, ed. J. Vičar and B. Felgrová (Olomouc, 1998), 33–9
    Instrumental works
    • A. Piskáček: Má vlast: cyklus symfonických básní [My Fatherland: cycle of symphonic poems] (Prague, 1911)
    • V. Helfert: Motiv Smetanova Vyšehradu: studie o jeho genesi [The motif of Smetana’s Vyšehrad: a study in its genesis] (Prague, 1917)
    • J. Hutter: B. Smetana: Klavírní trio – ‘Z mého života’ (I. smyčcový kvartet) – II. smyčcový kvartet [Smetana: Piano Trio – ‘From my Life’ (First String Quartet) – Second String Quartet] (Prague, 1923)
    • J. Hutter: B. Smetana: Richard III. – Valdštýnův tábor – Hakon Jarl (Prague, 1923)
    • J. Theurer: O komorních dílech B. Smetany [On the chamber works of Smetana] (Prague, 1924)
    • O. Zich: Symfonické básně Smetanovy [Smetana’s symphonic poems] (Prague, 1924, 2/1949)
    • J. Jiránek: O Smetanových klavírních skladbách a jeho klavírní hře [On Smetana’s piano works and their pianistic performance] (Prague, 1932)
    • H. Humlová, ed.: Smetanova ‘Má vlast’ [Smetana’s My Fatherland] (Brno, 1939)
    • O. Šourek: Smetanova ‘Má vlast’: její vznik a osudy [Smetana’s My Fatherland: its origins and destiny] (Prague, 1940)
    • B. Štědroň: Smetanův ‘Pražský karneval’ [Smetana’s Prague Carnival] (Prague, 1940)
    • O. Kredba: Klavírní trio Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s Piano Trio] (Prague, 1944)
    • J. Racek: Motiv Vltavy: genese hlavního motivu Smetanovy symfonické básně [The Vltava motif: the genesis of the main motif of Smetana’s symphonic poem] (Olomouc, 1944)
    • O. Šourek: Komorní skladby Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s chamber music] (Prague, 1945)
    • L. Kundera: ‘Chopinovy vlivy ve Smetanově klavírní tvorbě’ [Chopin’s influence on Smetana’s piano works], Musikologie, vol.2 (1949), 11–37
    • M. Očadlík: Smetanova Má vlast: cyklus symfonických básní (Prague, 1953)
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Chopin a Smetana’, HRo, vol.13 (1960), 94–100 [on the genesis and comparison of piano styles]
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Liszt a Smetana’, HV, no.4 (1961), 22–80 [on the genesis and comparison of piano styles; with Ger. and Russ. summaries, 140–42, 145–7]
    • M. Očadlík: Klavírní dílo Bedřicha Smetany [Smetana’s piano works] (Prague, 1961)
    • K. Janeček: ‘Smetanův kvartet Z mého života: tektonický rozbor’ [Smetana’s Quartet From my Life: structural analysis], Živá hudba, vol.4 (1968), 9–63
    • K. Janeček: ‘Smetanova poslední fugová práce: pokus o aktivizovaný rozbor pomalé věty Smetanova Druhého kvartetu’ [Smetana’s last fugal composition: an attempt at a functional analysis of the slow movement of the Second Quartet], HV, vol.8 (1971), 399–441 [with summaries in Eng., Ger., Russ., 493–501]
    • M. Ottlová: ‘Smetanova sonáta g moll’, HRo, vol.24 (1971), 69–78
    • K. Janeček: ‘Smetanův básnivý experiment: pokus o aktivizovaný rozbor taneční věty Smetanova Druhého kvartetu’ [Smetana’s poetic experiment: an attempt at a functional analysis of the dance movement from Smetana’s Second String Quartet], Živá hudba, vol.5 (1973), 41–88 [with Ger. summary, 245–6]
    • J. Gabrielová: ‘Šest charakteristických skladeb op.1 Bedřicha Smetany’ [Smetana’s Six morceaux caractéristiques op.1], HV, vol.11 (1974), 330–34 [with Ger. summary]
    • K. Janeček: ‘Smetanův první velký tvůrčí čin’ [Smetana’s first great creative feat], HV, vol.11 (1974), 101–24 [on Piano Trio; with Ger. summary]
    • K. Janeček: Smetanova komorní hudba: kompoziční výklad [Smetana’s chamber music: compositional interpretation] (Prague, 1978)
    • J. Gabrielová: ‘Smetanovy Lístky do památníku: ke kompoziční problematice skladatelova raného tvůrčího období’ [Smetana’s albumleaves: on the problems of composition in the composer’s early creative period], HV, vol.16 (1979), 246–51 [with Ger. summary]
    • R. Smetana: ‘Smetanova Vltava a její melodická tematika’ [Smetana’s Vltava and its melodic themes], HV, vol.16 (1979), 195–218
    • J. Ludvová and V. Lébl: ‘Dobové kořeny a souvislosti Mé vlasti’ [Smetana’s Má vlast: historical roots and connections], HV, vol.18 (1981), 99–141 [with Ger. summary]
    • C. Floros: ‘Verschwiegene Programmusik’, Anzeiger der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, vol.19 (1982), 204–25
    • A. Goebel: ‘Friedrich Smetana, Das Brautpaar: ein Beitrag zum Charakterstück im 19. Jahrhundert’, Musik und Bildung, vol.14/1 (1982), 12–19
    • J. Gabrielová: ‘Smetanovy České tance (poznámky ke kompoziční a estetické problematice)’ [Smetana’s Czech Dances (remarks on compositional and aesthetic problems)], MMC, no.30 (1983), 115–26
    • T. Hirsbrunner: ‘Das Erhabene in Bedřich Smetanas Mein Vaterland’, AMw, vol.41 (1984), 35–41
    • R. Siebr: ‘Zu den Violinkompositionen Robert Schumanns und Bedřich Smetanas’, Schumann-Tage [IX]: Zwickau 1984, 53–63
    • J. Smolka: Smetanova symfonická tvorba [Smetana’s symphonic works] (Prague, 1984)
    • J. Doležel: ‘Polka w twórczości fortepianowej Bedřicha Smetany’ [The polka in the piano output of Bedřich Smetana], Muzyka fortepianowa, vol.7 (1987), 57–63
    • J. Volek: ‘Semantyka i znaczenie form tanecznych w twórczości Chopin i Smetany’ [The semantics and significance of dance forms in the music of Chopin and Smetana], Rocznik chopinowski/Annales Chopin, vol.20 (1988), 113–19; Ger. trans. in Chopin Studies, vol.4 (1994), 109–15
    • Y.-K. Mao: ‘Smetana and his Má vlast’, Study of Music, vol.2 (1989), 85–9
    • J. Fukač: ‘Mezi triumfální a počestnou bodrostí: Smetanův symfonický pokus’ [Between triumph and honest joviality: Smetana’s symphonic experiment], OM, vol.24 (1992), 261–7; Ger. trans. in Ethnonationale Wechselbeziehungen in der mitteleuropäischen Musik: Brno XXVII 1992, 299–308
    • M. Ottlová: ‘Smetana a Dvořák: na materiálu prvních vět posledních kvartet’ [Smetana and Dvořák: on the first movements of their last quartets], HV, vol.29 (1992), 110–17; Ger. trans. in Antonín Dvořák 1841–1991, ed. M. Pospíšil and M. Ottlová (Prague, 1994), 103–13
    • D.B. Mead: The Symphonic Structure of Smetana’s Má vlast (DMA diss., U. of Texas, 1994)
    • J. Gabrielová: ‘Oehlenschläger – Hartmann – Smetana: Hakon Jarl’, Musik en forskning, vol.20 (1994–95), 55–80; see also Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 118–37
    • M. Ottlová: ‘Smetanova Triumfální symphonie’ [Smetana’s Triumph Symphony], HV, vol.32 (1995), 27–34, Ger. trans. in Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 91–101
    • M. Ottlová: ‘Problémy se Smetanovou Triumfální symfonií’ [Problems with Smetana’s Triumph Symphony], Český lev a rakouský orel v 19. století, ed. Z. Hojda and R. Prahl (Prague, 1996), 37–46 [on the Austrian anthem in Smetana’s composition; with Ger. summary, 218]
    • K. DeLong: ‘Hearing his Master’s Voice: Smetana’s “Swedish” Symphonic Poems and their Lisztian Models’, Liszt and his World, vol.1, ed. M. Saffle (Stuyvesant, NY, 1998), 295–334
    • L.M. Koldau: Die Moldau: Smetanas Zyklus ‘Mein Vaterland’ (Weimar, 2007)
    • L.M. Koldau: ‘Vltava – Moldau: zur deutsch-tschechischen Rezeption von Smetanas Má vlast im ausgehenden 19. und 20. Jahrhundert’, Deutsche – Tschechen – Böhmen: kulturelle Integration und Desintegration im 20. Jahrhundert, ed. S. Höhne and L. Udolph (Cologne, 2010), 173–92
    • K. St Pierre: ‘Smetana’s “Vyšehrad” and Mythologies of Czechness in Scholarship’, 19CM vol.37/2 (Fall 2013): 91–112
    • B. Smetana: Vltava: pro klavír na čtyři ruce/Die Moldau: für Klavier zu vier Händen, ed. H. Macdonald (Kassel, 2014)
    • B. Smetana: Vltava/Die Moldau, ed. H. Macdonald (Kassel, 2015) [incl. O. Mojžíšová: ‘Předmluva’]
    • B. Smetana: Šárká, ed. H. Macdonald (Kassel, 2018)
    Vocal and choral works
    • J. Plavec: Smetanova tvorba sborová [Smetana’s choral works] (Prague, 1945; rev. 1954)
    • J. Smolka: Smetanova vokální tvorba: písně, sbory, kantáta [Smetana’s vocal works: songs, choruses, cantatas] (Prague, 1980)
    • O. Hostinský: Bedřich Smetana a jeho boj o moderní českou hudbu [Smetana and his struggle for modern Czech music] (Prague, 1901, 2/1941)
    • V. Helfert: Smetanismus a wagnerianismus (Prague, 1911)
    • K. Stecker: K otázce smetanismu a wagnerianismu [On the question of Smetanism and Wagnerism] (Prague, 1911)
    • V. Helfert: Smetanovské kapitoly [Smetana chapters] (Prague, 1917, 2/1954)
    • F. Pujman: Smetanovský brevíř [A Smetana breviary] (Prague, 1917)
    • J. Racek: Idea vlasti, národa a slávy v díle Bedřicha Smetany [The idea of Fatherland, Nation, and Glory in the work of Bedřich Smetana] (Brno, 1933, enlarged 2/1947)
    • A. Sychra: ‘Realismus Bedřicha Smetany’ [Smetana’s realism], HRo, vol.1 (1948–9), 166–86
    • V. Helfert: O Smetanovi: soubor statí a článků [Concerning Smetana: collection of essays and articles] (Prague, 1950)
    • V. Felix: ‘Rychlost harmonického pohybu v díle Bedřicha Smetany’ [The speed of harmonic movement in Smetana’s works], Živá hudba, vol.1 (1959), 85–108
    • V. Hudec: ‘Zum Problem des “Lisztartigen” in Smetanas symphonischen Dichtungen’, Liszt–Bartók: Budapest, 1961, 131–7
    • K. Janeček: Tvorba a tvůrci: úvahy, eseje, studie, poznámky [Creativity and the creators: observations, essays, studies, remarks] (Prague, 1968)
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Das Problem der Beziehung von Musik und Wort im Schaffen Bedřich Smetanas’, Music and Word: Brno IV 1969, 107–37
    • P. Klapil: ‘Typická melodická centra Smetanova a Dvořákova’ [Typical melodic centres in the music of Smetana and Dvořák], Sborník prací pedagogické fakulty University Palackého v Olomouci: hudební výchova (Prague, 1969), 3–17
    • M. Očadlík: ‘Smetanův tvůrčí řád’ [Smetana’s compositional laws], OM, vol.2 (1970), 143–51
    • ‘Smetanovo první tvůrčí období’ [Smetana’s first creative period], HV, vol.11 (1974) [Smetana issue; incl. Ger. summaries], 136–85
    • J. Bajer, ed.: Česká hudba světu, svět české hudbě [Czech music to the world, the world to Czech music] (Prague, 1974) [incl. M. Ottlová: ‘Smetanovy studijní pochody z roku 1845’ [Smetana’s study marches of 1845], 20–37; V. Protopopov: ‘Polyfonie v díle Bedřicha Smetany’ [Polyphony in Smetana’s work], 38–47; I. Martynov: ‘Smetana: novátor kvartetní hudby’ [Smetana: innovator of quartet music], 48–55]
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Bedřich Smetana a česká literatura’ [Bedřich Smetana and Czech literature], Česká literatura, vol.22 (1974), 426–38
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Smetanova estetika’ [Smetana’s aesthetic views], Estetika, vol.11 (1974), 238–46
    • V. Kyas: ‘Paralely v harmonické struktuře skladeb B. Smetany a F. Schuberta: k metodě kvantitativních harmonických analýz’ [Parallels in the harmonic structure of works by Smetana and Schubert: towards a method of quantitative harmonic analysis], HV, vol.11 (1974), 313–29 [with Ger. summary]
    • J. Vysloužil: ‘Johann Sebastian Bach und Bedřich Smetana: zur Genesis und Semantik von Smetanas polyphonem Denken und zu seinen polyphonen Formen’, Internationales Bach-Fest III: Leipzig 1975, 293–305
    • M.K. Černý: ‘Smetana a Balakirev: k interpretaci kulturně politických souvislostí ve Smetanově díle’ [Smetana and Balakirev: interpreting the cultural and political connections of Smetana’s work], HV, vol.13 (1976), 239–56
    • J. Jiránek: Vztah hudby a slova v tvorbě Bedřicha Smetany [The relationship of words and music in the works of Bedřich Smetana] (Prague, 1976) [with Ger. summary]; abridged Ger. version in Music and Word: Brno IV 1969, 107–37
    • V. Kyas: ‘Zur Genesis von Smetanas harmonischem Denken’, ČMm, vol.62 (1978), 179–91
    • H. Séquardtová: Konstanty a proměny ve Smetanově tvorbě (příspěvek ke studiu hudebně myšlenkových souvislostí) [Constants and variables in Smetana’s creative work (a contribution to the study of connections between music and intellect)] (Prague, 1978) [summaries in Eng., Ger., Russ.]
    • M. Ottlová and M. Pospíšil: ‘Smetanův Meyerbeer’ [Smetana’s Meyerbeer], HV, vol.21 (1984), 355–64 [with Ger. summary]; abridged Ger. version, ‘Grand opera auf kleiner Bühne’, IMSCR XIV: Bologna 1987, vol.3, 859–66
    • J. Smolka: ‘Podíl metrorytmických struktur na kompozičním stylu Bedřicha Smetany’ [The effect of metrorhythmic structures on the compositional style of Bedřich Smetana], Čas v hudbě, ed. M. Kuna and V. Nollová (Prague, 1984), 28–43
    • M. Girardi: ‘Letteratura e folklore nei ‘cori’ di Smetana come stromenti ideologici nell’ambito della musica nazional ceca’, NRMI, vol.20 (1986), 579–604
    • J. Smolka: ‘Bedřich Smetana a Jan Dismas Zelenka’, OM, vol.19 (1987), 104–9
    • J. Smolka: ‘Modulace a tonální skoky v hudbě Bedřicha Smetany a jeho předchůdců’ [Modulation and transitions to remote keys in music of Bedřich Smetana and his predecessors], HV, vol.24 (1987), 321–40
    • J. Markl: ‘Potulné melodie ve folklóru: u Mozarta, Smetany a jiných’ [Wandering melodies in folklore: Mozart, Smetana and others], OM, vol.23 (1991), 245–50
    • J. Jiránek: ‘Pastorální intonace v tvorbě Bedřicha Smetany’ [Pastoral intonations in the music of Bedřich Smetana], OM, vol.24 (1992), 218–34
    • W. Salmen: ‘Friedrich Smetana und der mythische Sänger Lumir’, Vergleichend-systematische Musikwissenschaft … Franz Födermayr zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. E.T. Hilscher and T. Antonicek (Tutzing, 1994), 551–9
    • M. Ottlová and M. Pospíšil: Bedřich Smetana a jeho doba [Bedřich Smetana and his time] (Prague, 1997)
    • O. Mojžíšová: Jak prožíval Bedřich Smetana své stáří. Vetché stáří, nebo zralý věk moudrosti? [How did Bedřich Smetana take his old age? Feeble, or the maturity of wisdom?], Sborník příspěvků z 28. ročníku sympozia k problematice 19. Století, ed. Z. Hojda, M. Ottlová, and R. Prahl (Prague, 2009), 95–108
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘The Legacy of Bedřich Smetana: the Development and Changes in his Reception’, National Identity|ies in Czech Music, ed. L. Dohnalová (Prague, 2012), 37–42
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘Smetanův Händel, Haydn a Mendelssohn v Göteborgu [Smetana’s Handel, Haydn, and Mendelssohn in Göteborg]’, Miscelanea z výroční konference České společnosti pro hudební vědu 2009. “Händel – Haydn – Mendelssohn a jejich druhý život“ v českých zemích a na Slovensku v 18. a 19. Století [Miscellanea from the annual conference of the Czech Society for Musicology 2009: Handel, Haydn, Mendelssohn and their Second Lives in the Czech Lands and Slovakia in the 18th and 19th Centuries], ed. M. Freemanová (Prague, 2012)
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘Kresby Bedřicha Smetany/Drawings by Bedřich Smetana’, Musicalia: Časopis Českého muzea hudby, vol.5/1–2 (2013), 97–104, 105–17
    • O. Mojžíšová: ‘Smetanovský dluh české muzikologie: písemné prameny jako předmět zájmu smetanovského bádání’ [Smetana’s debt of Czech musicology: written sources as a subject of interest], Musicologica Brunensia, vol.50/1 (2015), 153–64
    E: Performance and reception studies
    • F.A. Šubert: České Národní divadlo na první mezinárodní divadelní výstavě ve Vídni r. 1892 [The Czech National Theatre at the First International Theatre Exhibition in Vienna 1892] (Prague, 1892) [incl. reviews of The Bartered Bride and Dalibor]
    • J. Machač: Bedřich Smetana a cizina [Bedřich Smetana and abroad] (Hradec Králové, 1910)
    • F. Pujman: Poznámky o dramaturgii Smetanových oper [Remarks on the dramaturgy of Smetana’s operas] (Prague, 1919) [from Dalibor to The Devil’s Wall]
    • O. Zítek: O novou zpěvohru: k dramaturgii a režii hudebního dramatu [On the new opera: the dramaturgy and stage direction of music drama] (Prague, 1920) [incl. chaps. on Libuše, The Two Widows, and The Devil’s Wall]
    • O. Zítek: Smetanova Čertova stěna s hlediska dramaturgického [Smetana’s The Devil’s Wall from the dramaturgical point of view] (Prague, 1922)
    • Almanach na památku tisícího provedení Prodané nevěsty [Almanac to commemorate the 1000th performance of The Bartered Bride] (Prague, 1927) [incl. memoirs and statistics of performers and interpreters]
    • Památník: 200 představení Tajemství 1878–1928 [Album: 200 performances of The Secret] (Prague, 1928) [incl. statistics]
    • J.B. Foerster: O Bedřichu Smetanovi: referáty v Národních listech 1884–1893 [On Bedřich Smetana: reviews in Národní listy 1884–93], ed. J. Bartoš (Prague, 1929)
    • L. Firkušný: Prodaná nevěsta a její historie na brněnském jevišti [The Bartered Bride and its history on the Brno stage] (Brno, 1936) [incl. statistics, photographs, and stage designs]
    • H. Thein: Mé režijní poznámky k Prodané nevěstě [My production notes on The Bartered Bride] (Unhošť, 1940)
    • O. Šourek and others: Smetanův operní epilog: k novým dramaturgickým úpravám Čertovy stěny [Smetana’s operatic epilogue: on the new stage adaptations of The Devil’s Wall] (Prague, 1942)
    • Památník třístého provedení slavnostní zpěvohry Bedřicha Smetany ‘Libuše’ v Národním divadle v Praze [Album for the 300th performance of Bedřich Smetana’s Libuše at the National Theatre in Prague] (Prague, 1946)
    • M. Očadlík: Poslední dramaturgická úprava Smetanovy Čertovy stěny [The most recent stage adaptation of Smetana’s The Devil’s Wall] (Prague, 1946)
    • P. Pražák: Smetanovy zpěvohry [Smetana’s operas] (Prague, 1948)
    • V. Pospíšil: ‘Talichova Prodaná nevěsta’ [Talich’s Bartered Bride], HRo, vol.10 (1957), 741–5
    • Z. Soušek: ‘Zamyšlení nad interpretací Vaška ze Smetanovy Prodané nevěsty’ [Thoughts on the interpretation of Vašek in Smetana’s The Bartered Bride], Sborník Janáčkovy akademie múzických umění, vol.2 (1960), 19–27
    • P. Pražák: Smetanova Prodaná nevěsta: vznik a osudy díla [Smetana’s The Bartered Bride: its origin and further history] (Prague, 1962)
    • V. Pospíšil: ‘Prodaná nevěsta ve Francii’ [The Bartered Bride in France], HRo, vol.25 (1972), 126–30
    • L.S. Ginzburg: ‘O interpretací Smetanova kvartetu e-moll ‘Z mého života’: pokus o srovnávací analýzu’ [The interpretation of Smetana’s E minor Quartet ‘From my Life’: an attempt at a comparative analysis], HV, vol.11 (1974), 307–12; Eng. trans. in Muzïkal′noye ispolnitel′stvo, vol.10 (Moscow, 1979)
    • V. Hudec: ‘Ke vztahu Moravy k dílu Bedřicha Smetany’ [Concerning the relationship of Moravia to the works of Bedřich Smetana], OM, vol.6 (1974), 289–93
    • S. Jareš: ‘Obrazová dokumentace nejstarších inscenací Prodané nevěsty’ [Pictorial documentation of the earliest productions of The Bartered Bride], HV, vol.11 (1974), 195–8 [with Ger. summary]
    • L. Jehne: ‘K problematice smetanovských hlasových oborů a pěveckých typů’ [The question of Smetana’s voice types and singer types], HV, vol.11 (1974), 125–35 [with Ger. summary]
    • M. Kuna: Životnost Smetanova odkazu: kapitola z let nacistické okupace1939–1945 [The vitality of Smetana’s heritage: a chapter from the years of Nazi occupation, 1939–45] (Prague, 1974)
    • K. Černický: ‘K notaci tremola ve Smetanových operních partiturách’ [The notation of the tremolo in Smetana’s opera scores], HV, vol.16 (1979), 349–53
    • R. Vonásek: ‘Dalibor včera, dnes a zítra’ [Dalibor yesterday, today, and tomorrow], OM, vol.14/4 (1982), v–xi
    • J. Burghauser: ‘Historie retuší ve Smetanově Mé vlasti’ [The history of the reorchestration of Smetana’s My Fatherland], HRo, vol.36 (1983), 180–83
    • B. Hampton-Renton: ‘Smetanova Má vlast v novém světě’ [Smetana’s My Fatherland in the New World], HRo, vol.36 (1983), 85–9
    • O. Podgorný: ‘Smetanův první smyčcový kvartet z hlediska interpretační analýzy’ [Smetana’s First String Quartet: a comparative study of interpretation], HV, vol.20 (1983), 150–66
    • B. Srba: ‘Jevištní výprava představení Smetanovy Libuše v Národním divadle z let 1881 a 1883’ [Stage sets for Smetana’s Libuše at the National Theatre in 1881 and 1883], Divadlo v české kultuře 19. století: Plzeň 1983, 167–87
    • J. Střítecký: ‘Tradice a obrození: Bedřich Smetana’ [Tradition and rebirth: Bedřich Smetana], Povědomí tradice v novodobé české kultuře (doba Bedřicha Smetany): Prague 1984, 65–76
    • M. Dosoudilová: ‘Pujmanova režijní koncepce Smetanova Dalibora’ [Pujman’s production conception of Smetana’s Dalibor], HRo, vol.38 (1985), 178–84, 221–4, 284–7
    • I. Štěpánová: ‘Kostým Mařenky z Prodané nevěsty na jevišti Národního divadla jako etnografický pramen’ [Mařenka’s costume for The Bartered Bride on the stage of the National Theatre as an ethnographic source], Český lid, vol.72 (1985), 23–31
    • M. Hůrka: ‘Prodaná nevěsta a film’ [The Bartered Bride and film], HRo, vol.39 (1986), 186–92
    • M. Dosoudilová: ‘Geneze Pujmanova pojetí Prodané nevěsty’ [The genesis of Pujman’s conception of The Bartered Bride], HV, vol.28 (1991), 125–33 [with Ger. summary]
    • L. Peduzzi: ‘O premiéře Prodané nevěsty v Terezíně’ [The première of The Bartered Bride in Terezín], OM, vol.23 (1991), 307–8
    • J. Dehner: ‘Kovařovicovy retuše Mé vlasti’ [Kovařovic’s reorchestration of My Fatherland], OM, vol.24 (1992), 40–48
    • C.P. Storck: ‘Die Symbiose von Kunst und Nationalbewegung: der Mythos vom “Nationalkomponisten” Bedřich Smetana’, Bohemia, vol.34 (1993), 253–67; see also Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 76–90
    • M. Ulrychová: ‘Plzeňský kroj ve Smetanově Prodané nevěstě’ [The Plzeň folk costume in Smetana’s The Bartered Bride], OM, vol.25 (1993), 16–21
    • M. Pospíšil: ‘Bedřich Smetana v pojetí Elišky Krásnohorské’ [Bedřich Smetana as viewed by Eliška Krásnohorská], HV, vol.32 (1995), 42–54; Eng. trans. in Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1994, 62–75
    • M. Ottlová and M. Pospíšil: ‘Smetanovy ústupky obecenstvu’ [Smetana’s concessions to the public], Umění a veřejnost v 19. století: Plzeň 1996, 63–8
    • J. Smolka: ‘Moderní trvalé zvukové záznamy Smetanovy Vltavy s Českou filharmonií a jejími šéfdirigenty’ [Modern permanent recordings of Smetana’s Vltava with the Czech Philharmonic and its chief conductors], 100 let s Českou filharmonií: Prague 1996, 68–84
    • M. Kuna: Musik an der Grenze des Lebens: Musikerinnen und Musiker aus böhmischen Ländern in nationalsozialistischen Konzentrationslagern und Gefängnissen (Frankfurt, 1998)
    • C.P. Storck: Kulturnation und Nationalkunst: Strategien und Mechanismen der tschechischen Nationsbildung von 1860 bis 1914 (Cologne, 2001)
    F: Special issues, periodicals, and collections
    • J. Malina: Smetanův památník vydaný při slavnostním odhalení prvního pomníku Bedřichu Smetanovi dne 2. srpna 1903 v Hořicích [The Smetana album issued for the ceremonial unveiling of the first statue of Bedřich Smetana on 1 August 1903 in Hořice] (Hořice, 1903)
    • A. Rektorys, ed.: ‘Památník Smetanův’ [Smetana’s memorandum-book], Dalibor, vol.31 (1909), 223–70
    • K. Stecker and K. Hoffmeister, eds.: ‘Smetanův sborník’ [Smetana issue], HR, vol.2/5 (1909), 209–304
    • F. Věcovský, ed.: Památník k stému výročí narozenin Bedřicha Smetany 1824–1924 [Album for the 100th anniversary of Smetana’s birth] (Prague, 1924)
    • F. Věcovský, ed.: Památník vydaný k stému výročí narozenin tvůrce české hudby Bedřicha Smetany [Album issued for the 100th anniversary of the birth of the creator of Czech music, Bedřich Smetana] (Litomyšl, 1924)
    • Ročenka Společnosti Bedřicha Smetany [Yearbook of the Bedřich Smetana Society] (Prague, 1938–48)
    • M. Bělohlávek, ed.: Bedřich Smetana: Plzeň 1840–1843 (Plzeň, 1974)
    • R. Siebr, ed.: Sborník pedagogické fakulty v Plzni: umění, vol.10 (1974) [incl. V. Bokůvková: ‘Smetanova studentská léta v Plzni’ [Smetana’s student years in Plzeň], 7–24; A. Špelda: ‘Prokschova pozůstalost a Pamětní kniha v Plzni’ [Proksch’s Nachlass and memoir-book in Plzeň], 69–95]
    • Bedřich Smetana: Prague 1984
    • Hudební řeč Bedřicha Smetany: Prague 1984 [Bedřich Smetana’s musical language]
    • Sto let odkazu Bedřicha Smetany: Prague 1984 [100 years of Bedřich Smetana’s legacy]
    • O. Mojžíšová and M. Ottlová, eds: Bedřich Smetana 1824—1884 (Prague, 1995)
    • O. Mojžíšová, ed.: Bedřich Smetana: Time, Life, Work (Prague, 1998) [incl. R. Habánová: ‘Bedřich Smetana (his Life and Work)’, 80–115; O. Mojžíšová: ‘Bedřich Smetana’s Compositions (Selective List)’, 116–41; O. Mojžíšová: ‘Muzeum Bedřicha Smetany (its History and its Collections)’, 142–66]

See also: Cryptography, musical, §2: Other communication systems using musical symbols; Czech Republic, §I, 1(iii): Art music: Bohemia and Moravia: Growth of Czech nationalism; Dvořák, Antonín, §8: Artistic character; Mahler, Gustav, §7: Vienna, 1897–1907; Prague, §3: 1830–1918; Symphonic poem, §4: The Czech lands. See also from The New Grove Dictionary of Opera: Bartered bride, the; Brandenburgers in Bohemia, the; Dalibor; Devil’s wall, the; Kiss, the; Libuše; Secret, the; and Two widows, the

Archiv für Musikwissenschaft
Nuova rivista musicale italiana
Hudební veda
Miscellanea musicologica [Czechoslovakia]
Music & Letters
Hudební revue
19th Century Music
Sborník prací filosofické [filozofické] fakulty brnenské university [univerzity]
Opus musicum
Hudební rozhledy
Casopis Moravského musea [muzea, 1977-]