In 1939, Sibelius appealed to the world on radio to save his ravaged land. The Soviet attack was beaten back. Some time later, Sibelius burned the symphony. Why would he do that? The composer Einojuhani Rautavaara, who met Sibelius in his youth, thought that the old man feared that anything less than his best work would weaken international support and cause Finnish morale to collapse. That theory seems to me more credible than the common notion that the heavy-drinking composer annulled the work in a drunken rage. 

 The new sketches are no more than a teaser to his intentions. The musical language is definedly Sibelian, a wash of strings with a woodwind wail and a melody that hovers just beyond reach. Unlike Mahler, who danced with atonality in his final score, Sibelius stays within his safety zone. He knows his audience and will not test its tolerance.

 If this is the beginning of the symphony, it is excessively cautious. More likely, it opens one of the middle movements. In a letter discovered in a railwayman's attic after the music was nationally aired, Sibelius mentions "a cardboard box filled with music sheets" and talks of a chorus in the symphony. There may be more surprises ahead in this icebound saga.