In those times when his music was largely unknown and unplayed (in other words, for most of the nineteenth and at least the first third of this century), Haydn at least retained the distinction of being regarded as the Father of the Symphony and the Father of the String Quartet. While both of these honorifics may now be regarded as untenable from a strict musicological point of view, a quite different type of patriarchy is implied for each genre. Haydn's fatherly role in the development of the symphony consisted simply in the fact that he was an acknowledged leader in the field, the most popular writer in the form, and the one whose works were most in demand. This is apparent from the vast number of spurious works that were marketed under his name during his lifetime in order to increase sales. For the string quartet, however, Haydn's role as head of the family takes on a quite different perspective. Although he did not himself initiate the form of a multi-movement work for four solo stringed instruments without the support of the continuo, Haydn was to play an overwhelming and decisive role in the establishment of the genre. It was he who set the terms for what came to be regarded as the most pure and abstract musical form available to a composer, offering him a chance, so to speak, of writing for himself – and his agents, the four players.