National Library Bibliothèque nationaie 1*1 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, nie Wellington Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada

The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Lïbrary of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or seil reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fonne de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othemise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author' s ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. 'The best the house could afford': Critical Reaction to Rossini's i7 6aYbiet-e di Siviglia at the King's Theae, 18 18-1 83 0

Megan M. Paterson Facuity of Music

Submitted in partiai Wlrnent of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts

Faculty of Graduate Studies The Universiv of Western Ontario London, Ontario October, 1999

O Megan M. Paterson 1999 ABSTRACT

As one of the most popular fonns of entertainment in London in the early

nineteenth century, ItaIian opera drew enthusiasric crowds to the King's Theatre and

elicited much critical response fiom the press. This thesis uivestigates the reception of

Rossini's l7 barbiere di Siviglia between 18 18 and 183 0. Period literature reveais an

overwheiming preoccupation with the attributes of foreign singers, especially their style

of ornamentation, and this thesis places II barbiere within the critical milieu of the time.

Keywords: Rossini, II barbiere, England, London, King's Theatre, Italian opera, critics, singers, reception, ornamentation. ACKNO WLEDGMENTS

Several people have been insmentd in the completion of my thesis. Foremost,

1 wodd like to thank my advisor, Dr. Robert Toft, for his guidance, invaluable insights, and continued encouragement. 1 would dso like to extend my gratitude to Dr. Richard

Semmens for his attentive reading and constructive input. 1 am indebted to the staffat the

University of Western Ontario Music Library, particularly Lisa Philpott, for their help and persistence in fmding sources that seemed impossible to locate.

1am grateful for the support and patience of rny fiïends and family. With deepest appreciation 1 thank Jeff Ross, Greg Dorter, and Catherine Irvine for their meticdous editing of dr&s upon drafts of rny work and specid thanks to Catherine for her kindness and diligence in preparing the ilhstrative material for uiis thesis. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Certificate of examination Abstract Acknowledgernents Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction The Propriety of English Journalism Growth of the Press Kinds and Foms of Publications Content and Quality of the Musical Coverage Audiences at the King's Theatre Reviews of Italian Opera

Chapter 2 'Submitted to the Judgement of an English Audience' Rossini and il barbiere under English Scrutiny Reception of the première and initial reactions to Rossini Subsequent Response to Rossini and II barbiere

Chapter 3 'Exninent Singers' Reception of the Singers Involved in the Première Notable Singers in the Revivals

Chapter 4 'At dl costs the English public shodd not be bored' Celebrated Nurnbers " Our old fnends" Excessive Length Rossini the 'Mannerist' 'Barbarous additions'

Chapter 5 'Meretricious Ornament' P~ciplesof Singing

Sontag's Tastehl Flondity: cc Una voce poco Fa" Conclusion

Appendix 1 Announcement Notices in the Dailies for IZ barbiere di SivigZiu Appendix 2 List of Seasonal Performances and Role Assignations Appendix 3 Cornparison between perforniances of Mozart and Rossini operas Appendix 4 Mlle Sontag's published embellishments for "Una voce poco fà"

Vita CHAPTER ONE Introduction

Musicologists continue to strive for a deeper understanding of the performance

and reception of early-nineteenth-century Italian opera. Much has been written about the performances of this repertory on the continent, but few scholars have focused on the

King's Theatre in London, one of the most significant centres for Italian opera outside

Italy.' nie English public adored foreign spectacle, and the management of the King's theatre, dthough working under severe fmancid restrictions, procured some of the frnest continental singers in hopes that performers iike Angelica Catalani (1780-1849), Manuel

Garcia (1 775- 1833), and Henrietta Sontag (1 806- L 854) would fil1 the house. Edrnund

Waters (fi- 1805- 1 825) and John Ebers (1 785-1 83U), who rnanaged the theatre between

1815 and 1 828, staged works by &heEnglish public's favourite cornposers of Italian opera, Mozart, Rossini, Paisiello, Cimarosa, and Paer, and although these managers furnished the best productions they couid Bord, they were unsuccessfid in keeping the theatre fiom bankmptcy.' Curiously, little scholarship has been devoted to the performance and reception of operas by these composers, although in this regard Mozart

' Ernanuele Senici, "'Adapted to the modem stage': La clernenza di Tito in London," Cambridge aperaJournal7, no.1 (1995): 4. ' For penod accounts of the serious manageriai probIems that plagued the theatre and burdened it with bankruptcies, see John Ebers, Seven Years of the King's Theatre (London, l828), Michad KeIly, Reminiscences of Michael Kelly, of the King S Theatre and Theatre Royal Drury Lane, including a period ofnearfy halfa cenhrry; with original anecdotes of many distinguished persons, political, licerary, and musical, vol2 (London: Henry Colbum, 1826), and " A Statement of the Matters relative to the King's Theatre," Quarteriy Musical Magazine and Review: 1 8 1 8,239-63. has fared better thm others? Rossini, however, despite the considerable number of

performances of his operas in London at the beginning of the nineteenth century, has

been neglected. The first of his operas to appear on the London stage was II barbiere di

Siviglia (1O March 18 18).

This thesis investigates the reception both Rossini and i7 barbiere received in

London between 18 18 and 1830, &er which tirne discussion of the opera in the musical

press declines precipitously- An examination of the principles that guided and ïnfluenced

reception in this city will increase our understanding not only of contemporary opera

conventions as a whole, but also of the issues that were important to early-nineteenth-

century English audiences. Penod literature, including newspapers, magazines, journais,

and amateur accounts, foms the documentary base of the study. The eariy nineteenth

century witnessed a flourishing of music criticism, and the musical press repiarly

reviewed the operas appearing on the London stage. Reviews fiom these periodicals

provide a weaith of information on such matters as the operas themseIves, composers,

singers, staging, orchestras, and audience reactions.

Of the existing secondary literature, twû studies on opera and the English musical press by Theodore Fenner are particularly significant.' Fenner catalogues all performances between 1785 and 1830 and provides a fairly accurate List of the reviews published for the premières, as well as subsequent revivais. Beyond Fenner, research on

See, for example, Senici, " 'Adapted to the modern stage"' and Rachel CowgiIl, " Re-gendering the Libertine; or, the Taming of the Rake: Lucy Vestris as Don Giovanni on the early nineteenth-century London stage," Cambridge Opera Journal 10, no. 1 (1998): 45-66. See Theodore Fenner, Leigh Hunt and Opera Criticism: The "Examiner" Yeats 1808-1821 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1 972) and Fenner, Opera in London: VÎews ofthe Press 1 785-2830 (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1994). specific aspects of opera in England has been undertaken by Ernanuele Senici and Rachel

Cowgill (see note 3).

In order to achieve an accurate understanding of early nineteenth-century opera criticism, one must appreciate the flexibility of operatic composition and production. In the early nineteenth century, the 'work' simply could not reside in the printed score alone.

For example, singers, not composers, controlled the final shaping of roles, and other aspects of the operatic event such as set design, costumes, action, and so on were not included in the score. Libretti offer some help in this regard, but the incomplete annotations render them deficient for my purposes.

It was customary for operatic roles to be written for specific singers, and Rossini origuldy fashioned the music for Il barbiere to accommodate the vocal capabilities of his Roman cast, which inchded Manuel Garcia, Signora Rhigetti-Giorgi, and Luigi

am boni.' However, an integral aspect of Italian operatic performances involved the alteration of roles-through interpolations and embellishments-to suit the specific singer. Thus, details of performances of a particular opera differed from season-to-season or even night-to-night.' The various versions that resulted, while not necessarily reflecting Rossini's conception, are valuable for what they reveai about contemporary

Rossini's contract for If barbiere stipulates that he agreed to make whatever changes were required or desired: "Maestro Rossini must set to music according to the qualities and convenience of the singers, obliging himself also to make where needed a11 those alterations necessary either to ensure the good reception of the music or to meet the circumstances and convenience of those same singers , at the simple request of the Impresario, because so it must be and no other way etc." See Rossini, Gioachino. Ii barbiere di Siviglia: Fucsimik of the Aurograph [email protected] a preface by Philip Gossett, Bologna: Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale, 1993. Gossett provides a transiation of the contract. This was especially the case at the King's Theatre where singers and managers customarily adapted operas to fit the Company and the taste of the public during that season. See Thomas Love operatic performance practices. In his discussion of this issue with respect to Italian

opera in England at this tirne, Emanuele Senici cites Stefan Kunze, who contends that

cc the idea of different but equally authentic versions seems intolerable," but Senici

purports that many versions are possible and indeed inevitable owing to the nature of

Italian opera on the London stage.' Consequently, our modem reiîance on the veracity of

'the score' may not be appropriate when dealing with this repertory. Furthemore, the reviews fkom the penod focus on the singers and treat 'the work' as if it were of secondary importance.

The Propriety of English Journalism

Because modem understanding of the performance of Italian opera in London relies so heavily on the criticism that appeared in the musical press, it is necessary to examine the critical milieu of these reviews. An excerpt fiom an 1824 book on public journalism illustrates the infiuence of the reviewers:

The Periodical Press of Great Britain is justly the boast of Englishmen, and the envy and admiration of foreigners. It is the most powerful moral machine in the world, and exercises a greater influence over the manners and opinions of civilized sociew than the united eloquence of the bar, the senate and the pulpit.'

Peacock, The Works of Thomas Love Peacock, Volzrrne Nine, Critical and Orher Essays (New York: PLMS Press, 1967)' 236-4 1. See Emanuele Senici, " 'Adapted to the modem stage'." Kunze's assertion is taken fkom his discussion on Mozart's operas: Stefan Kunze, Moaarfs Opern (Stuttgart: P. Reclam, 1984), 342. The Periodical Press of Great Britain and lreland (London: Printed for Hurst Robinson, 1824), 1. Growth of the Press:

The penodicals from this period refiect the political, social, and technological

changes of the Industrial Revolution. At the end of the eighteenth century, an increased

interest in commercial enterprises led to a transformation of the economy and a growdi in

the prosperity and independence of the nation. As new factories were built in the English

countryside, new towns developed, and people flocked to these areas to fil1 the jobs

created by industrial demands.' Owing to this increased economic activity in urban areas,

all classes of British society, particuiarly the comrnon people, improved economically

and socially. The expansion of the rniddle and working classes resulted in increased

awareness of, and demand for more involvement in, social and political matters of the

nation. The social and educational desire for self-bettement expressed in these two

groups stimulated the developrnent of English periodical literature at the beginning of the

nineteenth century .'O

With industrialization came technological advances in the publication of periodicals. The introduction of the stearn press in 1814 by Frederick Koenig allowed for much faster newspaper printing and increased circulation, and this new type of press was quickly used by most London newspapers." However, the most important reason for the expansion of periodical literature during this penod was the development of education.

Between 1751 and 1821 the British population doubted from 7 to 14 million and then to 26 million in 187 1. Most of this activity occurred in industrial town areas. See Raymond Williams, The Long Revolwion (London: Chatto and Windus, 196 I), 135. 'O Leanne Langley, "The English Musical Journa! in the Early Nineteenth Century" (Ph.D. diss., University of North Carolina at Chapel HiII, 1983), 3 1. '' The first steam press in the world was used on the Times in 18 14 and was capable of 1,000 impressions an hour and quickIy developed to print 4,000 impressions an hour on both sides (8,000 pages altogether) by 1827. See Langtey, 33; and Williams, 188-89. At the end of the eighteenth century, the growth of Methodism and its system of

organized Sunday schools led to a growth in the English literacy rate." New groups of

readers emerged as the middle class business workers and lower classes turned to the

press for information and news that would affect their fmances. In the early nineteenth

century, newspapers and other forms of periodicai information became an integral part of

societal Iife for these classes. The public demand for news and stories made it

economicaily feasible for periodical owners to increase the number and size of

publications. l3

The growth of newspapers and periodicals was harnpered by the state's attempt to

control the press through the imposition of heavy taxes on the numbers of copies sold, as

well as on advertisements, paper, and newspnnt ink. In addition, the reigning political

administration manipulated the press by advertising in and subsidizing publications that

agreed to print fàvourable material. These obstacles, particularly the tax starnp acts, seriously restricted the sale and profitability of periodicals.

'' The most significant expansion of the British literate population occurred between 1780 and 1830 from 1.5 million (conjectural number because the first British census was not taken until 180 1) to 7 or 8 miilion (about half of the population in 1830) due to the introduction of organized education in the form of Sunday schools. See Maurice J. Qu inlan, Yictorian Preltide: A History of English Mmners, 1700- 1830 (Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books, l96Q 160-6 1. The education of children also improved: in 18 16 about 875,000 children out of 1.5 million attended sorne sort of school. See Williams, 136, For more detailed information on the development of reading in England see Richard D. AItick, The Engkh Common Reader: A Social History of the Mass Reading Public 1800- 1900 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957). l3 The annuai circulation of newspapers (rounded to the nearest million) grew fkom 7 million in 1753, to 12 million in 1776, to 24 million in 18 11, and to 29 million in 1820. See Williams, 135 and H.R. Fox Bourne, English Newspapers: Chapters in the History of Journaiism 2 vols. (London: Chatto and Windus, 1887), 1, 372. In 18 13 there were 1 8 morning and evening dailies and 34 weekties, of which 16 were Sunday editions; in 1784 there were only 8 morning papers, and only one weekly paper in 1777. The Sunday press quickly gained prominence and, by 1810, established a wider circulation than the dailies. See WiIliams, 189 and Bourne, I, 289. In 182 1 there were 135 newspapers in England-16 dailies, 8 twice-a- weeks, 32 weeklies-with a total circulation of 16,254,534- See The Periodical Press of Great Britain and Ireland (London: Printed for Hurst Robinson, 1824), 93-94. High taxes pushed up prices and placed periodicals out of the financial reach of many in the middle and lower classes. In 18 15, at the height of periodical taxation, taxes accounted for nearly sixty percent of the price of a copy of the Tirne~,'~and by 1830 a middle-class household with an average income of £200 to £300 could not &ord a daily paper at a cost of 7d! However, fmancial restrictions did not prevent these classes from satisfj6ng their thirst for news by other means. The number of copies printed, prirnarily detennined fiom govemment stamp duty-book records, does not accurately reflect the readership of newspapers and journals during this period, for single copies were read by a number of people at taverns and ims. For exarnple, in 1829, an account in the

Westminster Review contended that on average thuty people read any single copy of a

London newspaper (Westminster Review: April 1829, X 478).16

A number of reading-rooms and reading societies appeared which catered to the public's expanding desire for news. By 18 15 reading-rooms were cornmonplace in al1 parts of England, and every large, and many smdl towns, had its own subscnption reading-room with membership at an average cost of 1 guinea a year." Furthermore, part of the proceedings at large public meetings featured the reading aloud of newspapers to relay the events of the day. More importantly, coffee-houses, public houses, and gin-

14 LangIey, 32.

l5 Williams, 190. l6 Cited in Arthur Aspinall, Politics andrhe Press c. 1780-1850 (London: Home & Van That 1949), 24-25. Because of the extensive number of references made to and excerpts taken fiom newspapers and periodicak in this study, to Save space bibliographic information is placed in parentheses after the citation rather than in a footnote. Page references are given for weekiies and monthlies, but not for daities because of their short layout. Furthemore, sorne quotations or citations have been placed in a footnote if the context of the main body of text does not suit the reference, but the information provides a deeper understanding of the issue. shops evolved as centres for the dissemination of news. Coffee-houses quickly becarne popular middle-class meeting places, where " any newspaper published in London could be read and enjoyed with an excellent cup of coffee for haif the money." '' As the Earl of

Mount Edgcumbe revealed, coffee-shops were meeting places for opera-goers after a night's entertainment: "At the end of the performance the Company of the pit and boxes repaired to the coffee-room, which was then the best assembly in London.. ., and al1 the first Society was regularly to be seen there." I9

Whiie the middle classes met at coffee-houses, the working classes fiequented public houses not only for their meals, but also for access to newspapers at a low price.

By 1807 it was common for rural worken to meet at the local village alehouse, where the news was read aloud for those who could not read themselves-'O William Cobbett explained the expansion of press information to a much wider public than ever before:

"Ask the landlord why he takes the newspaper; he'll tell you that it attracts people to his house; and in many ways its attractions are rnuch stronger than those of the liquor there dm&, thousands upon thousands of men having become sots through the attractions of these vehicles of novelty and falsehood."" Al1 classes had access to, and the thirst for, information in the press, and the newspaper was no longer viewed as a luxury, but " had

- --

l7 AspinaII, 25. Most large towns wouId have several reading-rooms for the rniddle class to choose frorn. l8 The number of coffee-houses grew extensively at the beginning of the nineteenth century, so that by 1836, one could be found on virtualiy every street corner in London. In 1815 there were about 15 coffee-houses in London. This expanded rapidly to 1600-1 800 by 1840 at a rate of about 100 new coffee- houses per year. See Aspinall, 27-28. See page 28 for detaiIed account of one coffee-house owner's report. l9 Richard Mount Edgcurn be (Earl), Musical Reminiscences, containing an account of Italian opera in England, frorn 1773 to 1834 4th ed. (New York: Da Capo Press, 1973), 178-79. " Aspinall, 28. insensibly grown into an actual necessary of Iife. Men had begun to feel towards it as

towards a companion, and could not be parted nom it; they codd not live done again and

without their newspaper.""

Kinds and Forms of Publications:

An examination of the various forrns and functions adopted by the periodical

press illustrates the expansion of the press and gives an indication of the conditions that

generated musical discussions and journais. The kinds of publications that emerged

catered to the expanding size, diversity, changing tastes, and demands of the new

audiences, and musical commentary was featured prominently in many of the leading

periodicals. Between 1800 and 1845, at least twenty-nine specialized music

publications-including magazines, reviews, journals, and registers-circuiated in Great

Britain, but most were short-lived.') An extraordinary array of wrïters, most of whom

were not professional musicians, offered their thoughts to the English public in a number

of formats in the press.

Daily newspapers, such as the Times and the Morning Chronide, were typically four pages in length and musical announcements, discussions, and reviews, organized according to theatre, typically appeared on the third or fourth page dong with an assortment of articles on a variety of subject matters. Coverage of music in the less

" William Cobbett, Political Regisrer, 26 September 1 807. Cited in AspinaIl, 28. " Alexander Andrews, The Nistoty of British Journal km. from the Foundation of the Newspaper Press in Enghd to the Repeal of the Stamp Act in 1855, with sketches of Press Cefebrities2 vols. (London: Richard Bentley, 1859), II, 82. fiequently published periodicals included correspondences, biographies of composers and performers, articles on the history of music, discussions on theory, reviews of music and books on music, essays on critical matters, and editorials offe~gopinions for the purpose of guiding the nsing generation of amateurs on the subject of music. Although most monthly and weekly joumals did not deal solely with music, they did contain fairly detailed and well-developed discussions on musical subjects that included comrnents on the opera in London. May important and highiy influentid reviewers of theatricd productions, such as Richard MacKenzie Bacon and Leigh Hunt, wrote for these publications. Leme Langley notes the prominence of music criticism in the Examiner,

especially Hunt's contribution, despite his Iack of musical training: cc Fis] incisive and imaginative musical-theatrical writing would remain a watershed in English criticism." 24

The early-nineteenth century saw few periodicals devoted exclusively to music.

Langley identifies four formal types of music journals which she categorizes by their fiequency, audience, and degree of attention to musical detail in their cornmentaries.

Monthly musical miscellanies, which contained littie musical detail and relatively brief editorial comrnentary, appealed to a wide audience. Quarterly review publications, on the other hand, targeted the serious amateur and professional musician by including larger and more detailed articles on a variety of musical subjects. News magazines, which appeared weekly or fortnightly, also directed their discussions at a musicdly informed audience by emphasizing current music. Moreover, several amateurs published accounts of their operatic experiences in the form of persona1 notebooks to share their opinions with the p~blic.~Because music periodicals experienced diffculty surviving under the

changing tastes and economic statu of the public, only two journais devoted entirely to

discussions of music circulated, the QuurterZy M~csicalMagaine and Review (18 1 8-28)

and the monthly Hurmonicon (1 823-33). These publications advocated music as a

subject and encouraged musical appreciation to the more widespread reading audience

created by Industrialkation. The music criticism published in these joumals contributed

to the musical education of the English public and helped foster a keen interest in opera.

William Ayrton (1 777-1 858), cntic for the Harmonicon and musical director at the

King's Theatre (1 8 17 and 182 1-1822), viewed these journals as a way of inhrming and

educating the " intelligent admirers of the science." "

Content and Quality of the Musical Coverage:

The content and quality of musical coverage in these periodicals varied according

to a nurnber of considerations. Journals were ofien designed to instruct, enteaain, or

influence the reader in some way, as well as sel1 as many copies as possible, and the

substance of the reviews often reflected these purposes. The content, therefore, must be

considered within the circumstances of journalism at the time which involved political

influences, rivalries between periodicals, puffery, and various levels of musical

sophistication. Despite the biases of the writers, newspapers and magazines generally give a good description of events, especially theairical performances.

'4 Ibid., 42. Ibid., 55-58. Influence over the content of periodicals couid easily be bought because high taxation and insufficient income from sales to cover production costs forced periodicals to rely on outside conîributions. The governrnent recognized the authority the press held for much of the public and capitalized on this weakness to promote its image. But sorne autonomous journais emerged that strongly opposed the incumbent administration and voiced more liberal views. In 1834, two-thirds of the copies of periodicals sold in cities and towns were politically liberal organs directed against "the leading officia1 men under the Crown, and the general measures of liis Majesty's Ministers."" The main governmental ally, the Times, even transformed and johed the Morning Chronicle as an

"avowed and adrnitted champion of the Whig aristocracy.. .written for the Whigs, and againrr placemen, pensioners, and taxes."" Because of the highly partisan climate, some politically motivated conflicts arose, setting conservative against Whig publications.

However. Fenner notes that the liberal journals tended to allow more politicdly unbiased views on theatrïcai performances than their more conservative counterparts. '' The majoriv of reviews that form the basis for this study are found in liberal organs.

Much operatic cornrnentary was also coioured by strong conflicts between periodicals. Frequently, writers disputed the accuracy or factual basis of a citation in another publication, but other tirnes discussions (often heated) were simply sparked by competitiveness between the joumals for readership. The main point of contention lay in the monthlies' and weeklies' disapproval of the daily press, particularly with respect to

'6 Cited in Langley, 60- '' The Periodical Press of Great Britain and Ireland, 94. '' Ibid., 106. the accuracy and intellectual level of their reports. A passage in the TheafricalInquisitor

decIared the criticism of the daily newspapers "in general scarcely deserving of notice."30

Discrepancies in recounting details such as the physicai appearance of performers were

emphasized, and dailies, because of their attention to the perfomers, were criticized for

the narrowness and trïviality of their content.)' These rows notwithstanding, the power of

the daily press grew, and other perïodicals even complained that their journal's reptation

woulci suf5er if it diverged £?om the views on things like Italian opera presented in the

newspapers.)'

Owing to the wide population the press reached, favourable comments fiom

English critics were important to theatre managers and owners, playwrights, and singers.

For example, Michael Kelly noted that Richard Sheridan (175 1-1 8 16), manager of the

Dnuy Lane theatre (1 776- 1789), " dreaded the newspapers, and aiways courted their friendship" and often made statements such as: "Let me but have the periodical press on my side, and there should be nothing in the country which I could not ac~ornplish."~~

Though the public controlled the commercial fate of the opera, the press, particularly the newspapers, still exerted strong control over their appreciation of the drarnatic and musical merit of an opera Wary of poor reviews, in the belief that it wodd inevitably lead to financial min, managers often courted the fî-iendship of reviewers. Free seats and

" Fenner, Opera in London, 2. 30 Thealrical hqztkiror, October 1 8 1 3,3 10. " See for example, Examiner: October 18 10, 632-33. '' See for example, Thomas Kenrick, British Sfage: May 18 19, 14 1. Kenrick implied that the "critical chararcter" of his periodical was determined by whether he shared the opinions of newspaper critics. dinners were traded to secure favourable reviews in hopes that they would enhance the theatre's reputation and ticket sales. Leigh Hunt explained the practice and the resultant colouratioo of the reviews:

PufEery and plenty of tickets, were, however, the system of the day. It was an interchange ~Farnenitiesover the dinner table; a flattery of power on the one side, and puns on the other; and what the public took for criticism of a play was a draft upon the box-office, or rerniniscences of last Thursday 's salmon and lobster sauce.. .We saw that independence in theatrical criticism would be a great noveity."

Although puf5ery occurred, it was also met with disdain fiom some opera-goers who apparently preferred impartidity and honesty in reviews. An anonymous author in 1824 wrote:

A person whose duty it is to lead and correct the public taste in theatrical performances, should not owe his admission to the generosity of-or liberality, if you will-of the stage manager. He must repay Lie obligation in some way; and being personally known to that person, and others in his interest, he is extremely likely to be influenced to the detriment of impartial animadversion, should that be called for.. .he should be sent there, an independent and unknown agent of the newspaper establishment, to make his remarks upon the performances, without being exposed to the censure or the propitiation of any manager whatever. If the theatncal criticisms that appear came fiom sources such as these, they would not only be more interesting to the public, but they would reflect merit on the part of the journal that published them?

The content, depth, and musical sophistication of these reviews varied according to the general scope of the periodical, as well as the critic's level of musical knowledge and training. As William Ayrton pointed out in an editorid, very few reviewers were

33 M ichae l Kelly, Rem iniscences of Michael Kelly, of the King S Theatre and Theatre Royal Dmry Lane, including a period of neariy hava centrrry; with original anecdotes of many disfinguished persons. politicai, iiterary, and mzrsical2 vols. (London: Henry Colburn, l826), II, 340-4 1. educated musicians: "not one musical critic in five has the slightest knowledge of the

elements or even the language of the art in which he sits judgement" (Hmonicon: 1830,

178). Some of the most fmous and influentid critics of the period had no conventional

music training, but possessed keen musical interests. Although not professional

musicians, three of the most popular music journalists, Richard MacKenzie Bacon

(Q~erZyMusical kfagazine and Revie w), Leigh Hunt (Examiner), and Thomas Massa

Alsager (Times), were involved in musical activities that allowed them to write on the

subject in an intelligent, if not always musically precise, mamer? The highly intricate

Italian operatic style required a trained ear to be able to make intelligent observations

about the music. Consequently, many of the reviewers with littie or no formal musical

education made only vague reference to the music itself.

The level of musical ski11 required for a critic becarne the focus of a discussion

among wrïters during this period. An ofien-quoted debate between the English composer

John Bamett and Leigh Hunt on this problem appeared in five periodical numbers of the

TatZer over a two-week period in 183 1?' Barnett dismissed many of Hunt's assertions on

musical matters on account of Hunt's lack of knowledge of the science of music, to which

Hunt responded: "There is not a more shallow piece of plausibility, than the proposition, that a cntic has no right to speak of an art which he does not profess; or at least, that he

34 Leigh Hunt, The A utobiography of Leigh Hunt with Reminiscences of Friendr ami Conternporaries. 2 vols. (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1850), 1, 18 1-82. 35 The Periodical Press of Great Bri~ainand Ireiand), 147-48. 36 Hunt was a pianist and part of the Novello circle, whiIe Alsager's Iove for music was demonstrated in the performances he put on in his home. See Fenner, Opera in London, 15-16. '' Tatler: 27,30 August, 2,5, and 12 September 183 1. has no right, compared with that of anybody who does profess it" (TutZer, 5 September

183 1,226)- He continued:

[Critics] have the right to speak accordingly, whether they understand the theory of the art or not. They have the same right to criticize it, as men have to express their feelings with regard to a face or a flower, or the sunshine, without understanding anatomy or physics; for it is not the means or the process of the mystery which is the thing they are concemed with, but the result; and it is in proportion as they can express their feelings as to this result, anc! give their reasons for what they feel, and why others feel it, that they have the right to be critics. (Tatler, 12 September 183 1 250)

At the conclusion of an exhaustive correspondence, Barnett, having failed to support his arguments, conceded to Hunt's position that writers without conventional musical b:aining cm provide valuable comments (Tatler, 12 September 183 1,249).

The critic's proficiency as an auditor inevitably affected the content and quality of the review, particularly in the case of a new work. Charles Burney thought the critic ought to be a "judicious listener," present to record events and offer opinions.38 By placing the critic's experience of the work over informed discouse, personal judgements became predominant, and opinions in reviews of the sarne performance often differed widely. Moreover, operatic reviews featured accounts of non-musical aspects of the performance because the principle ahof newspapers invoIved reporting observations, usually by critics with little musical skill. Langley points out that

it is diEcult to gauge the real quality of the performance on the basis of these contemporary reviews, for not only were the performance standards of the time very different from modem ones, but the opinion of the writer was also

I8 Charles Burney, " Essay on Musical Criticism," quoted by Winton Dean, "Criticism" in New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. inextricably linked to his familiarity with the music, the composer, the perfomer(s), as well as his own skill as a listener."

However, despite these legitirnate concerns, reviews provide a wealth of relevant

information on al1 levels of musical sophistication, and provide insight into the

performance of Italian opera at this tirne that cannot be obtained from other sources.

Audiences at the King's Theatre

As the chief venue for Italian opera in London, the King's Theatre attracted

audiences who loved the foreign spectacle and performers. However, for many years, the

theatre was largely defmed by its socially elite atmosphere. Only the most affluent

circles of the London community fiequented performances of Italian opera because the pnce for admission was the costliest in London." Viewed as a place of fashion, the theatre attracted the loftiest members of society, who came more to see and be seen than for the pefiormance itself. A published Plan of the Boxes to the King's Theatre, which listed the box purchases for each year, recorded theatrical attendance, but served prirnarily as a societal register for members of the upper class. In 181 1 the Examiner

asserted: " Our nobility seem willing to endure every species of managerial imposition and insuit, rather than forego [the opera];-so powerfil is the force of fashion" (Examiner:

24 March 18 11). The need to be stylish dictated that the members of the upper classes

39 Langley, 78-79. Langley's dissertation provides a comprehensive discussion of the musical press, including information on the factors which influenced reviewers and their reviews. 40 Theatre managers charged opera patrons as rnuch as one guinea for a single performance in a box seat. David Naibach, The King's Theatre. 1704- 1867; London 's First Itafian Opera House (London: Society for Theatre Research, 1 128. appear in full dress to reflect their place in society. The Earl of Mount Edgcumbe noted:

"The audiences thus assembled were considered as indisputably presenting a finer spectacle than any other theatre in Europe, and absolutely astonished the foreign performers, to whom such a sight was entirely new." 4'

The ïtalian opera house acted as a gathering place for the nobiliv who had Little regard for the performance and often did not arrive until the performance had already begun. Boxholders cornmonly chatted, visited between boxes, and played card games, although they would interrupt their activities to listen to a favourite singer or air.42 The

London Stage asserts that box subscribers " felt an even greater propriety right than did any other class of London playgoers in doing exactly as they chose."" As Edgcumbe noted, every arktocratic lady "considered ber opera box] as much her home as her house," complete with attendants for the purpose of social interaction with other boxholders." The men often vacated their box seats during the performance to be seen and meet acquaintances in Fop7sAlley, the open area in the centre and sides of the pit.

Benjamin Ludey described the ally as a " tirne honoured celebrity" fiequented by the

"habitués" :

It was the practice of the day for dl the more " exquisite" and fashionable of the male operatic patrons to quit their boxes or their scanty stalls during the performance, and to fil1 the vacant spaces in the centre and sides of the pit, where they could laugh, lounge, chatter, eye the boxes fiom convenient vantage points, and likewise criticise and applaud in cornmon. The "meetings and greetings" that

'' Edgcumbe, 178. '"This custom already existed on the continent in rnost Italian theatres to fulfil social obligations as well as fiII in the longueurs of the recitative. See Fenner, Opera in London, 85. 43 London Stage, Part 5, vol. 1, ccvii.

4;' Edgcumbe, 1 80. took place in the pit of the opera were looked upon as an essential portion of the evening's entertaï~ment?~

In the early nineteenth century, rïsing ticket pnces caused the boxes and pit to become even more exclusive as even the affIuent members of society could no longer aord full subscriptions. '6 However, in order to maintain appearance of wealth that being on the subscription list provided, many opera-goers from the upper classes kept their subscriptions, but were forced to sel1 their boxes for a nurnber of performances each season to members of the Iower classes, at a drastically reduced pnce. David Nalbach

remarks that " some members of the nobility who were embarrassed fmancially purchased a box for the season to keep up social appearances, but disposed of every performance at a los^."^' This necessity for a wealthy heu caused the prior class limitations of the boxes and pit to recede, allowing the introduction of other classes to the previously privileged portions of the theatre. The '' cessation of the exclusive reign of fashion" '' changed the makeup of the audience for Italian opera during this period to include people

Edgcumbe referred to as "of a different description" who did not " properly belong." ''

Nevertheless, by the time Rossini appeared on the London stage in 18 18, the elitist nature of Italian opera had subsided and "the unfounded prejudices against it in the middle and lower classes, [were] daily disappearing" (Theatrical Inquisitor: May 18 18, 338-39).

" Benjamin Lumley, Reminiscences of the Opera (London: Hurst and Blackett, 1864), 62-63. 46 Prices rose according to the increased dernands placed on the managers by the star singers. Because of CataIani's outrageous demands, box prices augmented fiom 180 to 300 guineas per season. Edgcumbe, 1 79-80. 47 Nalbach, 129. 48 C.L. Gruneisen, The Opera and rhe Press (London, 1869), 4-5. Quoted in Nalbach, 129.

j9 Edgcumbe, 1 83-84. The audience, iike the cntics, becarne much more diverse and exhibited various IeveIs of

knowledge about Itdian opera.

Cntics became outspoken about the public musical taste, and they praised and

blamed al1 levels of society without prejudice. The upper classes fkquently received

hostile comrnents from the press for their opinions of the opera as fashionable

entertainment. Hunt, disgusted that so few attended the theatre out of the pure love of

music, wrote of the air of "falsehood" created by the socialites and accused them of

being performers (on their own terms) who struggled for attention with the singers on

stage (Cornpanion: 30 January 1828). In 1822. Hunt chastised the musical taste and

judgement of the public whom he labeled: "smatterers and dabblers in music, whose only

vanity prompts them to rely on their own incapability, and then persists in forcing their

favourites upon us, lest the withdrawing them should ïmpugn the profundis of their judgement" (Examiner: 14 Aprïl 1822,234). Certain members of the Iower classes also

found themselves under criticism fiom the press. As one critic noted, the social

composition of the opera-goers comprised "of the most promiscuous we ever saw; for

women of notorious infarny were placed in the boxes of the highest distinctions"

(Morning Chronicle: 28 January 18 1 1).

A scarcity of documentary evidence makes it difficult to gauge public response to

Italian opera." House receipts could offer some indication of attendance, but since no

complete accounts exist, the number of performances often provides the best method for

'O Marvin Carlson, "Theatre Audiences and the Reading of a Performance," in Interpretation of the TheafricalPmt, ed. Thomas Pastlewait and Bmce A- McConachie (Iowa City: University Press, 1989). Carlson addresses the issue of varrying audience response with respect to play productions. determining the popularity of particular operas and singers. Fenner concludes that a

successfid or popular première season would have yielded a minimum of six

performances.51Moreover, the generai success or failure of an opera can be detemiined

by the level of contïnued interest, Le. the nurnber and fiequency of revivds.

Some documents suggest that much of the public relied on reviews to know how

to respond to an opera, However, pubIic response often deviated fiom the views

presented in the press as an examination of II barbiere's performances in London will

demonstrate. Evidence of audience reactions emerge in many reviews which, Fenner has

determined, generally coincide with box-office success or failure." Although writing about a period some forty years prior to the focus of the present study, Cecil Pnce's remarks on the effect of the press on public attendance of operas in London certainly applies to the early nineteenth century: " publicity, however artfûl and seductive, could rarely persuade people to attend plays that were known to be caviare to the general.. . On the other hand, a new piece that enthralled an audience drew crowds without the help of newspaper puffing." 53

Reviews of Italian Opera

Reviews of performances at the King's Theatre appeared in various forms in the newspapers and jounials that circulated in London in the early-nineteenth century. The

'' The high nurnber of performances of a new production for a season being 12 or 13 and the Iow at 1 S. Fenner, Opera in London, 96-97. 5"bid., 269-70. 53 Cecil J.L. Price, Theatre in the Age of Garrick (Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littiefield, 1973), 14 1. best newspapers, journais, uid magazines employed two reviewers: one for English opera and one for Italian, aithough sorne weeklies and monthlies employed only a single person to cover both types because of their less fiequent distribution. The length of reviews for

Italian opera averaged about seven hundred words, but varied accordhg to the importance of the production." The basis of the hierarchical system for the length of a review dictated that premières deserved longer reviews, while less space was devoted to revivais of operas and the débuts by and benefits for singers (udess they involved a première).

Italian opera figured prominently in the two principle London newspapers, the Times and the Morning Chronide. The Times covered première productions, revivals, débuts of new performers, and benefit concerts more consistently than other publications. Journals typically covered the same topics as newspapers, but were able to wrïte more extensive and detailed discussions because their longer format allowed more room for theatncd commentary. The reviews of L? barbiere in the London newspapers and perïodicals illustrate these qualities.

The disintegration of social boundaries that shaped many aspects of English culture until the end of the eighteenth century had a profound influence on the periodical press and the arts of the eariy nineteenth century. With greater social and economic freedom, members of the lower and rniddle classes were able to enjoy luxuries-such as

54 Fenner, Opera in London, 14. newspapers, joumals, and theatncaI performances- that had previously been monopolized by the aristocratie elite. At the King's Theatre this change was reflected in a more diverse audience for both the performances of Italian opera and discussions of those performances in the press figured prorninently to appeai to the tastes of their newly defined readership. An understanding of the growth of the press, and its pervasive uifluence provides some indication of the social context within which performances and reviews of iZ barbiere can be exarnined,

The following chapters examine documents fiom the early-nineteenth century pertinent to the London performances of Il barbiere, documents which reveal critical response to Rossini, the opera itself, and its performances. Discussions of the performers dominate the reviews, while other aspects of the production such as staging and the orchestra receive little mention. Specifically, the writers focus on the extraneous material singers introduced into the opera, the Italian style of singing, and the abuse of omamentation. An examination of the writings in the musical press provides a window

(through the eyes of critics) into the operatic conventions prevalent during this penod and ailows us to get a sense of what the EngIish audience might have heard and seen. CHAPTER TWO 'Submitted to the judgement of an English audience'

After its initial performance in Rome (20 February 18 16), IZ barbiere received a great deal of positive attention in the Italian press and continued to cornmand the interest of critics throughout the early nineteenth century. fl barbiere quickly became one of

Rossini's more popular works outside Italy, especially in London where it was an audience favourite. This chapter examines the circumstances surrounding the composition, première, and reception of the opera in Rome as well as the initiai performances and reception of the opera in London. Several aspects of the Roman première season of Il barbiere, which also involved Manuel Garcia, feature prominently in the reviews of the London performances.

Rossini moved to Rome in November 1815 for the Z 8 16 Caniival season at the

Teatro Argentina, for which the impresario, Duke Francesco Sforza Cesarini (1772-

18 l6), had cornmissioned him to compose a new opera. Cesarini first approached

Giacomo Feretti (1 784- 1852), a well-known Roman poet, for the libretto, but Feretti's libretto was rejected by both Cesarini and Rossini because they found the story " quite worthless." ' They turned instead to Cesare Sterbini (1783-1851), who agreed to write the libretto and completed it in a short period of thefor the Roman première. Sterbini

' GeItrude Righetti-Giorgi, Cenni di una donna giù cantanre (Bologna, 1823). For this thesis, text of Righetti-Giorgi's accounts will be drawn from Luigi Rognoni, Gioacchino Rossini (Turin: Edizioni rai radiotelevisione italiana, 1968); see 357. The English translation is taken fiom Philip Gossett, Preface to II barbiere di Siviglia: Facsimile of the A utograph Manuscript, by Gioach ino Ross hi, (Bologna: Civico Museo Bibhgrafico Musicale, 1993)' 13, note 34. Gossett cites an assertion by Righetti-Giorgi (the first Rosina) that Feretti's libretto was not refused by censors as had been suggested, but was "unappreciated" and dismissed because of the weak plot. chose as his subject a story that had been used by a number of librettists before him, Le barbier de Séville by the French playwright Pierre-Augustin Beaumarchais (1 73 2- 1799)' denin 1772, and first perfomed in Paris in 1775.

Cesarini, Sterbini. and Rossini were well aware that this subject might be problematic because of the widely popular opera on the same story by the highly esteemed Italian composer, Giovanni PaisielIo (1740- 18 16)' with a libretto by Giuseppe

Petroseilhi (1 727-1 797).' For this reason, the three collaborators for the new opera tried to distance their opera from Paisieilo's. The 18 26 printed libretto of Rossini's opera carried the title Almaviva, O sia L 'inutileprecauzione and, to avoid Merassociation with Paisiello's work, Sterbini presented a disclaimer, or «Notice to the Public»

The comedy of Signor Beaumarchais entitled h' barbiere di Siviglia, O sia L 'inutileprecauzione is being presented in Rome arranged as a comic opera, with the title Almaviva, o sia L 'inutile precazzione so as to fülly convince the public of the feelings of respect and veneration that animate the author of the music of the present drarna toward the justly celebrated Paisiello, who already employed this subject under its onginal title. Called on to assume this most difficult assignrnent, Maestro Gioachino Rossini, in order to avoid the imputation of a foolhardy rivalry with the immortal author who preceded him, has expressly requested that the Barbiere di SivigZia be newly verified in ils entirety, and that there be added to it several new situations for musical numbers, which were in any case required by modem theatrical taste, which has changed so rnuch since the epoch in which the renowned Paisiello wrote his music.3

Paisiello's opera, /i barbiere di Siviglia. O sia L 'inutile precauzione, was premièred in St. Petersburg in 1782. For an interesting discussion on the similarities and differences of Rossini's and Paisiello's settings, see Marvin Tartak, "The Two 'Barbieri'," Music and Letters 50, no.1 (1969): 453-69. ' "La Commedia dei Signor Beaumarchais intitolata ,,Il Barbiere di Siviglia, O sia l'inutile precauzione si presenta in Roma ridotta a Dramrna Comico col titolo di ,,Almaviva, O sia l'inutile precauzione al170ggettodi pienamente convincere il pubblico de'sentimenti di rispetto e venerazione che anirnano 1'Autore della Musica dei presente Dramrna verso il tanto celebre Paesiello che ha gia trattato questo soggetto sotto il primitive suo titolo. Chiamato ad assurnere il medesimo dificile incarico il Signor Maestro Gioacchino Rossini, onde non ïncorrere nella taccia d'ma temeraria rivalità coll'immortaIe autore che Io ha preceduto, ha espressamente With this declaration, Sterbini acclaimed the merits of Paisiello and his opera, and at the same tune emphasized the novelty of the new setting of Beaumarchais's play in hopes of absolvhg himself and Rossini f?om cnticisrn frorn the public and by the press for treating the same story as the most popular contemporary composer. Nevertheless, cornparison of the two operas was inevitable and it plagued performances of Rossini's version fiom its première in Rome throughout the nineteenth centuqc4 Its present title, fl barbiere di

Siviglia, did not appear until the opera's revival in Bologna in August 18 16, only two months afier PaisielloTsdeath.

For the production of h' barbiere, Cesarini worked diligently to assemble a cast that would likely ensure public approval and render the opera a success. He procured

Luigi Zamboni as primo bu80 for the part of Figaro, Signora Rhigetti-Giorgi as prima donna for Rosina, and Manuel Garcia, a Spanish tenor of immense popularity throughout

Europe, as primo uomo for the part of Count Almaviva. The highlight of the cast was

Garcia who had established himself as one of Rossini's favourite singers after premièring the role of Norfolk in Rossini's Elisabetfa, regina d Yng?ziZterra (4 October 18 15) in

Naples. A letter fkom Cesarini to Monsignor Car10 Mauri, dated 20 December 1815, relayed the news of Garcia's engagement: " Yesterday, then, at 1 1P.M. 1 can tell your

~~~~~ richiesto che il Barbiere di Siviglia fosse di nzrovo inferamente versificato, e che vi fossero aggiunte parecchie nuove situazioni di pezzi musicali, clle eran d'altronde reclamate da1 modern0 gusto teatrale contant0 cangiato dall'epoca in cui scrisse la sua rnusica il rinornato Paesiello." Cesare Sterbini, Almaviva. O sia L 'inutile precmione (Roma: Crispino Puccinelli presso S. Andrea della Valle, 18 16), 2-3. English translation fiorn Gossett, Preface to fi barbiere disbiglia, 13-14. The desire to compare the two operas among Italian opera cognoscenti an.? scholars since Rossini's première, reached such extremes that in 1819 the Théâtre Louvois in Paris put on the two productions, side-by-side, to allow the Parisian audience opportunity to rnake their o~vncornparison: Rossini's won favour. Michael Robinson, " The Barber of Seville: An Introduction," descriptive notes, excellency that I believe to have secured for the stage of the Argentina one of the finest

tenors of Europe, who will then go to London."' Rossini fashioned the part of the Count

specificaily with Garcia and his vocal capabilities in mind,6

Cesarini died suddenly on 16 February 18 16, during the height of rehearsds.

Ho wever, preparations for the first performance of Almaviva continued and the opera opened only four days later. An entry in the Chigi diary (a daily record of events at the

theatre) for the twenty-first of February stated: " Yesterday evening a new burletta of maestro Rossini, entitled the Barbiere di Siviglia, had its première at the Argentina with a poor reception." The first performance of the opera in Rome has generdy been categorized in most Rossini scholarship as a 'fiasco', but the circumstances sunoundhg and reaction to the première have been exaggerated . Though only the fust night met with hostility, the anecdotal descriptions of that night have perpetuated the myth of a cornplete failure for the opera's season as a whole.

In addition to the untirnely death of the impresario, confusion and complications marred the première of the new opera. Several reports indicate that it was plagued by

. .. - Gioacchino Rossini: Il barbiere disiviglia, recorded under the direction of Claudio Abbado (Deutsche Grammophon , 1992), 16. ' " Ieri poi alle ore 23 dica a S-E- che credo di aver assicurato per le scene dell'Argentina uno dei più bravi tenori d'Europa che và poi a Londra." Cited in Enrico Celani, " Musica e musicisti in Rorna," Rivista musicale iraliana 22 (1 9 19, 55. English translation fiom Gossett, Preface to I! barbiere di Siviglia, 7, note 20. As this quote reveals, it was already known, before Garcia began work on the Roman performance, that he would travel to London to perform at the King's Theatre- See page 3, footnote 5. ' Ieri sera ando in scena ad Argentina una nuova burletta del maestro Rossini intitolata il " Barbiere di Sivigliu,, con esito infelice," Chigi diary, cited in Celani, 266, English translation Frorn Gossett, Preface to Il barbiere di Siviglia, 26, note 1 1 See Henri Beyle (The Count de Stendhal), Vie de Rossini (Paris, 1824. Reprint translated by Richard N. Coe as Lqe of Rossini. New York: Orion Press, 1970), 177-78; Richard Osborne, Rossini (London: J.M. Dent, 1986), 28-3 1; Nicholas Till, Rossini: His Lfe and Times (New York: Hippocrene Books, 1983), 62-62; Francis Toye, Rossini: a study oftragi-comedj (London: W.Heinrnann, 1934; reprint constant disruptions by a cabal of Paisiello supporters-who found Rossini's version

ùiferior to the earlier work-as well as by a number of calamitous stage accidents. These

events are corroborated by Righetti-Giorgi's account of that evening, which states that a

series of mishaps and disasters (with the exception of her Cavatina, of course) ruined the

performance? In addition to describing Basilio's bloody nose, the interruption of the

hale by the appearance of a black cat on stage, and Rossini's outrageous Spanish-style

suit with gold buttons, 'O Righetti-Giorgi mentions the behaviour of the audience on the

opening night:

Whïstles from everywhere. The finale was reached, a classical composition, which the greatest composers in the world wodd have been honoured to write. Laughter, shouts, and the most penetrating whistles, and they quieted down only to let even louder ones ring out. At that moment we arrived at the lovely unison: " Questa'awentura" a home voice from the upper balcony screarned: " There's the fimeral music for D[uke]. C[esarini]." That was al1 it took It's impossible to describe the abuse showered on Rossini, who remained undaunted at his cembalo, as if to Say: "Apollo, forgive them, for they know not what they do." "

Public disapproval of the première was paralleled by criticism in the Italian press. One report stated: ccTrulyuseless was the Precaution taken by Rossini and his colIaborators, shce on opening night the public gave vent to the wrath it feels when it is heroically

-- - -- as Rossini: The Man and His Music, New York: Dover, 1987), 54-62 (page citations are to the reprint edition); and Herbert Weinstock, Rossini: A Biography Vew York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1968). Righetti-Giorgi's reminiscences did not appear until 1822, six years after the event, but they stil1 provide sorne of the most informative accounts of the première available. 'O Although these details of the première have been referred to by numerous Rossini biographers, no contemporary evidence exists to support them. " '' Fischiate di ogni parte. Si giunse al finale, che é una composizione classica, di cui si onorerebbero 1 primi compositori del mondo, Risate, urli e fischi penetrantissimi e non si faceva silenzio, che per sentime de' più sonori. Allora si arriv6 al bel unisono: ((Questa avventtmw; una voce chioccia da1 lubbione grido: «Ecco ti funerali del D.C.)). Non ci volle di più. Non si possono descrivere le contumelie, cui ando soggetto Rossini, che se ne stava impavido al suo cernbalo, e pareva dicesse: ((Perdons, O AppoIlo, a questi signori, che non sanno ci0 che facciano))." Italian from Rognoni, 358-59, English translation frorn Gossett, Preface to II barbiere di SivigIia, 27. bored." " Disappointed with the negative public response and overt hostility, Rossini left the theatre and, feigning illness, refused to compfete his contractual obligations of three per£orrnances at the harpsichord.

The disastrous première, however, did not prevent the opera from being a success, for the following evening witnessed a dramatic improvement in critic and audience attentiveness and approval. Indeed, subsequent performances elicited several highly positive reviews. Righetti-Giorgi recounts that "the most honoured men in Rome" reaiized the "excellence of his work." The Roman opera-goers

came to their senses, and decided that they should at least Iisten attentively to the entire opera, so as to judge it fairly. They therefore flocked to the theatre also the second evening, and they remained in rapt silence.. .The opera was crowned with general applause.. .at the third performance the applause grew stronger still: and frnally Rossini's L? barbiere di Siviglia joined the ranks of those musical compositions which never age.I3

Another article published a few weeks afier the première asserted that

although II barbiere di Siviglia did not encounter the approbation of the public on its opening night, on the next night and on those following its merits were savored and it excited such enthusiasm that the theatre rang with praise for Maestro Rossini. The public wished him to come forth several tirnes, and he was even accornpanied to his lodging with a torchlight procession, so great was the reception given this latest composition, full of joy and verve, of the farnous Maestro Rossini. ''

" " Fu veramente inutile la Cautela del Maestro Rossini, ed altri suoi socj, perché la prima sera il Pubblico fece 1 soliti sfoghi quando è annojato eroicamente." From Bibiioteca taetraie, cited in Annalisa Bini, "Rossini a Roma, ossia la comicita in trionfo," in Rossini 1792-1992: mostra storico-documentaria, ed. Mauro Bucarelli (Perugia: Electra Editori Umbri, 1992), 147. English translation from Gossett, Preface to II barbiere di SNigiiu, 2 8. l3 '' I Romani frattanto tornarono su1 fatto Ioro, e pensarono che almeno bisognava sentir tutta I'opera con attenzione, per poscia giudicarne con giustizia. Accorsero quindi al teatro anche la seconda sera, e vi fecero altissimo silenzio.. .L'opera fu coronata del piauso generaie,. .Alla terza recita il piauso crebbe: infine Il barbiere di SivigIia di Rossini paso al rango di quelle composizioni musicali che non hvecchiano." Rognoni, 359. English translation from Gossett, Preface to il barbiere di Sivlglia, 28. l4 "il Barbiere di Siviglia se non incontri, la prima sera I'approvazione del pubblico, la sera appresso e nelle altre consecutive ne fu ben gustato il pregio, e desto tale entusiasmo che risuonava il teatro degli evviva per il Sig. Maestro Rossini, II popolo volle più volte vederlo su1 Palcoscenico, e fu perfino accompagnato colle torcie da1 teatro fino alla di lui abitazionte, tanto è stato l'incontro che ha fatto questa Despite its almost imrnediate popularity, Roman audiences had Iittle exposure to

Rossini's new opera because the opera season ended within a week of the première,

which allowed time for oniy five performances.'5

Rossini and II barbiere under English Critical Scrutiny

Because of its financial difficuities and England's geographical isolation, the

King's Theatre usually had to wait extensive penods of time-often between six and eight

years-to produce new Italian operas;16the fust Mozart opera to be performed in England,

La Clemema di Tito, was not staged until 1806, fifteen years after Mozart's death." In

1820, Bacon wrote of the Europeans' aversion to antiquated operas and their incessant

demands for theatre managers to always have the latest operas, whiie the London

audiences were content to stage older works: "those of the King's Theatre of

England.. .wait patiently.. .till the continental cities have approved, and perhaps nearly

forgotten, the compositions which we of the second table receive wÏth the humility which becomes us" (London Magazine: July 1820,94). Ayrton referred to London as "the kt, loftiest, and most lavish capitals, fed upon by men of song" (Harmonicon: October 1823,

133).

------ultima composizione piena di estro e di vivacità del rinomato Sig. Maestro Rossini." From Diaro di Roma cited in Annalisa Bini, " Echi delle prime Rossiniane nella Starnpa Romana dell'epoca," in Rossini a Rorna-Rossini e Roma (Rome: Fondazione Marco Besso, 1992)' 176. English translation frorn Gossetr, Preface to II barbiere di SNigIia. 2 8.

l5 Alberto Cametti, " La rnusica teatrale a Roma cento anni fa," Anntrario della Regiu Accudernia diSanta Cecilia 332 (1915-16): 66. '' Fenner, Opera in London, 69. " The English public were not without any exposure to Mozart previous to his King's Theatre début because individual arias and songs already circulated and found favour in amateur circles at private concerts, and appeared as substitutions in other operas. Mozart did not enjoy popularity in London for Rossini, however, quickl y gained international fme, and London audiences did

not have to wait long for their frrst sarnple of his operas. The King's Theatre staged i7

barbiere in 1818, ody eight years after the first performance of Rossini's fist Italian

opera in Venice (La cambiale di rnarrimonio, 3 November 18 IO), and a delay of only two

years after Li' barbiere's Roman première. The choice of lZ barbiere appears unusual both

because his other operas were more popular on the Continent and because the initial

reaction to it in the Roman press was hostile. II barbiere reached the London stage

through Waters's engagement of Manuel Garcia for the 18 18 season;18 during contractual

negotiations, Garcia had stipulated that after his appearance at the Teatro Argentha, he

would leave Italy to travel to London (see note 5). l9 Fint-rate singers comrnonly took

compositions-often whole operas-which most effectively displayed their talent with them to new cities or countries in hopes that success and wide approbation would ensue.

Garcia Iikely chose the role of Almaviva-written by Rossini specifically with the

Spaniard7stechnical virtuosity in mind-for his introduction to London audiences."

even another ten years after the production of Tito. Fenner, 133 and Roger Fiske, EngIish Theatre Music in the Eighreenth Century (New York: Oxford University Press, I986), 506. 18 The Garcia family, with a few other renowned singers, formed an opera Company and traveIed to the US., becoming the first [talian opera Company to visit America. For their début they staged II barbiere in New York at the Park Theatre (Novernber 1825); it was the frrst opera to be Sung in Itdian in New York. I9 Unfortunately, no score or libretto of the opera brought to and originally performed in London exists, but as the focus of this study is not on the veracity of the score, but rather on information in newspapers, joumals, magazines, and amateur accounts, this Iacuna is easily surnountable. Because it was brought to the London stage by Garcia, the version that was performed waprobably the same as the Roman version, with the alterations made by Rossini after the disastrous first performance. See Gossett, Preface to Il barbiere disbiglia, 28, note 78 and 35-44 in his description of the autograph. Garcia wouId probably have brought a score with the revisions from Rome. if barbiere did not have its première in Paris untiI 1819, which suggests that the Roman version is the only possibitity. 'O Although no contract for Garcia's employment at the King's Theatre is available for my examination, contracts for the finest Italians singers customarily included control over the choice of opera in which there were to make their début. The foIlowing exarnples appeared in published copies of proposal letters between Mr. Waters and singers, most of which stipulated that the singer would provide the opera for their presentation (Quarterly Mztsical Magazine: 18 18, 246-48): As early as 3 0 January L 8 18, notices appeared in the London dailies announcing

the approaching première of h' barbiere di SivigiÏa. These publications created a great

deal of anticipation both for the opera and its primo uomo, Manuel ~arcia;*'however, neither Rossini nor the opera are mentioned in the first annouocements. For example, the

Times published: cc The subscribers to the Opera and the public are most respectfûlly informed, that Signor Garcia is engaged at this theatre, and will shortly make his fïrst appearance in this country" (30 Janiiary 18 18). The appearance of only Garcia' s name in this advertisement suggests that information about the arrivai of this phenomenai tenor preceded the knowledge of the particular opera in which he would make his début. The advertising focused on Garcia probably because the English public were most attracted to productions which featured new foreign singers who had already established their fame on the Continent.

The f~stnotices that included both the composer and title of the work Garcia chose for his début appeared only a few days Iater on 3 February 18 18. The Times printed: " Signor Garcia is engaged at this theatre, and will shortly make his first appearance in this country in Rauzzini's [sic] popuIar opera entitled Il Barbiere di

1. " Prima Donna Seria, Sig. F.P. demands ...permission to make her debut in a man's character in an opera which she wilI take with fier." 2. "The first opera 1 am to appear in, to be of my own choice, and the singers who are to perform in it, to be to my satisfaction."

3. " Signora C P requires to have the naming of the opera in which she is to make her first appearance." " In his review ofII barbiere's London premiére, Ayrton remarked on the sense of heightened anticipation created by the press: " Expectation has for some time past been awakened by the promise of a new Opera, a new Composer, and a new Singer. The interim between the first announcement of these novelties and their actuaI production has not been unernpioyed; recourse had been had to the usual methods of preparing the pubIic-or at least that part of the public who fiequent this Theatre-for their reception; theatricat diplomacy has been unusually active, panegyric has been neither idle nor scruputous, and thus hope was raised to the highest summit when the Overture began" (Morning Chronicle: 13 March 1818). Sevigliao' (Times: 3 February 1 8 18)." Onginally scheduled for 7 March 18 18, but

probably postponed because of casting changes, fl barbiere premièred at the King's

Theatre on Tuesday 10 March 18 18. Starting with the %t performance, Rossini's opera

dominated the London stage for ten to twelve years. In the fist season, L? barbiere

received twelve performances, and in the years between 18 19 and 183 0 it was revived

eight thes, ofien with numerous performances?

Reception of the première and initial reactions to Rossini

The Iarge number of performances, together with reports of full attendance,"'

indicate that public response to Rossini and the opera was positive. In newspaper,

magazine, and journal reviews, critics devoted a great ded of space to recording their

initial reactions to Rossini, using iZ bat-biere as a springboard to discuss Rossini's music

in generaf-it was with this première that tfie English public was fist introduced to his theatricai music. Because of Rossini's newness and the strong English curïosity for foreign figures, many of the critiques include extensive accounts about Rossini's compositional style and offer judgements on his merits as a composer. Opinions arnong critics varied widely, and many reviews contained contradictory passages which both

- " See Appendix 1 for a iist of advertisements published in the Times and Morning Chronicle prior to the prerniere of II barbiere. The extreme degree to which Rossini's name was misspelled in the Times may be accobnted for by the fact that a popular Italian castrato, composer, and singing tutor in London in the late eighteenth century was named Venanzio Rauzzini (1 746-1 8 10). Rauzzini was held in hi& esteem in London for his peri?ormances at the King's Theatre, as well as for his contribution of new operas, revised works, and pasticcios. However, the announcernent in the Morning Chronicle included the correct spelling of Rossini's narne. -3 The number of performances seems to be a point of contention arnong various scholars. ConsequentIyt 1 have determined the numbers for 18 18, 18 19, and 1822. presented here by examining accounts of performances at the King's Theatre in the British Stage: December 18 18,287; December 18 19, 279; December 1820,285 and the " Chronicles" from the Harmonicon (1 850). For a detailed outline of the number of revivals and their number performances, see Appendix 2. endorsed and opposed Rossini and his work. Some writers, however, such as Thomas

Massa Alsager of the Times, supported Rossini fiom the outset.

Alsager' s fist review praised Rossini as a "young composer of extraordinary merit" and stated that this first example of ks work at the King's Theatre proved

"delightful" (Tintes: 1 1 March 18 18). Aithough wrïtten with obvious reserve, Alsager's comments reveal his general approval of Rossini's music:

This opera is the Fust specirnen of his composition which has been submitted to the judgrnent of an English audience: taken as a whole perhaps, it bears marks of haste, and still more of extravagance; but we are persuaded that al1 persons who have cmried the study of music to the least degree of refxnement, must have been delighted and astonished by the occasionai touches of genius, the variety and originality of his siyle, The general character of Rossini's music is extrerne ornament, the perfect reverse of what is called the simple style; but his resources in that Iule, and the fertility of his invention, seem almost unlimited. (Times: 1 1 March 1818)

Impressed by the new work, Bacon wrote of his admiration of h! barbiere, the character of which he considered "vocal without extravagance, rich without losing sight of the most touching simplicity, and various without ernbarrassing the ear by its complication. It has al1 the qualities of musical genius" (Literary Gazette: 14 March 18 18, 173). William

Ayrton of the Morning Chronicle aiso favoured the new composer and believed that

Rossini showed " some very original ideas, and some very ssiking effects, which are discoverable in ratfier beyond the number of pieces that, according to our calculations, are essential to an opera composed for Italy" (Morning Chronicle: 13 March 18 18). Even

Edgcumbe, who ofien wrote negatively about Rossini, conceded: "that [he] is possessed

24 For example, "the house was filled at an early hou? (Times: 1 1 Mach 18 18). of genius and invention cannot be denied, but [his operas] are not guided by good taste, and may be deemed too frn~iflll."~

The harshest comments on the London première came fiom the critic for the

News, who, obviously unimpressed by the production, did everything possible to counteract any positive reactions:

possinfl is considerably more admired on the Continent (where the ankle of the Prima Donna is more critically examined than the music of her part) than he is ever likely to be in this country. His style is less remarkable for its varïety than for the prodigality of ornament which rather characterizes than adorns it- There is no onguiality about it, either in passion or fancy-hdeed, with three or four exceptions, the music of the opera is considerably more flat and commonplace than anything we recollect 1ateIy to have heard: and its whole surface is laboued into an artificial richness by an accumulation of a thousand graces, which would scarcely have been used by any musician of moderate taste-even if he possessed no splendour of imagination. (15 March 18 18)

Leigh Hunt was not particularly enarnoured with Rossini's music either, and after a long and acerbic exposition on the inadequacies of Rossini's version of the opera, he concluded:

We have taken it for granted al1 this while that Signor ROSSINI is young, as reported. If not, he will hardly become eminent; but if he is, he undoubtedly may be so; provided he is not as noisy and vehement as his music, and does not get his wild head broken some day, for some over-vivacious serenade. (Examiner: 22 March 1818,202)

Although L? barbiere was generally well received after its &st performance, the initial reactions of many English critics. like their Italian colleagues, were strongly coloured by their disdain for Rossini's choice of subject matter. Some reviews sirnply mentioned the existence of the m-Osetungs of the same plot. Kenrick, for example, asserted that "the music for this Opera was composed we believe in the first instance by

25 Edgcumbe, 132. Paisiello; but the songs have been newly set by Rossini" (British Stage: April 18 18, 82).

However, most writers were baffled by Rossini's audacity to set the same story as the

great Paisiello, and by the management's decision to produce Rossini's version over that

of Paisiello. An anonymous critic in the Thenfricalinquisitor referred to the opera as

" originaily composed by Paisiello," but also conceded that cc the effect of this Opera, as now set, reconciles us to the change. Signor Rossini's music, though it wants the soul- touching of Paisiello, is marked by a sprightly playfùlness, and even comic expression, which harmonizes with and enforces the drarna" (March 18 18,207-08). Reviews by

Hunt in the Examiner and by the music critic from the News included particularly harsh

remarks. Hunt attended the first performance with " high expectations" owing to the enormous approval II barbiere had since received in My, but Ieft disappointed and consequently shunned the work and the composer because he believed Rossini attempted to elevate himself to the level of the great composer Paisiello. To voice his indignation at

Rossini's poor taste, Hunt devoted the entire review to a critique of Rossini's music. He stated:

The author's having taken up an opera to set to music, which had already been composed by so fine a master as PAESIELLO, was not a piece of ambition to the best taste .... We expected that we should find Iittle genius exhibited, at least on the same sentiment; and we were not disappointed. The greatest excellence of the Italian school wozart] ... consists in fine melody and expression. They take up one passion after another, and give you the genuine elementary feeling of it, as if they were undergoing and totally occupied with it themselves. PAESIELLOYs compositions are special instances of this power of expression. His melodies are exquisitely graceful, touching, and onginai; and bis recitatives aiways appear to us so extremely to the purpose, as to be superior even to those of that deliglztful Germa.by nation, and Italian by nature, MOZART. In neither of these qualities, will Signor ROSSINI'S Opera, in our opinion, bear any comparison. (Examiner: 22 March 1818,202) Hunt considered Rossini's opera '' destitute" of "a succession of beautifiil airs," which he believed imperative for a successfil opera. He even suggested that perhaps Rossini borrowed fiom Haydn, Mozart, or Paisiello, but could not substantiate his claim without reference to the score: "we have dortunately lost our copy of the boer' (fiaminer: 22

March 18 18,202)- Comments even less courteous than Hunt's appeared in the News:

We do not know whether impudence or genius is most remarkable in a composer who sits down to repeat a story which has already been so delightfdly told by one of the greatest masters of his art: but we may in some degree settIe the point by fancying how we should estimate the modesty of any worthy gentleman who should announce a new comedy to be cdled The Mdsummer Mght '.Y Dream, or a new tragedy of Macbeth or Othello. In the new Barber of Seville we therefore looked with some eagerness for some touches of genius or nature-some wildness of fancy at once gracefid and original, which should justSy the boldness of an atternpt for which no other excuse could be invented-but we were disappointed. (1 5 March 1818)

Thomas Love Peacock, on the other hand, preferred Rossini's seîting to that of Paisiello:

" There can be no question that Rossini's music is more spirit-stirring than Paësiello's7 and more essentialiy theatrical: more suited to the theatre by its in£înite variety of contrast and combination." ''

Critics often compared Rossini to other composers presented that season, particularly with the insurrnountable legacy of Mozart's operas on the London stage.

Much of the critical cornmentary attacked the deviation of Rossini's style fhm the accepted formula for 1talia.n opera that they believed Mozart had established in his works.

The English public and press revered Mozart as the ideal, and his operas, which domulated the King's Theatre seasons f?om 15 16-18, went unchallenged until the advent of Rossini. Although rnany critics conceded Rossini's merits, they affirrned Mozart's superiority and asserted that Rossini would not be able to surpass the Geman composer's talents and popularity. Peacock characterized the première of l7 barbiere as "a grest revolution in dramatic music," but not one that would supersede Mozart's works:

Rossini burst on stage like a torrent, and swept everything before him except Mozart, who stood, and will stand, alone and unshaken, like the Rock of Ages, because his art is like Shakspeare's, identical with nature, based on principles that cannot change fil1 the constitution of the human race itself be changed, and therefore secure of admiration through al1 tirne, as the drapery of the Greek statues has been through dl the varieties of fashion."

Bacon suggested that, had Rossini been bom earlier, he might even have been Mozart's rival in the realm of Italian opera (Liferary Gazette: 14 March 18 18, 173). Such approbation was disputed by crïtics, including Ayrton who remarked that fl barbiere,

" notwithstanding the ment that it really possesses, has been over-rated, particularly by those mischievous fkiends who have been so extravagant in their praise, as to institute somethuig of a cornparison behveen this and the operas of Mozart" (Morning ChronicZc:

13 March 1818).

Ln their cornparisons of Mozart and Rossini critics focused on the respective musical ment of the two composers. Reviewers noted the "animal spirits" responsible for the vivacity and force of Rossini's music but contended that his music lacked the ethereal and sweeping melodies of Mozart's operas. In the British Stage, Thomas

Kenrick asserted:

The character of his music is highly imposing; abounding with ornament and splendid passages, but seldom presenting those energetic, sublime, and pathetic melodies, which in Mozart occur so profusely, He tu&ates in a richness of style,

'' The Wurk of Thomas Love Peacock: Critical and Other Essays, Volume 9 (New York: AMS Press, 1967), 244. " Ibid., 245. which rather gains upon the judgrnent of the auditors, than appeais to their sensibility, or wins their hem. (British Srage: April 18 18,82)

However, Rossini found an advocate in the author of a letter to the editor (signed only as

CC Musicus7? 28) of the Quarterly Müsical Magazine and Review, who chdlenged the

composer's detractors and their belief that in order for music to be effective and stir the

passions, it must follow the rules of classicism as manifest in the music of Mozart. He

claimed that there existed "no peremptory rule against complexity, provided the auditor

is affected more strongly than by greater simplicity." Musicus argued that the dominance

of melody and attention to execution in Rossini's music drew surprise, captivated

fisteners, stirred emotions, and sparked loud applause. To the self-directed question,

cc does the music of ROSSINI produce this result?'he responded: "the world says-it does" (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1823, 2).

Although Mozart's reputation remained intact, approval and popularity of

Rossini's music elevated him to almost an equal level." Though many critics eventually acquired more favourable opinions about Rossini, others retained their concerns, and

" AIthough the author remains unknown, this article was likely written by either Bacon or William Horsley (1 774-1 858), a writer Bacon hired to compose anonymous pieces for publication. Langley notes that Bacon habitually fabricated letters, but attributes passages signed as Musicus to Horsley based on a comparison of stylistic features of the wrïting. However, Langley cautions that her assignrnent rnust only be considered preliminary owing to a lack of documentary evidence. Nevertheless, she writes that Musicus was the most forthnght author on Rossini. Langley, 250,260. See Quarrerly Musical Magazine: 1823, 1-12 and 1828,7- 10 for discussions by Musicus of Rossini. '9 Because public approval is most apparently reflected in the number of performances of a particular opera or composer's works, the relative popularity of a composer or work can be detennined by these figures. Appendix 3 compares performances of Mozart and Rossini in London between 18 16 and 1830. The format for these tables is predicated on a table in Fenner, Opera in London, 140, which he uses to demonstrate Mozart's popularity. i present tables for both Mozart and Rossini to compare their respective acclaim on the London stage. Each table shows the number of performances of each opera, the total number for each composer's operas, the total nurnber of operas staged at the King's Theatre, and the percentage of each composer's operas per season. Such a comparison reveals that both cornposers enjoyed enormous popularity in London but at different times. When Rossini's operas appeared at the King's, Mozart's presence began to decline steadily, While Mozart peaked in 18 17 with 67% of al1 performances, Rossini never fully escaped the shadow of Mozart- In 1823, Ayrton showed disdain for the cornparison:

It was once proposed to give Don Giovanni to Rossini, to re-set, that he might enter at once into competition with the great German composer*! Proh pudor! As to the competition between Rossini and Mozart, was there ever a competition between a pippin and a pine-apple? The Milk-woman poetess and ~Wlton! (Harmonicon: October 1823, 137)

Subsequent Response to Rossini and II barbrére

Even though critics had given IZ barbiere "but a short life to live," the opera quickly became an audience favounte and established Rossini's fame and popularity in

London. Il barbiere was revived as early as the next season (18 19) and received nine performances.-" The King's Theatre staged productions for another seven seasons through 1830, after which time the number of performances and discussion of the opera in the musical press declined precipitously. Frequent accounts of the house being full for these subsequent performances indicate the continued interest in and popularity of fl barbiere over the years and through the various representations of the work by different performers. The reports included statements Iike: "an over-flowing audience" (Times: 16

February 1824), "the house was crowded to excess" (Times:16 April 1828), and "Mly and fashionably attended" (Afhenaeum:27 February 1830, 125). An account from

Edgcurnbe codirms Rossini's immense popularity: " So entirely did Rossini engross the stage, that the operas of no other master were ever to be heard, with the exception of

Rossini's ascendancy was more prolonged and reached its pinnacle in 1823 (the year before Rossini was due to arrive in London) with 84% of al1 performances. 30 George Harcourt Johnstone Derwent (Lord), Rossini and Some Forgotten Nightingales (London: Duckworth, 1934), 139. those of Mozart.. .. It is singular how every other composer, past and present, were totaliy put aside and those alone named or thought of." 32

Despite il barbiere's continued popularity with audiences, the number of performances steadily decreased over the years in favour of Rossini's newer works. After

Li' barbiere's first season writers focused more on premières of Rossini's other works because of their n0velty.3~Moreover, reviews of the revival performances of Il barbiere diminished in both number and length wïth few comments on the opera as a whole. Most critics sirnply mentioned it in passing, offering little judgement: Rossini's £ine work," cc his chef d'œzïvre" (Times: 13 March 1826), cccheerful'y(New Monh'y Magazine: April

1826, 15 1), "Rossini's justly celebrated 'Barbiere"' (Athenaeum: 27 February 1830,

125), and " Rossini's never-fading Barbiere di Siviglia" (Times: 29 April 1829). New productions of il barbiere only excited interest in the press if they introduced a new and important singer to the public. For such occasions, discussions of the opera increased, but primarily focused on the new performer instead of the ~ork.'~

Although much of the eariy commentary focused on the inadequacies and inferiority of Rossini's music, repeated hearings improved the critics' opinions of Li' barbiere rather than lessening them (as Alsager had predicted) (Times: 11 March 1818).

As critics accepted Rossini's style more and more over the years, they modified their artistic hierarchy to include Rossini as an English favourite. In some periodicals, a more

3' In 18 19, Rossini's opens were very much in vogue. The Harmonicon cited the Journal of Bologna which noted seventeen theatres in Italy and seven outside ItaIy in which Rossini's operas were produced that year (Harmonicon: October 1823, 136). '' Edgcumbe, 132. 33 See Harmonicon, I825,74. I4The most notable increase in attention to the opera cornes in 1828 with the début of Iienrietta Sontag in the role of Rosina. positive opinion of Rossini began to appear as early as the 18 19 revival. One of the most dramatic reversais appeared in the Examiner in which Hunt retracted much of his earlier criticisms and explained that a full opinion couid only be drawn afier more than one hearing:

The more we hem this opera, the more highly we think of it. Al1 works of genius require, as it were, to be read with attention.. .. At the first hearing of a fine opera, one misses nine out of twenty parts in it, from the mere hurry of it's passage. It is Iike dashing in a post-chaise through a fine landscape. We must hear it again and again; and then we get acquainted with al1 those varieties of expression, those intentions, and over-flowing meanings, with which a man of genius abounds. (Examiner: 25 April 18 19,269)

Though Hunt's opinions on Rossini and his music improved over time, he did not discard al1 his concerns about the quality of Rossini's compositional style: "He has greater qmtiry of beautifùl things than we supposed at first.. .. But on the whole, he strikes us as having less onginality than animal spirit" (Exminer: 25 April 18 l9,269)."

Rossini's announcement of a trip to London in December 1823 generated enorxnous interest among both the public and press.'6 The sense of heightened anticipation reveded itself in a marked increase in the production of Rossini operas at the

King's Theatre3' and the emergence of a great deai of literature devoted to the composer and his works, particularly in the Harmonicon and Quarterly Musical Magazine and

Review. In 1823, the management produced three new opere serie-La Donna del Lago,

Ricciardo e Zoraide, and Matilde e Corradino-and in 1824 both Zelrnira and Semiramide were produced.

-

35 In 1832, Hunt declared that he thought of il barbiere as Rossini's best opera, though he still preferred Paisiel Io's version.

36 For more information on Rossini's visit to England, see Michael Scott, " Rossini in England," Opera 27 (March, May 1976);2 10- 14,434-39. Rossini spent his stay in England touring the country as the honoured guest at

many dinners and parties in both artistic and fashionable circles, and with "the lead of the

Court .. . becarne the favourite of London society. No smart musical party was complete

without him."" The press, particularly the dailies, featured stories on Rossini, chronicled

his movements, and cited comments fkom his lips as fiequently as possible to feed the

public fascination. An announcement in the press that Rossini would appear at the piano-

forte for the opening night of Zelmira sparked enthusiasrn among opera-goers and filled

the house quickly, the pit being packed in less than fifteen minutes (Quarterly Musical

Magazine: 1824,49). Bacon remarked on the charged state of the audience: " When he

entered the orchestra he was received with loud plaudits, and so eager was the audience to

catch a sight of his person, that every individual in the pit stood on the seats to obtain a

view" (Quarredy MmicuZ Magazine: 1824,49). Similarly, Rossini appeared at the

theatre during a performance of 1.barbiere and received wmgreetings fiom the entire

audience despite the action already being underway on stage." Reports also featured

descriptions of the composer's physical attributes and expression. Bacon wrote:

He is scarcely of the middle height, lusty, and upon the whole with rather a heavy air. He certainly looks more like a sturdy beef-eating Englishman than a sensitive fiery-spirited native of the soft climate of Italy.. .. His countenance when at rest is intelligent yet serious, but bears no marks of the animation which pervades and indeed fonns the principal feature of his compositions. (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1824,49-50)

The excitement that surrounded Rossini's visit to England dissipated shortly after

1Gs departure, and it took two years for another new opera to be staged. The profusion

37 See Appendix 3 Toye, 1 17. 3"bid., 1 13. of Rossini operas in the mid-1820s produced some negative reactions in the perïodicals,

as many writers resented Rossini's domination at the King's Theatre to the exclusion of

other composers. A series of articles appeared in different publications that debated the

merits of Rossini. Ln his introduction to art article on Rossini, Musicus presented both

sides of the argument: "Rossini has enthusiastic admirers and bitter adversaries. The

former eulogise the latter scorn him. Both may, perhaps, have some ground for their

opinions" (Qzrarterly ~MElsicalMagazine: 1823, 1).

Some of Rossini's strongest opposition came fiom the cntic for the New MonrhZy

Magazine in an exposition on the destructive nature of Rossini's lasting effect:

The constant repetition of eight or ten operas of Rossini must have an injurious effect on musical taste, and will ere long, we venture to prophesy, bring its own remedy.. .the attractions which rnight have continued for many years to corne, if a moderate and discreet use had been made of them, by allowing to meritorious works of other masters a tum in the performances of a.operatic season. (June 1829,249)

The writer agreed that the character of Rossini's music effectively attracted the public and

led to his consistent popularity throughout Europe over the years, but the critic aIso

asserted that there were negative aspects to Rossini's style which would inevitably

cc prevent the duration of the Rossinianfirore,"

Ayrton also challenged the merits of Rossini's music, which he believed were

" becoming a question every where, even in Italy. This is always the fate of those who are so judiciously applauded, and whose productions are indiscnminately extolled"

(Harmonicon: 1823, 1 15). He \.as most critical of the " exaggerated praises that had been lavished upon Rossini" and as evidence he cited a " bon5 fide eulogium" on the composer fiom the Biblioteca Iralicina written by an Italian critic, Capriani: Rossini was the id01 of the public ear, the star of the manager, the support of the music seller, the food of every taste (il favorito pascale), the theme of every philharmonie circle fiom one extremity of Europe to the other. The diversity in the characters of nations, in their opinions, their tastes, their prejudices, al1 were nothing against the resistless power of this new Amphion- (Warmonicon: 1824, 155)

Rossini did, however, receive enduring support fkom some English writers who continued to proclairn his genius. Musicus wrote that Rossini's greatness uias proven, because of his universal approbation by al1 audiences, and that

fashion and prejudice, and ignorance and bad taste and voluptuous feelings, and heaven knows what other causes beside, are conjured up to account for this extraordinary fascination-... To me it seems clear that the man who is able to supersede, as it were, al1 former composers, however high th& estimation, and to set aside ail present cornpetitors, whatever their pretensions-the man who can filI al1 Europe with his music, must possess talents of a superior order. In the streets and in drawing-roorns, in the orchestras, and in the theatres, you hear ROSSINI, and scarcely any thing but ROS SN.(Quarrerly Musical Magazine: 1 823, 1)

The author professed that while sorne of the critics' concems about Rossini's music were justified, the debate on the merits of Rossini that absorbed critics in the early nineteenth century suggests ttiat Rossini's music must contain sm~cientstrength and power to stir the emotions.

The mixed critical reception that Il barbiere received in its first twelve years at the

King's Theatre did not prevent the opera's success in the eyes of the public. The uncritical acceptance of Rossini, and fl barbiere in particular, by English audiences- judging by the number of performances (Appendix 3) and the reports of a regularly fui1 house-certainly challenged the dominance of Mozart on the London stage and secured Rossini's position as an English favourite. In L829, Wade wrote of L! barbiereys

" unprecedented popularity" and its consistent reception with warm and generous applause: "This opera, the freshest creation, as it has been called, of the Gran Maestro, endures through al1 vicissitudes. and rivalry, and popular fickleness., .there can be but one conclusion, that the opera in itself is not made of perishable stufP' (Athenaeum: 6 May

1829,285). CHAPTER THREE 'Erninent S ingers '

First-rate singers fiom the Continent generated enormous interest in Italian opera

in the English public. London audiences-especiaily members of the aristocracy-

adored foreign singers and often attended the King's theatre solely to hear a particula.

performer. Fenner notes that some patrons "kept in touch with the latest opera events on

the Continent during their tours, passing dong news of promising new singers and

productions to the impresario at the King's, who, of course, also made his own trips to

Paris and Itaiy to canvass promising musicians." '

With the knowledge that the quality and reputation of the singers directly affected the acceptance and success of any production, the management, although working under severe financial constraints, strove to procure the finest continentai singers. Because of their immense popularity, leading singers were able to comrnand high fees, and managers reguiarly conceded to their dernands. Beyond an engagement fee, the best singers at the

King's secured contracts which comrnonly included the right to stage benefit concerts, ail profit beyond the fee for the use of the theatre going to the singer.' Proposais for engagement fiom foreign singers increased in both number and specificity, as singers began to realize that they could extract fiom the managers ai the King's Theatre more favourable conditions than they could fiom other theatres in ~uro~e.'

' Fenner, Opera in London, 85. See examples of proposal letters in the Quarterly Musical Magazine: 18 1 8,24648. Toye, 1 19. Foreign performers viewed London as a place where some of the most plentifül

fees could be had. Toye remarks: " London was then the milch-cow of every foreign

musician, regarded, not without reason, as a source of incorne rather than as a musical

centre."' For the English public, the reputations of the performers were often more

important than the quality of the perf'ormance; a weli-known name could procure a small

fortune? Cornposers, too, were quickly accepted by the public. For example, although

Rossini did not Wfil his contractual obligations while in London, his substantial

reptation led to nurnerous opportunities for private musical engagements as well as

tutoring members of the upper class for which he received generous compensation.6

Many critics cornplained about the amount of control the singers possessed over

the content of their contracts. In 18 18, Bacon published an essay devoted to the state of

the King's Theatre, with specific attention to the exorbitant requests made by the singers,

citing a nurnber of Letters of proposed engagements between singers and theatre managers

as examples. While Bacon did not challenge the merits of the singers, he attacked their

greediness:

The public has long been in the practice of condemning the enormous sums demanded by artists of this description, for the reward of their labours. What will that public be disposed to think of pretensions such as these-of fourteen covers and three courses! !! .. . we highly applaud Mr. WATERS' publication of these monstrous demands, and we trust they will open the eyes of the nation, and tend

' Ibid, Scott, 434-35,438-39 and Toye, 120. Furthemore, a well-known name was often more important to the English public than the quaIity of the performance. For example, an oft-quoted anecdote from Hiller recounts a soirée organized by Rossini. None of the musicians, al1 of whom had highly established reputations, had music prepared, and after an evening of improvisation Rossini was astonished that the musicians' serious Iack of musical integrity stiIL produced warm reception and a large pay check. See Toye, 1 19-20 and Scott, 434. Theatrical engagements worked in a similar fashion and singers with established names were quickly accepted by the public with Meattention to their actuat musical merits- to the abridgrnent of such exorbitant impositions-impositions which, we may Say, no other country can or does submit. (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 18 1 8,248)

The following engagement letter, taken fiom those published by Mr. Waters, is typical of its type:

Mademoiselle to Mr. Waters. SIR Milan, 12th Novernber 1received a letter of yours, to fonn with you a theatrical engagement for next year: 1shouid not be against accepting it, if we could agree upon the conditions I propose, and my demands are as fo1low:- 1. 1 intend, to be employed in your theatre, asfirst comic nbsolute singer, to sing only in comic and semi-serious operas. 2, The Fust opera 1 am to appear in, to be of my own choice, and the singers who are to perfonn in it, to be to my satisfaction. J. You will give me for my salary for the said season, fwo thousand guineas in gold, to be paid in equal payments monthly fi-om the day of rny arriva1 in London, until the end of the said season. 4. A fiee benefit night, free of al1 expenses, and ensured to amount to five hundred guineas, with liberty to give a new opera. 5. An advance of two hundred, to be paid here in Milan, the moment the engagement is signed. 6. That the management of the Royal Theatre are to firrnish me in ait the operas wherein I am to perforrn, the suitable greater or lesser dresses to rny satisfaction. 7. That 1 may be aLlocved the liberty to have any pnvate concert, it being always understood after my first appearance. 8. The accommodation of a carriage to take me to and fiom the theatre at dl times. If Mr, Waters, the Manager, fmds my proposals convenient, he may send me the engagement here in Milan: but 1 beg of hirn, which ever way he decides, to answer me by the retum of post, for my guidance, for the other proposals 1have fkom other towns. Selieve me, with the rnost perfect esteem, Your most humble Servant, (Signed) F.F . (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1 8 1 8,247) Bacon contended that the high ticket prices and immense sums paid to procure the best singers should ensure English opera-goers the finest opera-house and productions in

Europe. However, this was not dways the case,

The press's disdain for the demands made by the singers reached its peak when

Angelica Catalani (1 780-1849) doubled her fee for her second year at the Kuig's (1 824) to a "wholly unprecedented" amount. Edgcumbe noted that for her first season, Catalani had already cornmanded a large surn, 2000 guineas, but she complained that her fee " was ridiculously low. and that to retain her, 'ci vogliono molle milu lire sterline.' She demanded, and obtainedfive ho us and," even though no other theatre on the Continent would have submitted to such extortion.' Critics were outraged at the management's concession because Catalani's dictums nearly doubled ticket prices in the course of a single season, and made attendance at the theatre too expensive for much of the pubIic.

The strongest criticism of Catalani came fiom Edgcumbe who stated: " She has permanentiy injured the establishment; for the pnce once raised, has never been lowered, or at most in a very trifling degree; and it is become quite impossible for persons of moderate incomes to afford so unreasonable a surn for a mere entertainment." Without questioning Catalani's tafents, Bacon also discussed her demands and suggested that

" perhaps as a matter of character and prudence it might be judiciously recomrnended to her to observe a certain moderation on her demands." He continued:

When the cost of music in this country is compared with the charges of admission, and indeed for dl that is comected with the knowledge and practice of the art abroad, it must be a matter of the greatest surprize that such rates as are paid in England can be submitted to. And truly speaking, the extravagance rests with a

' Edgcumbe, 180. ' Ibid. few, and a very few of the principal singers.. .. public music is innnitely more costIy than it ought to be or than it needs to be, consistently with its own prosperity or with justice to the public, and we do not hesitate to pronounce that it is the duty of those who watch over the interests of both, to encourage a discussion which in the end must (if any thing cm) b~gabout the reformation of and abuse so prejudicial to art and to artists, and to the musical world at large. (QuarterlyMusical Maguzine : 1S24,6 1-62)

Despite many such protests, littie changed and the theatre continued to entertain large numbers of extravagant requests. The singers' greed escalated ta such an extent that some of them complained that ticket prices for their benefits were too low, and advertised in newspaper announcements for their night the amount they would " condescend to take" for their perf~rmance.~

The exorbitant fees paid to the fmest singers absorbed most of the opera house's budget and caused other aspects of the staging to sufTer. Edgcumbe noted: " Whilst enorrnous expense is thus flourished in superfluities, a mean economy prevails in al1 the inferior departrnents, with regard to secondary singers, the chorus and orchestra: the scenery, decorations, and wardrobe, are in every respect unworthy of the largest theatre in the country." Io He also blamed singers for the " very inferior description" of the ballet

which he considered " scarcely above mediocrity." " Peacock wrote of the difficult situation faced by the theatre managers:

No one, indeed, who has seen and heard Catdani, or Pasta, or Malibran, or Giuletta Grisi, would willingly dispense with one such prima donna; but the single star should not be worshipped exclusively to the sacrifice of the general effect. She can be but a component, however important, part of it, and if the

Edgcumbe, 182. Many foreign singers felt dispntled because the King's Theatre set the price of tickets at half a guinea per person and stipulated that singers could not ask for more. Any sum beyond that could only be given as a gratuity, usually to a favourite performer. 'O Edgcumbe, 176. " Ibid. general effect fails, the star will fall.. .. But-. .no general effect, however other wise excellent, will produce attention without a stad2

The theatre's management typicaily struggled financially to obtain a sufficient company for each season, but &er 18 15, the number of new singers engaged increased dramatically. Fenner notes, that at that time "about one third of the men and nearly half of the women sang for one season only." '' However, Edgcumbe reported that " scarcely any [singers] were engaged for the whole season" because the management had adopted a custom of "dividing the season uito portions, one performer coming for the early, another for the latter part of it; some for three months, others for still shorter periods." '' The employrnent of many singers for only portions of a season caused problerns for the

King's Theatre, compromising both the quaiity of the performances and the finances of the theatre. Edgcurnbe Iamented the "unsettled, fluctuating state of an inefficient

company" and complained that with such numerous engagements the manager "incurs a great additional unnecessary expense. He announces six or seven prima donnas, of whom the principal demand nearly as Iarge a salary for a short period as for a season, and the rest are to be paid no inconsiderable sums without the least benefit to the theatre." '*

Peacock remarked on the detrimental effect short engagements had on the state of the opera:

The best singers corne here for only a portion of the season: they sing moming, noon, and night, at concerts; they have no time to rehearse. The manager had collected stars, but not a company: there is a soprano too much, and a contralto too little-a tenor wanting, and a basso to spare: they patch up a performance as

--

" Peacock, 242. l3 Fenner, Opera in London, 159. l4 Edgcumbe, 174-75. " Edgcumbe, 175. Moreover, the engagement of several prime donne during the course of a singIe season sparked numerous disputes among female singers regarding the assignation of 'suitable' roles. they may-altering, garbling, omitting, interpolating-and the result is, a bad concert instead of a good opera?

The management were generally responsible for the rapid turnover rate because they tried to keep up with the ever changing tastes of the public. Only outstanding singers who found favour with the English audiences remained beyond one season, although some popular singers had but bnef appearances of their own volition. Hunt deplored the rule of fashion that sent "away old and tired favourites for the mere sake of novelty" and comptained "that the leaders in fashionable life, who have too much influence in this establishment, are utterly destitute of taste and discriminationy'

(Examiner:20 January 1828,65),

Singers understood that the nature of the public response largely determined the length of their stay on the London stage- Not al1 singers found favour with the fashionable elite and could reap the resultant hancially beneficial rewards of private concerts and music lessons. Those that did aot receive approbation from the opera-goers often remained for only a few performances- Ifthe audience was not content with a performance they quickly voiced their discontent and typicsllly blamed the performers.

The English public's reputation for irritability intimidated singers, and many performers were carefid no t to offend the public in any way, making every effort to appear on stage as scheduled. Some foreign singers refüsed to engage at the King's Theatre because of its temperamental audience; for example, Italian soprano Caterina Gabrielli (1 730-1 796) turned domone opportunity at the opera-house, stating: "For were 1 to take it in my head not to sing, 1 am told the people there would certainly mob me, and perhaps break

'' Peacock, 246-47. my bones-" " Furthemore, the hddEnglish weather had deleterious effects on the

voices of foreign singers and ofien hampered their which consequently

affected the reception of both the singer and the opera.

Favourable comments fkom the critics in the London periodicais were irnperative

for singedg nie public's interest in the perforrners drove the press to feature extensive

Oiscussions on singers and the representation of their roles. For a singer's King's Theatre

début, critics reserved the majority of the review for a detailed description of their

performance and physical appearance. Established singers, or those in secondary roles,

usually received less notice, but this did not necessarily reflect a of success. in order to

offer more extensive observations about new perfomers, critics often included very litde

comrnentary on established favourites, but typically made a point to remark on the usual

excellence of their preferred singers.

Although the general comments on singers remained fairly consistent fiom one

periodical to another, discussions of particular perfomers differed and favouritism for

some singers over others figured prominently. Variables that affected the content of

critical discussions included the critic's level of musical training, the audience's

farniliarity with the singer, and the level of anticipation for the production. Most writers

I7 Richard Brins ley Peake, Mernoirs of the Colman Family (London: Richard BentIey, 184 1), 1,95, cited in Fenner, Opera in London, 159. Despite her initial reservations about the King's Theatre audience, Gabrielli did appear in London for two seasons (1 775-76). '' In 1825, for example, ilhess related to the damp weather depIeted the King's Theatre company-including Mad. Vestris, Mad de Begnis, Sig- Garcia, and Sig. Curioni-to the point that "not a single opera could be played without the omission of a principal character" (London Maguzine: July 1825, 374). The problem was solved by the introduction of new singers such as Mademoiselle Garcia. See also Ebers, 246,260. l9Henry Philiips, Musical and Persona! Recollecrions During Hava Century 2 vols. (London: Charles J. Skeet, 1864), 120. PhilIips recalls that Signora Mon was so fearfûl of cnticism from the press that she considered acceptance with the critics "a necessity of life." Cited in Fenner, Opera in London, 5. discussed vocal WIe using vague tenns, but those more familiar with the Italian school

and the particular opera could be more specific in their observations. Moreover, critics

usually remarked on the acting abilities of singers, which they considered an integral

aspect of the operatic singing style. Performers were expected to associate the sentiment

of the words with actions and Vary these according to the change of ernotions in the text

Through a number of techniques-including gesture and attitude- singers attempted to

evoke the passions of their characters and please the audience visually at the same the.

However, many critics chastised the singers' Italianate stage rnannerisrns for being too

realistic because the English preferred a more reserved display." For new performers,

reviews often included brief biographicai information as well as descriptions of their

physical appearance and demeanour.

Reception of the Singers Involved in the Première

In an atternpt to improve the Iighting of productions, the King's Theatre instailed

gas lamps for the season of 18 18. Most of the press approved of this new method of illumination, aithough Hunt considered the light "too powerful for the complexion, when brought so near; and certainiy there is no reason why the ladies' faces shodd suffer for if' (Examiner: 25 January 18 18,66). Moreover, the financiai strain of the newer technology drasticaily cut into the budget for that season, and sparked criticism from opera-goers. An abstract of a report of a Meeting of Subscnbers to the Opera-House

See for example Hunt's critiques of Manuel Garcia's acting for being " over-vivacious" (haminer: 2 August 18 18,492 and 12 April 18 18,235). published in the Times, clearly outlined the dire financial situation of the King's Theatre in 18i 8 in comparison to the 18 1 1 season:

The number of performances was considerably fewer this season and the salaries of the musicians had been reduced; several of the latter had lefi in consequence. At present there was no composer attached to the orchestra, the Italian male singers were reduced to four and there was not a single Italian fernale singer in the company. [Chairman, Lord Ailesbury declared:] 'From this, it was obvious there could be no performance of serious Operas-' The chairman then stated that in 18 11 he had been one of a cornmittee appointed to examine M. Taylor's accounts for the King's Theatre, and had kept some notes. Madame Catalani had received £2,100 and the salaries of the other performers were proportionate; the total amount paid to singers was £9,835. The salaries of the dancers brought this amount to £16,789. The total paid to singers during the present season [18 181 was £5,100, to dancers £3,200, the entire surn, therefore, being about haifwhat Mr. Taylor had paid. (Times: 1 June 18 1 8)2'

Some critics felt that the expensive new gas lights forced the management to reduce the Company and this resuited in singers of iderior quality. For example,

Edgcumbe subrnitted that the post Catalani era (1 8 14-1 823) was virtually void of good singers: "with one or two exceptions [Ronzi de Begnis and Camporese] there were not any of whorn f feel inclined to Say much, because there is not much to be said in their praise." " In contrat to Edgcumbe, a writer to the Harmonieon known only as " S.D." of a series called " Chronicles of the Italian Opera in England" (1 830, 10-338 passim) maintained that the opera. of the 18 1 8 season specifically were given with little diminution in talent (with the exception of the loss of Camporese). Sirnilarly, Mr. Kelly, the stage manager, professed that " he never knew so good a company as the present"

(Quarterly Musical Magazine: 2 8 18,244). The principal singers enlisted for the 18 18 season at the King's Theatre included the sopranos Fodor and Miss Com; the tenor

" Another account of the meeting appears in the Quarferly Musical Magazine: 1118,24143, " Edgcumbe, 1 18. Garcia; and the basses Angrisani, Arnbrogetti, and Naldi? Despite budgetary restrictions, the management was able to engage Garcia for the season, especially because of his enormous popularity on the continent at the ti~ne.~~The principal roles of R barbiere were filled by the leading players of the King's theatre for that season: Garcia as

Count Almuvivo, Fodor as Rosino, Naldi as Figaro, Ambrogetti as Doctor Bartolo, and

Angrisani as Don Basilio.

The number of notices published in the two months pnor to the London début of

Garcia reveal not only the extent of his fame throughout Europe, but also the great anticipation which preceded his fist performance. The reviews offer extensive discussions of the arrival of this new talent, except for that of Hunt, who inadvertently forgot to mention the new perf~rrner.~Furthemore, most reviewers devoted more space to Garcia than to Rossini. At f~st,Garcia received only moderate praise but soon won considerable favour with the critics. He found more immediate approval with the public, which is evident in the nurnber of reviews that mention the audience's boisterous applause.

Refer to Appendix 2 for a listing of the singers at the King's Theatre and their respective parts for the première and revivals of il barbiere. The cast iists are derived from information available in reviews and other King's Theatre material and are as complete as the sources allow. Generally, only the five principal characters are given, except for a few cases in which al1 of the singers are specifically narned. '' Although his precise fee for the first season is not known, some indication can be drawn from his fees in Rome and in his subsequent seasons in London. For the Roman première, Garcia's fee was more than three times that of Rossini's, as the fees paid to singers typically exceeded those earned by composers. While Rossini received Scudi 300, Garcia took Scudi 1,000 (John Rosselli, Singers ofltalian Opera- The History of a Profession [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19921,241, note 39). In London, Garcia collected saIaries of £260, £ 1000, and f 1250 for the 1823, 1824, and 1825 seasons respectively (John Ebers, Seven Years of the King 's Thearre [London, 13281,394). His 1823 salary is most likely considerabIy Iower than the others due to a shorter engagement that year-Garcia returned to the King's Theatre halfkay through the season. From these figures it can be assumed that his foremost status in the Company would have ensured hirn a high salary in the range of £1000-1250 for his fmt season, one- fifth of the amount allocated to the entire cast. Surpnsingly, most reviews conkined Little or no biographicd information on

Garcia, but some critics could not resist commenting on his physical attributes and

personality. Bacon rernarked in passing that Garcia possessed a " tail and dashing" figure

(Literary Gazette: 14 March 18 18, 173), while Hunt described him as "a stoutish dark man, with an intelligent if not handsome countenance" (Examiner: 12 April 18 18,235).

Obviously not Unpressed by the Spaniard, the cntic for the TheatricaZ Inquisitor noted:

" The figure of this gentleman is rather ta11 and elegant, but we cannot think his countenance prepossessing; its openness approaches to impudence, and so we think does his general air, which is certainly deficient" (March 18 18,208).

Garcia possessed vocal skills and acting which represented the Italian operatic school. Much of the comrnentary focused on his manner of performance, and the reviewers differed in their degree of aversion to, or endorsement of his Italianate virtuosic style and stage presence. Most cntics, if at al1 negative, objected to Garcia's extremely florid style of ernbellishrnent, an essential characteristic of the Italian operatic style.

However, even the Roman press, while acknowledging his obviously beautifid voice, cnticized Garcia for his highly omamented performance. In a review soon after the opera's première in Rome, the critic for the Biblioteca teatrale wrote:

Had Signor Garcia not been so enamoured of singing florid passages and immoderately embroidering the music, he would perhaps have excited twice as much enthusiasm; but, truth to tell, no other tenor has demonstrated a voice so beautifid in its ornaments nor such professionality, and the Roman public showed its appreciation?

-- -

IS " By some unaccountable chance, when we spoke of the new Opera by ROSSINI, we omitted to mention the new singer, Signor GARCIA" (Examiner: 12 April 18 18,235). 26 Gossett, Preface to II barbiere di SNiglia, 28, note 79. Gossett presents evidence which suggests that Feretti (the onginal librettist) wrote this review and probably had a biased point of view. This review illustrates that Garcia's vocal display, while polished and exact, was extreme even by Italian critical standards even if Roman audiences approved. Hïs use of decorations in London sparked nurnerous and widely varying reviews. Alsager's review, acknowledged Garcia's virtuosic talents:

The new singer, Signor Garcia, is a great master of his art, and plays with its difficulties in a manner that is truly surprïsing. His voice is a pure tenor, somewhat on the decline, but of great flexibility, strength, and compass. His style is the florid, and carried to the degree which probably has never been exceeded; but his singing is the perfection of that style, and considered as a mere exhibition of art, cannot but produce high gratification. To try Signor GARCIA as a sentimental singer, would be to destroy his merits dtogether. He disclaims that school, we apprehend on principle, and shodd be judged only by those laws on which has formed himself. The character of Count Almaviva, which Signor GARCIA performed in this opera, requires a good actor as well as an accomplished singer; in both respects he did it complete justice. (Times: 1 1 Mach 1818)

Bacon also approved of Garcia's Italian manner:

mis voice is] very brilliant and flexible, and so highly cultivated, that not oniy does no passage seem difficult to his facility, but he executes every conceivable combination of notes in a finished marner, tempering and preparing as it were his - utrnost vehemence according to the laws of science. He is an admirable musician, and his invention is more fertile than that of any other singer we ever heard. (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1824,57)

However, other critics chastised Garcia for his excessive use and style of ornamentation.

Ayrton recognized Garcia's flexibility, but faulted him on his extravagant

embellishments, which he described as cc an error of the fTrst magnitude, namely, a continual departure from the sostenuto style of suiging; or in other words, an exuberance of ornament, and almost unbroken succession of roulades, which metamorphose the air into a vocal exercise" (Harmonicon: 1823, 85). The critic from the News also disliked

Garcia: " We cannot speak very indulgently of the new performer. His voice is artificial" (15 March 18 18). Garcia's vocal style elicited arz even more negative response fiom S .D.

in the " Chronicles of Italian Opera in England" (18 18), who stated:

He was lialfworn out; if he had ever had the power of sustaining a note, it was now entirely gone and he endeavoured to conceai the defect by the utmost profusion of florid ornarnent.... The character in which Garcia made his debut was that of Almaviva ... a part admirably qudified to show off his excellences and conceal his defects. (Harrnonicon: 1830, 248)27

Some reviewers, while still hesitant to approve of his style, were more receptive to Garcia

and appreciative of his talents. Bacon proved Garcia's greatest advocate and contradicted

the fairiy common cornplaint that the tenor used virtuosity to disguise his inadequacies:

No part of his performance languishes for an instant, and even if he has a weak passage, he strengthens or covers it by his embellishments. It is here indeed that he encounters the objections of critical judges, who consider his manner as too florid. So far has this opinion been carried, that Signor Garcia has by some been accused of designedly introducing an unmeaning profusion of passages to conceal the failure and decline of his voice. When we first heard him we were inclined to believe there was some tmth in the charge, but our matured observation assures us that his piayfdness is the effect of exuberant power and facility, and the result of his long continued employment upon the characters of Rossini's operas, which not only task the execution of the singer, but which, by identiQing ornarnent with expression, stimulate him to new experiments, by releasing his judgement fiom those limitations which a puer style of writing was wont to lay upon him. (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1824,58)

The reviews aiso differed widely in their views of Garcia's acting ability. The

Theatrical hquisitor believed his acting to be " spirited and characteristic" (March 18 18,

208), while the critic fiom the News wrote more severely: "he has but one attitude" and

'' S.D.'s reference to Garcia's lack of" power of sustaining a note" is probably a cornplaint about his ornarnentation and his inability to sing passages of long held notes without additional embellishrnent. rather than a comment on his starnina. '* Singers adopted a varieV of attitudes to depict the passions of the characters they represented- An eighteenth-century writer defined attitude as a "Posture, or graceful Disposition of the Body, in Standing; Sitting; or Lying." John Weaver, Anatumical and Mechanical Lectures zrpon Dancing (London, 172I), facsirnile in Richard Ralph, ed., The Life and Works ofJohn Werner (New York: Dance Horizons, 1985), 145. Singers were instructed to approxirnate the attitudes of figures in the fine arts, but were urged not to stand motionless in a pose to deliver the words, There was an acceptable arnount of animation for one action in singing, which he uses most unmercifidly on al1 occasions" (News:15

4 March 1818). However, he received the most criticism for being too flamboyant, animated, and realistic in his expression. For example, Hunt denounced Garcia for his exaggerated acting, of which he included this description:

He sometimes gesticulates so much as to look like a dumb man tahgwith his fmgers. He has also at times an affected rather than uncouth manner of wallcing and standing, especially a way of planting himself with a thigh rounded inwards and a leg perking out, in a style partly robust and pdyfinical, Iike some of the attitudes in MORTIMER'S pictures of bandit& This, with a tendency to be corpulent, has not the engaging effect it intends; and uniuckily for our impressions of him, it was in one of these kinds ofattitudes, with his arms folded in a cloak, his head thrown back, and his voice pouring forth an easy profusion of ornaments, as much as to Say, " You see the way I'm in," that we saw him for the first tirne, on entering the house during ROSSINI'S Opera. (Examiner: 22 April 1818,235)

In the same review, Hunt discussed Garcia's poor acting in a performance of La

Clernenza di Tito:

His mouth is so prodigiously dreary and tunied down at the corners. He also tum his eyes up and down a great deal too much, like a do11 that is pdkd with wires. We earnestly advise Signor GARCIA to prune his exuberance, in order that his powers, which are in many respects excellent, may not run to seed. (Examiner: 12 Apni 1818,235)

Bacon found Garcia's portrayai of his character, and his ability to evoke the rneaning of the Song, much more agreeable:

What cbiefly exalts his style is the sensibility with which he concentrates into the full rneaning of his songs, He enters heart and sou1 into the music, and fiom the moment he sets his foot upon the stage, he devotes himself wholly to its expression, gives al1 his faculties and powers to the character he is to sustain, and to the composition he is to sing. (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1824, 57)

the sentiment of the text and singers were criticized for using too rnuch or too little attitude or if the action did not suit the character. For a discussion on attitudes, see AIan Hughes, "Art and Eighteenth-Cenhiry Acting Style," Theatre Notebook 4 1 (1987): 24-3 1, 79-89, 128-39. Despite their reservations about Garcia's tdents, several critics viewed his

engagement as a great benefit to the company. One writer stated: " we do not hesitate to

consider him a vduable acquisition to the corps of the King's Theatre, and he promises fair to become a favourite" (Theatrical lnquisi~or:March 18 18,20 8). Moreover, Bacon contended: "GARCIA'S accession will give strength and richness to the cast of the operas which must throw great resources into the manager's bands?' (Literary Gazette: 14

March 1818). Comments fiom early in the following season reveai that with greater public exposure, Garcia gained increasing critical acclaim. Kenrick stated: " We like

Garcia better every time we see him" (British Stage: June 1 8 19, 175). Garcia must have been af3ected by the reception and criticisms he received after the première season because the reviews fiorn the first revival ( 18 19) indicate a reduction in his O fi-rebuked copiousness. Lei& Hunt remarked: " [Garcia] kas thinned indeed some of his exuberance both in gesture and singing; but his laurels, on this account, only seem to us the stouter and fiesher" (Examiner: 25 April 1819,269).

Despite this increased approbation, Garcia-dong with other leading singers- left the company for performances at the Théâtre Italien in Paris because of senous managerial, fmancial, and political problems at the King's." Garcia returned to the

London stage in 1823 and resumed his role as Ahaviva for the 1824 and 1825 revivais.

After Garcia's remto the King's Theatre critics were still more willing to praise his

interpretation and his highiy ornamental style. The New Monthly Magazine asserted: " Of

Garcia, expecting always his preditection for embellishments, however tasteful, we can scarcely speak in terms of suflicient praise. His singing and acting came up to the ided perfection with which a pemsal of the part might impress a dramatic comoisseur"

(March 1824, 105). Despite the critics' initid reservations of the first season, after

several revivals the critics considered Garcia the best Ahaviva they had heard, and the

singers who followed him in the role sufEered througfi cornparison. However, his

popularity in London never reached the magnitude of approbation he received on the

Continent. Bacon wrote: " He has not excited that degree of attention here which the rest

of Europe has accorded to his talents and acquirements. It is not easy to divine the

reason, for a more cornmanding actor or a more gifted singer has rarely appeared"

(Qzcarterly Musical Magazine: 1824,57). Garcia retired at the end of the 1825 season,

but rernained in London as voice teacher to his daughters, Maria and Pauline, among

others.

Reviews of the première of R barbiere devote very little space to the other principal singers, and the few remarks that do appear are generally brief. The part of

Rosina, sung by Josephine Fodor-Mainveille (1 789- 187O), received little mention, as she already possessed a weII-established reputation as aprima donna assoluta.

Consequently, most reviews rnerely remark on her consistency in presenting a skilled performance. For example, the critic of the Theatrical Inquisitor stated: " Madame Fodor is, in Rosina, as in al1 her characters, incapable of being otherwise than fascinating"

(March 1818,20849). S.D. from the " Chronicles" declared: " Mad Fodor's Rosina has never been excelled, either as regards the singing or the acting" (Harmonicon: 1830,

248). Kenrick also applauded Fodor's performance: "Madame Fodor, in Rosina, sings with the sweetness so peculiar to her, and so exactly applicable to the character" (British

'9 '9 Fenner, Opera in London, 80-8 1 and 1 82-83. Stage: Apd 18 l8,82). The lone disapproval came fiom Edgcumbe, who was not particularly fond of Fodor's voice despite her obvious status as a English favourite. He conceded that she possessed a sweet voice but complained that she sang through her teeth instead of opening her mouth. Furthemore, he criticized her style for he thought it was not truly Italian, and at the end of the 18 18 season, when she left for Italy, he hoped that she would learn fiom direct experience to the ~ta.lians.~*Aithough Fodor appeared for just the fist season, some critics of the earliest revivals harked back to her interpretation.

Indeed, Kenrick considered Fodor his " favourite" :

Fodor used to dehght us by her more delicate touches of raillery, and her iinle displays of female coquetry and affectation. When offended by her lover, her pouting pleased us even more than her smiles; and the silvery modulations of her voice stole upon the feelings more surely though more slowly than the rapidity of execution which characterizes the present Prima Donna @ellochi]. (British Stage: June 1819, 174)

Critics rarely discussed the three remaining principal characters-Figaro, Doctor

Bartolo, and Don Basilio-in their reviews. With respect to the singers who played these roles, writers focused more attention on the politics of role designations than the actual performances. In the original casting of Il barbiere di Siviglia, Waters assigned the part of Figaro to Giuseppe Ambrogetti (1 780-after 1833) and that of Bartolo to Guiseppe

Nddi (1770-1 820). Naldi, however, saw Figaro as the lead role, protested the decision, and at a late rehearsal demanded the cast be altered placing himseif in the role of the barber. Highly irritated, Ambrogetti refused to sing in the opera, and this undoubtedly

accounts, in part, for the delay of the première. S.D. fiom the " Chronicles" applauded

Ambrogetti's decision to remain in the opera:

'O Edgcumbe, 135-36. Fomuiately for himseifand the audience, the advice of his niends prevailed over his anger, and he revenged himself on Naldi only by making Bartolo the p~cipal instead of the second comic character in the piece. His whole performance of the avarkious and jealous Guardian was in the richest vein of comedy.. .. me] absolutely electrified the audience. (Harmonicon: 1830,248)

The difficulties smounding the première influenced the critics' opinions of these singers,

and Ambrogetti found more favour in the press than Naldi did. Ayrton wrote:

To NALDI was allotted the character of the young Figaro!-This ought to have been, in point of acting, the first in the Opera, and shouid therefore have been given to AMBROGETTi. It \vas however othenvise ordained, and the latter shewed his resentment by making the part of Doctor Barfolo the most striking of the piece. Nothing can exceed the manner in which this was perfomed; it completely threw aU the others into the background. The reception of this incomparable actor was remarkable-he was greeted by three distinct rounds of applause, which he doubtless knew how to interpret; and he may rest assured that he will never want the suppoa of the public against any cabals, so long as he continues, as he has hitherto done, to merit their approbation. (Morning Chronicle: 13 March 1818)

Although Ambrogetti made his King's Theatre début only a year earlier, he enjoyed considerable popularity with both the public and the press. Reviews contained ody complimentary remarks about Ambrogetti and some critics even favoured him over

Garcia, for Hunt professed: " [GARCIA] acts the part of the Count better than any other performer would do with the exception of AMBROGETTI" (Examiner: 12 April 18 18,

235). Ke~ckalso praised Ambrogetti and remarked on his superior skills:

Old Doctor Bartolo, who is made by AMBROGETTI the most important personage of the piece; if any doubt could have existed of the versatility of his talents, it must have been completely effaced by this performance, which the best actors on the English stage would find it, a difficult task to excel or even equal. (British Stage: April 18 18, 82)

Despite his long and quite distinguished career at the theatre, Naldi lacked the support of the press. Most critics failed to mention him, and those that did had few kind words. In the same review of the première, Kenrick thought Naldi perfomed better than usual, but suggested that he onfy did so to avoid some of the criticism he wodd receive

for the change in characters: "He surpnsed us by a display of liveliness and activity

wbich we have long been unaccustomed to in him: his emulation appears to have been

awakened by the applause bestowed on Ambrogetti7sacting; and he has shewn that when

he thinks to exert himself he has kwsuperiors" (British Sfage:April 1818, 82). Bacon

merely cornmented that "paldi] moved without his old perpetual grimace" (Literary

Gazette: 14 March 18 18, 173)- Other than observations of his "unusually arch and animated" performance (Literary Gazette: 14 March 18 18, 173) and his altercation with the English favourite, Ambrogetti, critics wrote very little of Naldi.

Similady, Carlo Angrisani's (1765-?) performance in the role of Don Basilio rarely received notice, except for rem& on his cc admirable" comic portrayal in the aria

"La calunnia è un venticello" (Act 1, scene 8) in which he describes the effects of calumny (Morning Chuonide: 13 March 1818). Comments on this scene are found in several of the reviews, but rather than discussing Angrisani's performance in any detail, they merely acknowledge that he received great applause. No mention of the other singers appeared in the reviews.

Notable Singers in the Revivals

Reviews of the revivals typically included less extensive remarks than those of the première season. With fewer comments on the opera itself, singers dominated the reviews even more than previously, particularly when the management staged iZ barbiere specifically to introduce a new singer to the London public. For such occasions, discussions often increased in number and length, but generally concentrated on the new singer with IittIe regard for the other performers. Although the reviews of the fïrst season focused on the new primo mmo, Garcia, the majonty of the reviews for the revivals paid most attention to the prime donne assolure. In the 1820s' the King's Theatre managed to procure some very strong female singers, and the performances of two prime donne in the role of Rosina-Garcia and Sontag-excited enormous interest among the press and sparked some of the most detailed reviews of al1 the singers.

The first singer in the role of Rosina to elicit a great deal of attention fiom the press was Maria-Felicia Garcia (1808-36)' daughter of Manuel Garcia. Taught by her father, Maria Garcia's vocal technique exhibited the ideals of the ltalian operatic style.

She began as a member of the King's Theatre chorus and partner with her father for private concerts and soirées. Garcia launched her career as a lead singer at the King's h&ay through the 1825 season, when both Madame Vestris and Ronzi de Begnis became ill and the managers cailed on Garcia to sing the prima donna role in Il barbiere.

The Morning Chronicle aruiounced her fust pefiormance: " We remark with pleasure, that

Mademoiselle GARCIA is announced at the King's Theatre for this even.ing7s performances; we have heard rnuch of this young lady's talent, and great credit is due to

Mr. Ebers, for having added her to his establishment, already considerably thinned by illness and other unexpected circumstances" (1 I June 1825). Just seventeen at the time,

Mademoiselle Garcia's début as Rosina attracted much attention among the audiences and press alike. Comments on applause for Gacia demonstrate that she won immediate favour with the public because of her good looks, youthful vivacity, and vocal brilliance;" but many critics greeted her appearance with a certain amount of skepticism

because of both her age and her father's notoriously virtuosic style. Nevertheless, even

those reviewers that wrote with reservation found her performance enjoyable. One critic

deemed Maria Garcia's début " the most important novelty of our month" (New Monthly

Magazine: July 1825,295), and another believed her voice "so naturally beautifül, and

under so excellent a tuition as that of Garcia, her father, she cmnot fail to become a f~st

rate vocalisty' (Literary Gazette: I 1 June 1825,380)- While Bacon considered such

praise too generous, he recognized both her current rnerits and her potential for the future:

She has considerable capabilities, but her style is at present encumbered with ornament; in a word, it is that of her father, who is, as everybody knows, inordinately addicted to embellishment, and who has the art of making a great master so fine that one does not recognise him again. If Mademoiselle Garcia will consent to sirnpliG her rnanner a little, she will be a vaiuable acquisition to the opera; but if not, we apprehend that musical persons will prefer hearing the compositions of Rossini and other favourite masters, delivered by those who will confine themselves to the beauties set domfor them, and who will forbear adding perfume to the violet. With her reception, this young lady has every reason to be satisfied; it was most flattering; indeed, her fiends made a strong muster, and manifested their satisfaction with an ardour and extravagance of admiration, that would have done honour to professed claqueurs. (London Mapine: July 1825, 3 74)

The New Monthly Magazine included an extensive review of the debutante and her abilities in the role of Rosina. The reviewer applauded her level of confidence during her first performance and contended that she possessed "the genn of comic powers, which bid fair to expand into fkst-rate perfection." He continued:

Her voice is a mezzo soprano, mastering a scale of two octaves with effort (a to a") and capable of a note or two beyond these extremes. The lower half of this

3 1 For example, Bacon wrote: " With her reception, this young lady had every reason to be satisfied; it was most flattering; indeed, her friends made a strong muster, and manifested their satisfaction with an arJour and extravagance of admiration, that would have done honour to professed claqueurs" (London Mag~~ine:Ju Iy 1 825,374). compass is of suffrcient power and roundness, but the upper notes, ascending fkom e7', want, at present at least, strength and vibration., .. Within their natural range Mademoiselle Garcia's notes are extrernely pleasing, partaking of the Ml-bodied, fiesh and healthfid rimbre of her speaking voice and of its distinct and perfect general articulation. The Iips and al1 the vocal organs perfom their office admirably. There is no mumbling, mincing, mouthing, &c. defects which adhere to corne of our noted singers. (New Monthly Magazine: Jdy 1825,296)

Having expected an abundance of over-indulgent embellishments owing to her tutelage, the reviewer commended Garcia for "the taste and delicacy of her passages, their gracefiilness [and] the plenitude of musical feeling displayed in their execution." He professed that such a level of sophistication was unprecedented for such a young singer:

" It is scarcely conceivable, and well mented the rapturous approbation which it called from every part of the house" (New Monthly Magazine: July 1825,296).

At the end of her first season, Maria Garcia left with her father for New York, but she retumed to the King's Theatre for the 1829 season under her marrïed name, Malibran.

She resurned her role as Rosina, for which she received generous approval, with particular notice of her progress since her departure 6om London. Wade admired her performance: " She is an admirable, an aimost perfect Rosina, Her look, her gestures, her voice, and the style of her singing, give each its tribu4qaid to the excellent effect of the whole7' (Athenaeum: 6 May 1 829,28 5). Garcia-Malibran's continued success on the

London stage established her as one of the most renowned and prosperous prime donne of

Italian opera in England.

The arriva1 of Henrietta Sontag (1 806-54)at the King's Theatre was a highly publicized and anticipated event. Many hyperbolical reports in newspapers and magazines appeared prior to her arriva1 and sparked an unprecedented interest in the new foreign singer. Periodicals published as much information about her as they could find. The New MonthZy Magazine wrote: "the most minute particulars of [Sontag's] birth, parentage, and education, He, character, and behaviour, were the themes of daily comment in every newspaper, even to the shape and adrneasurement of the mouth and lips, on which a speciai dissertation appeared in print." The same critic lavished her with praise and referred to her as "the very phoenix of songster, the ne plus ultra of youthfùl female beauty," who " spread content and happiness over a great portion of the sedate family of John Bull" (May 1828,20 1)." The press reported that the King's Theatre managers paid her a huge fortune (£250 per night) and allowed her the liberty of staging six benefit concerts (New Monthly Magazine: May 1828, 201). Introduced as the herald of Madame Catalani, Sontag made her début as Rosina in the 1828 revival of h! barbiere.

The arnount of space devoted to reviews of Sontag and the level of detail in the crîtics' discussions, places her as one of the most important performers of the part of Rosina.

As a result of the embellished accounts of her physicai appearance published prior to her début, she met with some disappointed crîtics. For example, AIsager cornmented:

With respect to her personal beauty, it is difficult to account for the extravagant descriptions which have been given of it by men of al1 ages and of dlnations. She may be cailed a prew woman; but in London, our taste is, perhaps rendered somewhat fastidious by the abundance of female beauty with which we are every day surrounded, and must confess that we cannot attribute any uncornmon share of it to Mademoiselle Sontag. (Times: 16 April 1828)

Although Sontag's looks did not quite reach English standards (as described by Alsager), this did not prevent her success in London and elevation to the level of an English favourite. Alsager remarked on the state of the audience for Sontag's début and their imrnediate adulation: "The house was crowded to excess, and every vacant seat was

32 Writers used "John BuIi" as a generic name for the average EngIishman or the English public occupied before the overture commenced. Mademoiselle Sontag was loudly called for at

the close of the opera" (Times: 16 April 1828). The appearance of Sontag boosted

attendance of the theatre and additional performances had to be added to accommodate

public dernand- The critic for the New Monthly Magazine also commented on the

overcrowded state of the theatre:

The throng to gain admittance to the fust taste of such a treat, was alrnost unexampled, as may be supposed. But many persons, albugh they arrived before the time at which the bills announced the opening of the doors, could not gain admission... We thus stmggled amidst a dense phalanx of eager Sontaghites, and at the expense of an ovenvhelming momentum of pressure fiom the rem, as well as of a profùse action of the porous system f?om within, cleared the iron railing, and made good our lodgement on a pit-bench. Al1 these painfui efforts and torments we undenvent for thy sake, gentle reader, as in duty bound- But for critical obligations, our curiosity would, for a week or so, have given way to bodily ease. (May 1828,20 1-02)

Critics reviewed her vocal style extensive-/, often comparing her favourably to

Catalani. Although writers immediately recognized fsr vocal facility, cornplaints

abounded about her lack of power. Alsager wrote:

Her voice is a first rate soprano, supposed to reach fiom the A below the lines, to the high D; but however this may be, she took no opportunity Iast night of extending it on either side beyond the C double octave. Its tone, without being uncomrnonly powerful, is extremely ciear and melodious; but its great merit is flexibility. (Times:16 April 1828)"

Moreover, her acting abilities fell under constant criticism: '' As an actress, Mademoiseile

Sontag presents but little clairns for distinction;. .. In short, of the five or six ladies who have played the sarne part here, Mademoiselle Sontag could claim superionty, in acting, over one at the rnost" (New Monthly rWaga7irze: May 1828,202). Sontag remained at the

as a whole. 33 SontagYsvocal style will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 5 with regard to her use of ornarnentation. King's Theatre for the following season, but did not appear as Rosina, relinquishing the

role to Garcia-Malibran. Despite her bnef period of engagement, Sontag's overwhehning

popularity and approbation as prima donna USSOZU~U at the King's Theatre continued

unparalleled in London during the early nineteenth century.

Because discussions of the prime donne dominated the reviews of the revivds,

singers of the other roles received very little notice other than reports of part designations.

The degree of attention placed on the singers who filled the remaining roles in the

revivals reflected the hierarchy of the characters within the opera itseIf. Performers who

played Ahaviva evoked the most generous response, followed by Figaro; the parts of the

doctor and music teacher often received no mention at ail.

Singers who foliowed Manuel Garcia in the role of Almaviva received very little

attention fiom the press. The only other singer of any repute was Alberico Curioni

(1 785- 1832), a tenor who found a place as a leading man at the King's Theatre between

1821 and 1830. He undertook Almaviva during Garcia's short Ieave and again after

Garcia's fmal departure fiom the theatre, His début in the role was not mentioned in the

press, and his subsequent performances received little notice. Critics considered his

performances cc not altogeîher en comte, but very fairly on the whole" (New MonthZy

Magazine: April 1826, 152), and by the end of his career as the Count, many critics

cornplained of his carelessness, flat tone, and disregard for Rossini's compositions-

Critics rarely commented on the other mde roles, and when they did, their

remarks were generally brief. The later interpreters of Doctor Bart010 found themselves

in the shadow of the great Arnbrogetti, whom the critics considered the best player of the part. A variety of singers sang the role of Figaro throughout the revivals, most of whom 73 the critics found no better than Naldi, with the exception of Felice Peliegrini (1 774-1 832), whose personification of Figaro received approval."

The writings sampled in this chapter reveal a keen interest in foreign singers at the King's Theatre. Arrivals of renowned singers fiom the Continent-such as Manuel

Garcia and Henrietta Sontag-were eagerly anticipated and their débuts received extensive coverage in the press. Reviews of l7 barbiere demonstrate that although opinions on a specific perforrner often differed from one critic to another, the content of the reviews remained fairly consistent and revealed certain characteristics of singers that clearly interested wrïters and their readershipphysical appearance, acting abilities, and vocal style.

34 See for exarnple, New Monrhiy Magazine: April 1826, 15 1. CHAPTER FOUR 'At al1 costs the English public should not be bored'

Though the English public relished Italian spectacle, they viewed opera as a social

occasion rather than a serious dramatic presentation.' As a result, their interest lay

principally with the leading singers, usually disregardhg other aspects of the production.

Emest Walker asserts that the audience " demanded at al1 costs that it should not be

bored," and when they were, they ignored the action on stage in favour of social

interaction. The constant din created by opera-goers playing games and £iaterriizing

subsided only momentarily for the performance of their favourite parts of the opera by

notable singers, and the applause that followed. Critics ofien compIained about the

inattention of the audience, and chastised them for their impudence. In a review of Li' barbiere's première, Ayrton deplored the degradation of the Italian opera in England owing to public neglect:

In this country.. .music has for years past been on the decline.. .; and the Lyric Theatre.. .is filled by those who attend it as a lounge-who go there to rneet their fnends-as a pleasant and numerously attended conversazione, rather than a musical or dramatic pefiorrnance; and when an admired Cavatina, and Aria d'Abilita fiom a favourite performer, and a good Finale are heard, the Company seclude themselves in their boxes, which admit of being closed, have their suppers or other refieshrnents brought in, and take no Mernotice of what is passing upon the stage. Under these circumstances, it is not likely that a composer, be his ment what it may, shall exhaust his powers upon these parts which will be neglected; hence the modern Italian Opera seldom contains more than is exactly equivdent to the Iimited demand of an audience thus constituted. (Morning Chrunide: 13 March 18 18)

See Donald J. Grout, A Short Hisfory of Opera (New York: Columbia University Press, I965), 1, 200; Michaei F. Robinson, Naples and Neapolitan Opera (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), 9. The diff3cult task of attracting and maintaining the audience's focus fe11 to the

managers and singers, who used a number of methods to draw attention toward the stage

rather than the social events of the pit and boxes. Although remarks concerning the

performers overwhelmingly dominated the reviews, critics sometimes included comments

on some of the 'lesser' aspects of a production that generally failed to captivate the opera-

goers (albeit in less detaii and less consistently). Comments on the plot, the extreme

length of the opera, adrnired numbers, Rossini's tendency for self-borrowïng, and the

'barbarous' addition of extraneous material reveal that critics, at least, were interested in the other aspects of the performance.

Celeb rated Numbers

Arias held the greatest appeal for the spectators during the performance, and critics reguiarly included remarks on those pieces that generated the greatest response fiom the audience. Most wrïters did not include detailed critiques of the arias, but merely cited the numbers that engaged their musical sensibilities. The audience indicated its musical preferences by spontaneous shouts ofccencore" at the end of a number which signaied to the performer that the house desired that piece to be repeated immediately.

Often, particularly enjoyable airs or passages by favourite singers received a few encores.

Receiving an encore was the highest cornmendation possible, and those few singers who were so honoured secured mention in the press. Despite protests fiom the management and press that encores disrupted the performance, the practice becarne cornmonplace at the King's Theatre in the eighteenth century. In the early nineteenth century, reviewers showed increased antipathy towards encores and complained that the interruption of the performance by such boisterous applause, while flattering to the singer, niined the overall effect of the piece and extended the length of already long productions (Times:16 April

1817). Although many critics opposed the practice, they nevertheless regarded encores as an indication of the success of any particular singer and opera.

Singers greeted calls for an encore with a mixture of gratitude and apprehension.

Nthough knowing that the audience approved of their performance allowed some sense of relief, repeating a nurnber even once became very tiring and taxing on the voice.

Furthemore, to maintain the fleeting interest of the spectators each repetition of the aria required signîficant variance. The critic fiom the New Monthly Magazine complained of cc the many fatiguing encores.. .. These wanton and selfish calls exhaust the singers and cloy the hearers.. .. There is a point of saturation" (June 1825, 264). Singers were unable to ignore the shouts of approval because of the censure they would receive fiom the audience (often in the form of hissing). Despite their disapproval of the custom, critics were also quick to chastise singers who did not comply with calls for encore~.~

The reviews of IZ barbiere reveal six pieces from the opera that received consistent approval fiom the public and press. Critics often cited Count Ahaviva's serenade "Ecco ridente il cielo" (Act 1, scene 1) as one of Rossini's best arias. Alsager considered Rosina's first aria, " Una voce poco W7 (Act 1, scene 5), "a beautif'ully expressive compositiony7(Morning Chronicle: 13 March 18 18), and Kenrick described it as cc most delicious" (British Stage: April 18 18, 82). Most writers commented on this air, and noted that it frequently received encores, particularly in the later revivals when

The press reprimanded Malibran for ignoring the applause of the audience during a performance in which she finatly conceded to sing an encore despite her fatigue (Times:27 April 1829). Mesdemoiselles Sontag and Malibran sang the role. Basilio's description of the effects of calumny in " La calunnia e un venticello" (Act 1, scene 8) often met with tremendous

applause, and Ayrton found it "singularly ingenious, and.. .one of the most accurate descriptions that musical language is capable of affording" (Morning Chronicle: 13

March 1818). Moreover, Alsager commended the air for its " faocy and invention," which rendered it " arnongst Rossini's best productions" (Times: 16 Febmary 1824).

Many reviewers aiso mentioned the duet between Figaro and Rosina, "Dunque io sono"

(Act 1, scene 9), in which Rosina gives Figaro a letter intended for cc Lindoro," and noted the rapturous applause and encores. The numerous references to encores for the music- lesson scene, " Contro un cor che accende arnore" (Act II, scene 3), reveal it as a favourite of patrons, as well.

The trio for Figaro, Aimaviva, and Rosina, "Ah! Qua1 colpo inaspettato!" (Act II, scene 9), received the most consistent mention and fiequent encores in the opera.

Kenrick wrote: " [It is] the most remarkable, and regularly receives an encore; the concluding movement of it is exquisite" (British Stage: April 18 18, 83). The critics agreed that only the latter part, starting with the words " Zitti, zitti, piano, piano," merited such approbation, "for the sake of which the whole was encored" (Morning Chronicle:

13 March 1818). However, to critical approval, singers usually only repeated the latter part, avoiding the opening section. Alsager commended the encore repetition of a performance in the première season: "the singer had sufficient discretion and self-denial to repeat only the latter movement, for the sake of which the applause and cd1 for repetition were given, leaving out the first part, which possesses no peculiar merit''

(Times: 13 April 18 18). These pieces not only enjoyed immense popularity throughout the revivais, but also were performed at numerous concerts and private soirées. To meet the public appetite for them, there were published collections of favourïte airs arraoged for almost every combination of instruments.

"Our old friends"

Although most opera-goers knew little Italian, a fairly significant portion of the upper-class and better-educated patrons in the audience presumably knew something about the language fiom their Continental travek3 Furthemore, music professors and some of the more educated critics would have known enough Italian to follow the drama.

To aid the remainder of the spectators who were not familiar with Italian, vendors in the lobby of the theabe sold translations of the libretto, and the central chandelier and individual lamps provided illumination for the booklets during the performance.'

However, even with a way to follow the action audiences continued to favour socializing over the entertainment on stage,

Many English opera-goers and critics also showed a lack of respect for the quality of Italian libretti. For example, in 18 1 1 George Croly dismissed âny discussion of the plot of Mozart's Cosifan Tutte because: ~'custornhas taught us to think little about the

Gazette, 1 826. Fenner, Opera in London, 92. ' Often the quality of the libretto translations was poor and distorted the plot. Hunt complained that most of the humourous parts of the plot were lost in the translation of the libretto for Il barbiere: " We have again to quarrel with the translation of the Operas, which we are very 10th to do, as they have been much better since the beginning of last season. In that of II Barbiere disbiglia, the joke of the drunken man's repeatedIy mistaking Docotr Bartolo's narne is entireIy lost, by preserving the words of the original.. .. This Barbaro is still Barbaro, which however rnay be easily guessed; but Doctor Sornaia, (which, by the way, is no play on a word at all) might be translated Doctor Pack-sadde; and Docotr Bertoido be turned into Docfor Bartimey, which would be a translation of Bartolo, and imply a sort of changeling too. Bertoldo being a weli-known name in Italian comic romance for a droll who was deformed" (hrniner: 12 April 18 18,235). dramatic merit of Operas: of the dialogue, therefore, nothing need be said" (Times: 3

June 181 1). Many critics shared this opinion and denounced Italian plots for their lack of interesthg action, and for thek profusion of " extravagances and absurdities" (Morning

Chronicle: 28 February 1820)- Edgcurnbe condemned Rossini's libretti as "execrably

bad" and complained that they contained "scarcely one line that can be called poetry, or even one of comrnon sense." However, Peacock defended the reputation of poets whose work had been injudiciously altered by the managers in their endless attempts to appeai to public taste: "It is seldorn that we are enabled to judge fairly.. .an Italian libretto.. .as a whoIe."

Understanding the dialogue did not present a huge obstacle for spectators of h' barbiere, because most frequent theatre-goers would have been familiar with the plot and characters through several already-existing drarnatic presentations. A translation of the story into English by George Colman the elder appeared at Covent Garden as a play in three acts under the title The Spunish Barber (1777) and became widely popular with the public. Paisieilo's Id? barbiere di SivigZia premièred on the London stage in 1789 for

Nancy Storace's benefit and received seven revivals through 1808. Moreover, the première of Mozart's Le Nozze di Figaro, based on the sequel to Beaumarchais's play (Le

Marriuge de Figura), at the King's Theatre on 18 June 18 12 introduced the characters of the opera to early-nineteenth-century opera-patrons. Kenrick confirmed that the public possessed a fairly high level of familiarity with the plot in his review, by referring to the characters as "our old fiends .. . the drarnatis personie of 'Figaro,' in their younger days"

- Edgcumbe, 126. Peacock, 236-37. (BritrSh Sîage: April 1818, 82). Despite its long history on the stage, Bacon praised the new setting:

The story is the old one of the adventures of Count Almaviva, a kind of field in which every composer seems anxious to try his force.. . But worn as it is, the interest is sustained with suigular ski11 by the music., .. Not an incident which could have introduced variety into the drama, has been passed over by the composer, and for the first time we see the spirit of Comedy drawing new life fiom the spirit of Song, (LiferaryGazette: 14 March 18 18, 173)

Reviews of IZ barbiere contained little discussion of the libretto, and no critic even mentioned its author, Sterbini. Most writers only brieflv recounted the derivation of the story fiom Beaumarchais's work. For example, Kenrick referred to the libretto as

based on the " well-known comedy of Beaumarchais" with some necessq alterations to fit the mould of Itdian opera buffa. He also noted that "the leading incidents are retained, though the brevity of an Italian Opera has necessarily caused some compression" (British Stage: April 18 18,82)-

Comments on the quality of the libretto appeared infiequently. Although cntics generally wrote negatively about ItaIian libretti, reviews of fl barbiere reveal a certain degree of admiration for its plot, The critic for the New MonthIy Magazine conferred hi& praise on the story and compared it favourably to Mozart's Figaro: "the poem.. .has the attraction of some excellent comic scenes, besides the merit of cleamess and simplicity, which is not the case with its sequel, 'Le Nozze di Figaro"' (March 1824,

104). The Theatrical Inquisitor applauded the plot for its ability to attract the attention of and draw laughter fiom the audience:

On the merit of the original drama it wodd be superfluous to advert; the Opera retains more of the playfil vivaci~and comic force, that the 'Nozze di Figaro;' and indeed we do not recollect to have seen any Italian Comic Opera, in which the incident situations have produced so strong and irresistible an effect. The House was kept in a continual laughter, a rare occurrence in the Theatre. To this the exertions of the performers mady contnbuted; they aU seemed to enter into the genuine spirit of the Author, and were most successfül in conveying the desired impression to the audience. (March 18 Z 8,207)

In view of these factors, the lack of criticism of the libretto suggests that the

critics assurned the average 'John Bull' aiready to be acquainted with the plot. Further, it

is likely that the members of the press understood that their readership was not

particularly interested in anything other than the leading singers.

Excessive Length

One of the most fiequent cornplaints about Italian opera in general was its

extreme length. Because an evening at the King's Theatre typically included both an

opera and a ballet, performances were drawn out &airs that lasted until at least midnight.

When critics compIained that the opera ran too long, managers often reduced leagth by excluding some portions-usualIy choruses and airs of secondary characters. As a result, the dramatic balance of many operas shifted as they became successions of favourite airs that showcased the leading singers. Mthough many protests about the excessive length of operas appeared in the press, critics also disagreed with the custom of curtailing the work to suit the public taste, because the opera lost integrity, unity, and meaning. A critic for the Times asserted:

From the practice which has obtained in the Italian theatre of this country, of cornpressing the incidents of three acts into two, the business is so precipitated or mangled, that the events lose al1 appearance of probability, and the Spectators al1 chance of illusion. It would be in vain therefore to look for regularity or consistency of plot. (29 Mach 1802) Three critics commented on the length of h! barbiere in their reviews of the première, but oniy objected to the second act, which they considered the weaker of the two, and recommended its significant reduction to appease the audience. In his discussion of the libretto, Ke~ckmentioned the necessary compression of the original story to fit the parameters of ItaIian opera, and suggested that " it would have indeed been quite as well had this been carried to greater extent, since the second act is still far too long" (British Stage: Apnl 18 18, 82). Similady, Ayrton noted: "As a whole, this Opera is much too long; it might be curtailed of some pieces, arnongst which are two that have, we suspect, been interpolated,' and may easily be pointed out" (Morning Chrorzicle: 13

March 18 18). Bacon also objected to the opera's duration and included a rather verbose commentary which ran for about half a column:

The opera has the single fault of too great length. No possible power of music can keep an audience contented to sit for hours, in contentment, and that too in a pit where the benches seem expressly made for trying the patience of the amateur, and for dnving those who are neither patient nor amateurs, into hissing, and hatred of the performance, from the mere pain of their backs.. .. The opera is roo long. We dislike this, f~stfor its necessary exhaustion, and next, for its exclusion of the divertisement, a part of the performance which ought never to be omitted,- as an indulgence in itself, and as highly contributhg to the enjoyrnent of the remaining music of the night. The second act of L? Barbiere afTords large room for excision. Three fourths of it might be cut out, with advantage tu the effect of the rest. It has beauty, but beauty that rnay be spared. The two portions before and after the Divertisement ought to be divided into as near an equality as possible, and the whole would be more secure of popularity. This the manager ought to see done, without listening to the clamours of the foreigners, who of course beset hun with growlings and supplications, each for his separate chance of glory and grimace. (Literary Gazette: 14 March 18 18, 173)

' The customary addition of extraneous material to the onginal work of3en lengthened the opera considerably and gave further reason for significant omissions. A more detailed discussion on this practice of interpolation appears later in this chapter. Despite the attention II barbiere's Iength received in the press, no evidence exists

in reviews to suggest that managers curtailed the opera for the following seasons, and the

critics abandoned the topic.' However, for several performances during the revival

seasons (1 825, 1829, and l83O), IZ burbiere was staged as a one-act production and

performed dong with other truncated operas in the same night.

Rossini the 'Mannerist'

Reactions to iZ burbiere in reviews of revivais often criticized the composition for its "marks of haste" (Times: 1 1 March 18 18). Comments appeared in the London press suggesting that Rossini composed the opera in a short period of time; however, this was probably based on anecdotal evidence. The English press likely obtained this opinion f?om the reports of Count de Stendhal's travels and his encounter with Rossini at an inn in Terrancine (9 January 18 17), which was published in 18 17 with excerpts reproduced by Hunt in the fiaminer (25 April 18 19).9 Although Hunt rebuked Rossini for bis want of originality, he included an extract fiom Stendhal's "very arnusing work" which illustrated that the " excellent musician" merely followed the conventions of Italian operatic iife:

This pour man of genius interests me much. Not that he does not appear gay and happy, but what a pity it is that this unfortunate country is not blessed with a sovereign who has taste enough to give him a pension of two thousand crowns, that he may not be under the necessity of writing except at the moment of inspiration. Who cm, under his present circumstances, make it a reproach to him that he composes an opera in a fortnight. He is obliged sometimes to write upon a

AIthough evidence of reduction would be more likely to reside in performing parts of the score for each season than in the critical press, unfortunately such prescriptions are irretrievable. Henri Beyle (The Count de Stendhal), Rome, Naples et Florence. en 181 7(Paris, 18 17; Reprint, Paris: Gallimard, 1987)- wretched table at an inn, in the midst of al1 the noise of the kitchen, with muddy ink, brought to him in an old pomatum pot. (Examiner:25 April18 19,269)

Hunt believed that the adverse conditions under which Rossini was forced to compose excused any signs of haste in ff barbiere. Ln contrat, Ayrton felt little sympathy for

Rossini, and blamed the Italian opera-goers and Rossini's greediness for the rapidity of composition:

Rossini composes with a view to profit; he therefore, writes often in a hurry, and five out of six of his operas are not intended by him to be addressed to posterîty. They are mostly got up for those ftalian cities where novelty alone has any chami, and where the same thing is out of date in two seasons. Were he to bestow his time, and exhaust his stock of ideas, upon works produced to satisQ such tastes, he would betray an indifference to his pecuniary interests, and he is too much a man of the worId to be guilty of my such imprudence. (Harmonicon: 1823, 1 15)

However, remarks on compositional haste must be understood with.the social context and conventions of Italian operatic life during this period. Composers were as transient as performers and fiequently rnoved between theatres and conbracts to obtaui as many positions as possible in an attempt to secure financial comfort. Moreover, impresarios often only finalized the details of the libretto a month before the proposed date for the première.I0 These two factors allowed little time for composers to compile at a cornfortable Pace sufficient material for a full length opera, or to have a complete score

much before opening night. Phillip Gossett points out that Rossini's " Legendary speed in composition.. .was the product of a theatrical system which demanded rapidity as the pnce for fulfilled contracts and continued success." 'l

'O PhilIip Gossett, " Gioachino Rossini and the Conventions of Composition," Acta Musicologica 42 (Septmenber IWO): 50. " Ibid. In order to complete a composition in the restrïcted time-he, composers customariiy employed previously composed materiai and aitered it to suit the new context. However, after the première of II barbiere in London, several critics complained that Rossini overused recycled materials and that such lazhess rendered many parts of the opera ineffective. Cnticisms of Rossini's reuse of musical passages in slightly

different guises led to his classification as a " rnannerist." The Theatrical lnquisitor asserted: "His worst defect is his want of onginaiity: he is what, in dl the fine arts, is termed a rnannerist, an imitator of himself' (April Z 8 18,; 62). Edgcumbe conceded that

Rossini possessed genius and invention, but berated his cornpositional alacrïty: "He is so rapid and so copious a &ter that his imagination seems already to be nearly drained, as no one is so great a plaganst of himself' "

Despite these admonitions, other writers supported the practice. In 1824, Ayrton published an excerpt of Righetti-Giorgi's Cenni di una donna that provides the Italian point of view: "It is true that Rossini copies himself, but if a passage in one of his operas pleases, why shouid he not be permitted to transplant it into another, and see his favourite flower bloorning in a second nosegay?'((Xarmonicon: 1824,82). In the English press,

Musicus agah defended Rossini:

" ROSSIM is a mannerist," Say his contemners. Undoubtedly. And who is not? But the fact is that ROSSINI'S mannerism is rendered more prorninent by the very peculiarity which is the principle of his system-by the accentuation and by the divisions he employs. Flowing melody, simply constructed, is not susceptible of the same strong characteristics.. .. #en we hear ROSSINI'S finales or his duets aboundhg in such "catching melodies" .. .no human behg cmmistake the hand of the author. In the works of the composers up to the middle of the Iast century, although traits proper to themselves are perceptible, yet, 1 repeat, ROSSINI'S mannerism is far more perceptibIe, though not more intrinsic, on account of the

" Edgcum be, 127. strength of bis peculiarity, and which necessarily wait upon the means he uses. (Quarterly Musical Magazine: 1823, 11)

Many critics chastised Rossini for embracing a practice vlndely adopted by many

other Italian opera cornposers to expedite the compositional process, and h! barbiere was

no exception. However, the only number taken in its entirety, without alteration, from

another opera is the Sinfonia (overture), which originally appeared in Rossini's Aureliano

In Palmira (Milan, 26 December 18 l3).I3 Consequently, Rossini included only a

skeletal outline of the piece in the autograph score, simply notating a bass part. Rossini

also appropriated several themes fi-om earlier works besides the Sinfonia, but modïfïed

them extensively and gave each theme its own setting in the context of the new opera.

Gossett identifies nine such themes, but concedes that because scholars vary widely in their process for the determination of borrowed materiai, no definitive list cmexist.

Rossini's tendency to employ recycled materials resulted in a certain sïmilarïty across his works that sparked criticism fkom the press. For example, the critic for the

Theatrical Inquisitor complained that Rossini's music iacked diversity and professed:

"when you have heard one of his opera's you have heard dl; the same omaments, the same finishes and cadences, and even the sarne style accompaniments" (April 18 18,362).

Similady, Edgcumbe wrote: " His compositions are so sirnilar, and bear so strong a starnp of peculiarity and mannerisrn, that while it is impossible not to recognize instantly a piece of music as his, it is fkequently difficult to distinguish one fiom another." l4 Though it is

l3 Some scholarship, based on mid-nineteenth-century accounts, has suggested that the opera originally had a different overture. These theones propose that the 'Iost overture' was based on 'Spanish themes,' but Gossett contends that the assumption was probably just a misinterpretation of Righetti- Giorgi's comments on Garcia's suspected relationship to the Count's serenade aria "Ecco ridente in cielo." Gossett, Preface to If barbiere di Sivrglia, 23-25. l4Edgcumbe, 127. unlikely that the so-called predictability of Rossini's music bothered the audience to a large extent, their sarneness' wodd not have helped to divert the audience's attention away fiom their social amusements.

'Barbarous additions'

The substantial impact singers had in attracting the public to the King's Theatre gave them a control over many aspects of the production. In addition to dictating the details of their engagements, leading performers deterxnined the final shaping of their roles by controiling the 'barbarous' addition of extraneous material into the opera to suit their desires. Operatic tampering typically included the addition of an aria, the interpolation or substitution of other arias, and, less fiequently, omissions of difficult arias.

Italian opera composers customarily catered to the needs and whims of their singers, and Rossini's contractual obligations for the composition of Il! barbiere reveal his agreement to make whatever changes were required for the benefit of the production:

Maestro Rossini rnust set to music according to the qualities and convenience of the singers, obliging himself also to make where needed al1 those alterations necessary either to ensure the good reception of the music or to meet the circumstances and convenience of those same singers ,at the simple request of the Impresario, because so it mut be and no other way etc.''

Rossini possessed a relatively sanguine attitude towards the alteration of his work and did not hesitate either to replace arias that had been poorly received or to write additional arias to lend more weight to a particuiar role for a celebrated singer. Gossett presents docurnentary evidence that suggests that Rossini hirriself was responsible for the inclusion of at least one additionai piece to the original version, a scena and aria for

Rosina, "Ah se è ver che in ta1 momento." l6 The new nurnber appears afler Bartolo convinces Rosina that Lindoro has betrayed her and before the thunderstorrn interlude in the second act. Although the text does not orighate fiom Sterbini's libretto, it contains no action and therefore does not effect the overall drarnatic design; Rosina reaf£ïrms her faith in her true love. Gossett associates the supplementary aria with Josephine Fodor-

Mainvielle, the fnst Rosina in London. Fodor left the King's Theatre after the 18 18 season and traveled to Venice where she was engaged at the Teatro San Samuele in

Rossini's Elisabettn and Il barbiere. Fodor's outstandhg success in Rossini's operas earned her wide acclaim in Venice and admitted her into the highest artistic circles, where she degedly came into contact with Rossini. Gossett contends that Rossini was likely impressed by Fodor's technical excellence and prepared the aria specifically for performance in Venice for the theatre's 18 19 season."

The music for the aria dernonstrates Rossini's predilection for employing previously existing material in a new context. Rossini derived the cabaletta's theme fiom

the Allegro portion of the aria " Alma rea il più infelice" in Sigismondo (1 8 15) but made extensive adaptations to its rhythm, orchestration, and omamentation to suit the context of h! barbiere. Aithough no score of fi! barbiere seems to have been published in London, it is unlikely that "Ah se è ver" appeared in Iater London performances: Rossini composed the work specifically for Fodor, who, after Venice, con6nued her career in

IS Gossetî, Preface to II barbiere di Sivigiia, 8.

l6 Phillip Gossett, "The Operas ofRossini: Problems ofTextual Criticism in Nineteenth-Century Opera" (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1970), 295-302; and Phillip Gossett, " 'Ah se è ver': An Paris, Naples, and Viema where she introduced the number into performances of the

opera. However, the existence of the aria provides insight into the widespread

convention of the addition of arias to enhance a principal singer's part and indicates the

level of Fodor7ssuccess in London, in the role of Rosina specificdly, which sparked this addition by the composer himself.

The social nature of operatic life at the King's meant that most patrons attended the theatre on a regular basis and probably watched the same opera several times. The more familiar an opera was, the easier it was for the audience to be distracted. Singers used their popularity to attract and maintain the audience's attention by varying their performances. For this purpose, prime donne, whose engagements entitled them to an number of Iiberties, regularly substituted arias of their own choice into their part. Fenner notes: "until Mozart and Rossini, the 'right of the book' was fülly exercised by leading singers-abetted by most musical directors-and that scarcely an opera was performed without borrowings fiom an average of three of four other composers." I8 As the custom of the time dictated, singers selected pieces from their extensive repertories to display their powers, enhance their reputations- and captivate the audience by introducing new material every night. Often the subject matter of these arias did suit the opera, but because the English cared little about the dramatic merit of operas, any mismatch was tolerated, In 1820, Ebers wrote:

Additional Aria for Soprano," descrptive notes, Gioacchino Rossini: If barbiere di SÏvigfia, recorded under the direction of Claudio Abbado (Deutsche Grammophon , 1 992), 17- 18. " Gossett, "The Operas of Rossini," 798. '' Fenner, Opera in London, 97. The 'right of the book' meant that singers had complete control over their part despite the original intentions of the composer and librettist. Let a new opera be intended to be brought fonvard. Signor This will not sing his part, because it is not prominent enough; so, to enrich it, a gathering mut be made of airs fiom other operas, no matter whether by the same composer or not, nor whether there be any congruity between the style of the onginal piece and the adventitious passages introduced. l9

First-rate singers held almost complete power over the arias chosen, but knowing that their careers at the King's Theatre depended on the acceptance of the public, they would not introduce new material if the alterations were not welcomed by the audience.

Despite public approbation, critics strongly opposed the convention and repeatedly complained of the minous effect the practice had on the integrity of the composition.

Peacock objected: "The Italians will look to nothing but their own individual display.. . and al1 ùi vain, except for the first production-for to the whsand inefficiency of every new Company the unfortmate opera must be refitted and garb1ed."20 The theatre's management received most of the blame for the lack of control over singers, but even the odd one who resisted this convention generally had to acquiesce to the singers demands to ensure a successfül season. However, one director, William Ayrton, was successfûl in reforming the practice of singers, emphaticdiy protesting the prevaihg system of conceding to the egos of singers and forbidding them to insert whatever new material they pleased. Ayrton's reforms were met with disapproval fiom both Waters and the singers," but he was applauded by critics for his attempts to b~ggreater musical

l9 Ebers, 1 16. 'O Peacock, 24 1. '' Ayrton faced staunch opposition from singers on several occasions. For example, Ayrton forbade Fodor fkorn introducing extraneous material in a revival of Mozart's La Clemenza di Tiro, but she altered her role as she pleased, and consequently incurred strong cnticisms fiom the press for her injudicious alterations. (Morning Chronicle: 14 July 18 17) integrity to the performances at the theatre." As a resdt of his efforts, the practice of

including extraneous material abated during his tenure as director of the King's Theatre,

especidly in the uperas of Mozart and Rossini.

The operas of less popular composers were unscmpulously mangled by singers.

For exarnple, Ebers complained that many operas became so altered as to be "almost

unrecognizable." However, critics indulged and even welcomed some modifications to

operas of the lesser composers when they felt the opera was devoid of good arias, in

which case the insertion of a better air Mproved the general effect. Admiration for

additions typically appeared when the singer chose to interpolate a celebrated aria fiom

Mozart or Rossini into a less popular composer's work. Mozart's and Rossini's operas remained mostly intact because the press, and even the public, objected to extensive aiterations of their favounte operas. Peacock noted: "The audiences of the King's

Thea&e are justly strict in this one part only, that they will not permit the sewing on of an extraneous purple shed to any of Woazrfs] great and sacred temes." 24 The public and critics held Rossini's operas to the sarne standard and therefore condernned excessive alterations of his works as well, ody allowing change where Rossini's music allowed modification.

Some reviews of 1' barbiere contain cornrnentary on the practice of interpolations, a practice which led some of the leading singers to insert new materid to display their

22 Alsager complimented Ayrton on his efforts to restore the bahce of music within the opera: " We take pIeasure in noticing that the system comrnenced last season, of studying to make the whole drama as perfect as possible, rather than particular parts more prominent and the rest detestible, continues to be acted on; it affords at once the tmest gratification to an audience, and the surest means for the improvement of music" (Times: 19 January 18 18). See also " Chronicles" Season 18 17, Harmonicon: 1830,246,

2j Ebers, 2 827. vocal agility and compass if Rossini's original number was not sufficiently embellished.

Although Kenrick alluded to the practice in his description of the performance as

ccslightly-varied'' (British Stage: June 1819, 1741, none of the early reviews of the opera

mentioned substitutions specifically. It is not until the revival performances of three

prime donne- Vestris, Garcia-Malibran, and SO ntag-and their interpretation of Rosina

that critics showed interest in interpolations in II barbiere. Rossini left room for the

application of this convention in at least one place in the ciramatic fi-amework of the

opera-the celebrated music lesson scene? Alsager remarked that some fonn of

substitution appeared to be the composer's intention: cc Rossini himseifseems to have left

carte blanche for the choice" (Times: 29 April 1829). Although Rossini did compose an

aria for this scene, the content of the text is not crucial for the remainder of the opera, and

therefore provided ample opportunity for substitution. The New Monthly Magazine noted

that "the ad libitum opportunity af5orded by the scene of the music-lesson" allowed the prima donna room to introduce cc whatsoever Song she may have most practised and

perfected" (May 1828,203). The reviews reveai that, in place of the original aria,

ContrO un cor che accende arnore," each of these singers customarily inserted a nurnber

of her choice which showed off her technical abilities.

Madame Lucia Vestris (1797- 1856) first appeared as Rosina in the 1824 revival,

but did not receive the sarne universal approval that other singers in the role experienced.

The critic fkom the New Monthiy Magazine objected to her being cast in the role:

'4 Peacock, 237. The Count, disguised as a music teacher, enters Bartolo's house and pretends to give Rosina her singing lesson in place ofthe ailing Basilio. Madame Vestris's singing could only be discerned by the eye. And Madame Vestris, as prima donna in Rosina! There's courage! we have a very high regard for this lady's musical talents, and we have O bserved their improvement of late years with sincere gratification; but we owe it to candour to declare, that, in our opinion, neither her musical acquirements, considerable as they are, nor her voice, nor her histrionic talents could justie the manager for introduchg her in the part of Rosina ...But this kind of voice, and, we will add, the degree of scientific cultivation to which it has reached, are not sufçicient for a prima donna at the King's Theatre. (March 1824, 105)

Furtherrnore, the sarne critic deplored her rendition of" Una voce poco fq" which cc produced Little sensation," and presented the only comment on her interpolation in the music lesson scene: " her Song fiom the Donna del Lago, which she thought to substitute for the authentic air, was equally unsuccessful" (New Monthly Magazine: Mar& 1824,

When Mademoiselle Garcia replaced Madame Vestris as Rosina mid way through the 1825 season, she brought new interpolations to the opera Bacon, writing in the

London Magazine, admired the new Spanish Song she introduced in the music lesson scene each night, remarking that "she sings so delightfûlly." Although he did not generally approve of inserting unrelated material into masterpieces such as fl barbiere,

Bacon resigned himself to Garcia's additions, because they were "so charming, and fidl of grace and spirit." In fact, he found it "quite impossible to quarrel with them" (Jdy

Upon her remto London in 1829 as Garcia-Malibran, she resumed the role of

Rosina and continued to introduce new songs in place of" Contro un cor," singing something different for each performance. Her unusual choices of substitution, though, because they defied the standard practice for interpolations, elicited considerable comment. Alsager, for example, though her choice of a French romance was poor for it did not aptiy display her powers of vocal exhibition:

Most vocalists of great acquirements have always made it a practice to select for that occasion some piece calculated to display their powers to the utmost extent. Madame Malibran chose a French romance.. .. Out of compliment she was encored; and in the repetition of the supposed lesson scene, she introduced a varïety of other French light songs, which were neither of a more recent date nor of a more brilliant execution. (Times: 29 April 1829).

However, two other reviews f?om the same season commented on her inclusion of

Spanish songs. The New Monthly Magazine wrote of her insertion into the music lesson:

cc But hstead of selecting a vocal piece of some importance for the music lesson, Madame

M. Garcia obliged the audience to content itself with a plain Spanish ballad, rather

'queer' in some of its melodic tums, which many a peasant girl of Andalusia might probably have sung quite as well" (June 1829,250). J. Augustine Wade applauded her

" discretion in avoiding a cornparison with more accomplished singers" in the music lesson scene by forgoing a virtuosic display in favour of a simpler piece. He reported that the dialogue was even dtered for the scene for the 'music teacher' to instruct Rosina " to try a canzonet, 'del Maestro Garcia,' and accordingly she sings a Spanish air,-we suppose, by her father, the late accomplished tenor at this theatre16and a most wild and singular composition it is" (Afhenaeum:6 May 1829,285).

Sontag incorporated substitutions which were much more ornamental in character, calcdated to highlight her extraordinary vocal flexibility and compass. Although al1 of her music for Rosina was highly embellished, she reserved her full display for the music

'6 For some time the general English populace believed that Garcia had passed away due to " inflammation of the lungs" while touring in Mexico (Times:23 January 1829), when in fact he did not expire untiI 1832 in Parissupposedly of the sarne ailment- (Fenner, Opera in London, 185). lesson scene" in which, reviews reveal, she substituted the original aria with an adaptation for voice of Rode's violin variations that was originally designed by Madame

Cataiani. In his review of Sontag's performance, Alsager even suggested that in the second variation, a section comprised of arpeggios, Sontag's execution was " infinitely superior" to that of Cataiani (Times:16 April 1828). Indeed, the critic fiom the New

MonthIy Magazine praised Sontag's performance and choice of substitution for the music lesson:

The greatest triurnph, however, of Mademoiselle Sontag, was in the scene of the music-lesson, where she sang Rode's air with two variations; the same which Madame Catalani ofien gave as the test of her vocal capabilities, and which other singers have successfully studied and executed since. In these Mlle. Sontag lefi every cornpetitor behind her. Her execution was wonderful beyond conception. The arpeggios of broken chords in the second variation struck us with perfect astonîshment. But such feats baffle description, they must be heard to be appreciated, and we may add, they must be witnessed to be ranked among the possibilities of Iiuman talent and perseverance. (May 1828,204)

Other than the interpoIation of extraneous material into the music lesson scene, singers avoided alterations of Il barbiere, and critics mentioned no instances of the practice for any of the other roles. The idequency of the commentary on 'barbarous additions' reveals that while singers adored the opportunity for vocal display, they showed some restraint with the works of a great rnaster such as Rossini.

Remarks on various aspects of operatic productions are scarce, principally because of the critics' almost singular fascination with singers. Moreover, the b&f

" See Times: 16 April 1828. accounts that can be located were nearly always linked to the singers in some way. In

large part, this is owïng to the artistic control exercised by singers that inevitabiy had an

effect on the performance as a whole. This chapter has demonstrated that conventions at

the King's Theatre pemiined numerous encores for favourite airs sung by favourite

singers. These conventions aiso pemitted wholesaie alterations to the original design of

a work, includîng the omission of secondary parts and choruses, and allowing extravagant

interpolations.

One critic in particular, Thomas Love Peacock, was highly critical of management's concessions to singes Peacock also cautioned opera patrons to beware of

" pronouncing swnmary judgment on things of which we know nothing but from the showing of the King's Theatre." He feared that any opinion about opera could not be given fairly because the " chaotic" nature of performances at the theatre left "the intentions of both poet and composer .. . an unfathomable mystery." 28

'' Peacock, 237 and 239. CHAPTER FIVE 'Meretricious Ornament'

Ln addition to interpolations, the right of the book aiso allowed singers to introduce whatever decorations they pleased to convey their interpretation of the text to the audience and to heighten the effect of their part. Contracts often included a clause that specified that the singer be granted fiee application of ornaments for their music. For example, Mademoiselle A.T. 's proposal for the 18 17 season stipulated, That I shall provide myself with omaments only" (Quarten'y Musical Magazine: 18 18, 2451.'

Omarnentation was the crowning glory of the Italian operatic training, the main purpose of which was to display the singer's vocal dexterity and ability to improvise. Austin

Caswell explains that in the development of rnelodic improvisation the singer was assumed not so much to be portraying a character as he was presenting himself and displaying his vimiosic ski11 before an enthusiastic public." Furthemore, kst-rate vocaiists had to Vary the type of decorations to out-perform other singers, win and maintain the interest of the spectators, and demonstrate their versatility. As a resdt, arias becarne improvisatory creations often with extravagant cadenzas and extensive variations on the original passages. Ayrton wrote of the impressive opera rehearsals which he deemed "the triumph of Italian sensibility," because they af5orded an opportunity to witness the astounding skills of the finest Italian singers in the craft of vocal

' Although Waters only provided the initials of singers for publication, it is likely that " A.T." was Ann Tree (1801-82), a soprano who was engaged at the King's Theatre for the 18 17 season in minor roles. However, she was better known for her work at Covent Garden where she made her début in 18 19 as Rosina in the English adaptation of II barbiere (The Barber ofSeville). improvisation: "at these [rehearsals] may be heard persons, perfectly ignorant of musicai science, as most of the vocal performers of Etaly are, sing their parts as if by instinct, with the most admirable spirit and precision" (Harmonicon: 1823, 134).

The evolution of the practice of improvised omamentation lay within the nature of

Italian operatic composition and pex5orrnance. Many treatises on Italian singing reved that composers were trained to wrïte melodies "quite simply" so that singers could

"render them agreeable to the hearer" b y altering and embellishïng tl~ern.~John Addison wrote that a composer typically included only the " Skeleton of his ideas" to ailow the singer to "give the finish according to his taste and judgment," but cautioned the singer

that there is but a hairbreadth partition between the sublime and ridiculous." An article in the Hurmonicon, which included excerpts from an Italian treatise on melody, explained that after the time of Handel singers began to embellish every part of a piece:

The composers became the slaves of the singers, and in process of time, were considered as altogether out of the question. Al1 they had to do was to get up a kind of skeleton airs, which the singers took upon themselves to animate and colour by their manner of embellishimg them (1 824, 130).

Rossini, however, c hallenged this practice. The enormously popular castrafo,

Giambattista Vefluti, is said to have indulged in such an excessive arnount of florid decoration that Rossini's music was virtually unrecogni~able.~Apparently Rossini was

------' Austin Caswell, "Mme Cinti-Damoreau and the Embellishment of Italian Opera in Paris: 1820- 1845," Journal of the American MusicologicaI Society 28, no. 3 (1975): 459. Maria Anfossi, Trattato teorico-pratico srrll 'arte del canto ... A Theoretical Treatise on the Art ofSinging (London, c. 1 840), 73. John Addison, Singing, Pracrically treared in a Series oflnstructions (London: D' Almaine, 1850). This frequently cited anecdote can be found in early-nineteenth-century literature, as welI as modem Rossini biographies. See Henri Beyle (The Count de Stendhal), Vie de Rossini (Paris, 1824), trans. Richard N. Coe as Lfe of Rossini (New York: Orion Press, 1970), 340-50, and Thomas Busby, Concert Room and Orchestral Anecdotes of Music and Musicians, Ancienr and Modern, vol. 1 (London, 1 825), 145- appafled by the result and vowed to include omamentation in his notation: Bacon

explained that other early-nineteenth-century composers also attempted to control the

amount of free license singers exercised over operatic music, " thus removing and extending the limits of the composer, so far as imagination is concemed, without narrowing the province of the singer." ' Rossini received strong criticism for his attempt to limit the singer's freedom from writers who believed that his methods were desîructive to the nature of Italian opera and the ingenuity of the singers. Reicha advocated the singer's interpretation over the composer's written embellishments. He argued that the composer could not provide sufficient ornaments to suit the voice of a talented singer and that the quality of the singer's improvised embeilishments were superior to ornaments written out by the composer:

Prescribed ornaments are sure to be almost always iil-executed. In a singer of talent, embellishments are generaily the result of inspiration of the moment; which is infinMy more effective than any thing that the study and researches of the composer can produce. The singer adapts them to the nature and compas of his voice, and modifies them according to the feelings and impulse of the moment

46. Rodolfo Celletti has presented arguments which challenge the authenticity of the anecdote in his "Origini e sviluppi della coIoratura rossinianna," Nuova rivista musicale itaiïana, 2 (1968): 872-9 19, and Storia del Belcanto (Discanto Edizioni, Fiesole, 1983), trans. Frederick Fuller as A History ofBel Canto (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 199 1 ), 142-46. Nevertheless, the story circulated both on the continent and in England, and readers of the time had no reason to doubt its vaIidity. Stendhal suggested that Rossini's vanity was wounded by VeIIuti's extravagant decorations and Rossini apparently declared: " next time I accept a contract, 1 shall not be confionted with another singer of this type, equally fortunate in the fiexibility of his larynx, sirnilarly obsessed with this mania for embroidery, but in al1 other respects mediocre, who will promptIy ruin my music for good and all, not onIy rnaking it unrecognizable to me, but-infinitely worse-by sending the audience to sleep with his twiddles and roulades, or, at best, by merely tickling their curiosity with a handfùI of meretricious conjuring- tricks? ... Obviously, there is not a moment to be lost, and 1 must fundamentalIy reconsider the whole conception of music which 1 have heId up to this point. ... in future, no singer of mine shaI1 ever have the slightest pretext for improvising a single appoggiatura. Every scrap of omamentation, every vestige of a fioritura, will constitute an integral part of the Song itself, and the whoIe lot, without exception, wiI1 be noted down in the score." Beyle, Life of Rossini, 34 1-42. ' Richard Mac Kenzie Bacon, Elements of vocal science; being a philosophical enquiry into some of the principles of singing, Notes and Introduction by Edward Foreman (Charnpaign, Illinois: Pro Musica Press, 1966), 102. dlthese considerations must necessarily be neglected, if written by the composer. (Narmonicon: 1824, 13 0)

However, Rossini meticulously fashioned his music after the specific capabilities of the

singers who were to perfom his works. Ayrton rernarked that Rossini occupied

himself seriously in studying the voices of the performers. He made them sing at the piano, and we have seen him more than once obliged to mutilate and 'curtail of their faU- proportions,' some of his most brilliant and happy ideas, because the tenor could not attain the note which was necessary to express the composer's feeling; and alter the character of a melody, because the prima donna sang false. (Harmonicon: 1823, 134)

Stendhal dso complained that because Rossini " deprived the singer of such oppomuiities for an extemporaneous display of his powers," he essentially destroyed the originality of the singers and took away kom the pleasure of the audience:

In the operas of Rossini and his Unitators, the singer is condemned to the mortification of never finding a single opportunity of making the public acquainted with qualifications which it has cost him the labour of years to Besides the habit of finding every thing written in the music he is to sing, tends to destroy ail spirit of invention, and check every impulse of a creative fancy. Al1 that composers demand now-a-days of the artist is a mechanical and insfrurnenral execution. The lasciare me fare, (leave that to me,) the usual phrase of Rossini to his singers, has corne to such a pas, that the faculty is not even left them of filling up a simple point d'orgue. They fmd every thing ornamented after Rossini's particular marner." (Harmonicon:1824, 107)

Many nineteenth-century opera singers-Laure Cinti-Damoreau, Giuditta Pasta,

Giovanni Rubini, Jemy Lind, Manuel Garcia, and He~ettaSontag-were famous for their embellishments, especiaIly their highly virtuosic cadenzas. Despite Rossini's increased notational specificity that placed limitations upon improvisation, singers regularly ignored Rossini's prescriptions and replaced his embellishments with their own.

The performances of the foreign singers who dominated the London stage in the early nineteenth century followed the Italian operatic tradition and were subject to the application of decorations above and beyond the wrïtten score. Many English writers, however, held sùnplicity as highest aesthetic standard and strongly opposed the new

Italian school of vïrtuosity heralded by Rossini and the singers for whom he designed his music. Langley writes that critics regularly objected to the Italian custom of ornatnentation and viewed it as a Continental invasion inconsistent with English notions of taste and propriety."' Rossini's music was crïticized for being more elegant than expressive. Writers favoured the expressive style of Mozart, in which the simplicity of music was capable of invoking the passions of the text, over the elegant style of Rossini because Rossini's highly decorative style prevented bue exploration of the emotional content. Writers held divergent opinions regarding the application of florid singing in the works of the two composers. Cntics considered Mozart's music sacrosanct, and Alsager proclaimed that any arnount of embellishment " would be a step short of profanation"

(Times: 13 May 18 18). In Rossini's music, however, alterations were accepted: "though

Rossini's music may bear embroidering, that of Mozart is too highly finished to suffer the additions of any other artist" (Times: 13 May 1 825).

Irnmediately after the première of L! barbiere in London much criticism was directed at Rossini for the excessive floridity of his style, but this was seen as a fault of the Italian operatic school in general. Alsager wrote that Rossini's "extreme ornament

[was] the pedect reverse of what is called the simple style" (Times: 11 March 1818). The

News denounced Rossini's music because "its whole surface is Iaboured into an artificial richness by an accumulation of a thousând small graces, which would scarcely have been used by any musician of moderate taste-even if he possessed no splendour of

' Langley, 77. imagination" (15 March 18 18). A review of Malibran's performance in A? barbiere included an extensive discussion regarding the decision a singer faced when codkonted with the choice between a florid and plain style:

Redundance of embellishment, however delicate and tasteful, however seducing by its momentary ch-, is morally and physically hostile to expression, to pathetic vocal deIivery: rnorally, because while our mind is devoted to the correct execution of ornamental passages, we cannot easily direct our thoughts to the more noble aim of infusing feeling and depth of expression into our delivery; and physicully, because Macadamking a few broad, simple, and impressive sounds into passages of numberless rapid notes, there is no time left for giving the emphasis required, and the physical force which it naturally demands, is wasted in the execution of the passages. What should we Say if an actor, instead of impressively exclaiming the five words, "Go on, 1'11 follow thee," bethought himself of improving the text, by delivering in the same space of time which their proper enunciation wouId require , a sentence of the same meaning couched in forty or fifty words remarkable for their politeness, elegance, sonorousness, and abstract propriety? The case is not quite so strong, but certainly very similar in music, and, above all, in Rossini's compositions, in which al1 the necessary ornaments , including a goodly surplus of dispensable ones, are pemed by the author himself. To add to these, is to work over Brussels lace. (New Monthly Maguzine: July 1825,296-97)

Many critics recognized that the public demanded the introduction of omarnentation into Italian opera, despite its deviation fiom the accepted English style.

An article signed only as R.N. explained: '' Florid music having become exceedingly popular, and the public lavishing its praises and its favours upon those who sing such compositions, it is necessary that those who are dependent for support upon the public, should bend to public taste" (Quarteriy Musical Magazine: 1825, 10). However, the same critic blarned singers for the degradation of public taste: "The taste of the public is placed in a great measure in the hands of the performer-he has the power, and he ought to have the inclination, so to feed, direct? and chasten that taste, that it does not become corrupted. If it decline, to him must principally be attributed the evil the ensues" (QuarterZy Musical Magazine: 1825, 2 1). Reicha suggested that audiences were drawn to

the decorative style because "novelty is alcvays attractive, not to Say seductive. The

public was far fkom imagining what an injury they were doing to music, by lavishing

such ill-judged applause upon airs of this kind; for that is the penod fiom which we date

the decline of Italy" (Hurmonicon: 1824, 13 0).

Despite the critics' aversion to omamentation, for the public, the main attractions

of Italian opera were the singers and kirvirtuosic abilities. Decorative vocal

performances drew attention towards the stage, but Alsager rejected the notion that the

audiences were easily dazded: " For, whatever may be alleged to the contrary, the fact is

undoubted, that .. . English audiences have never been collected for a long period of tirne

by amusements chiefly depending for their [attraction] upon musical science and

elaborate combinations" (Times: 3 August 1829). To maintain the interest of easily

distracted listeners, singers constantly introduced new ornamentation fiom one

performance of a number to the next, whether for an encore or on the following night.

However, Dugald Stewart thought that this practice ruined the effect of the work and degraded taste over the years:

It comrnonly happens that after a period of great refmement of taste, men begin to grati@ their love of variety by adding superfluous circurnstances to the finished models exhibited by their predecessors, or by making other trïfling alterations in them, with a view of merely diversiQing the effect. These additions and alterations, indifferent perhaps, or even in some degree offensive in themselves, soon acquire a borrowed beauty, fiom the connexion in which we see them, or fiom the duence of fashion: the same cause which at frrst produced then continues perpetually to increase their nurnber, and taste retums to barbarkm by alrnost the same steps which conducted it to perfection. (Quarterly Musical Magazine : 1822,3 19) Ornamentation often triumphed over expression. Passages that abounded in

ornament were said to be void of any kind of expression because decoration and

expression were considered antithetical? Bacon noted that aithough omaments

captivated Iisteners, they did not invoke the passions:

Oniaments weil performed are apt to seduce out senses by the seeming difnculty of execution, and we are led away by novelty, by wonder and surprise at what perhaps we never conceived practicable; the emotion rises with the rank of the performer, we give great credit for more value than there really is, and take it upon the trust of his personal reputation. The judgrnent is thus silenced, while the ear is filled with new, agreeable, and unexpected sounds. But we are hfluenced only by an emotion of surprize-the affections are never engaged.1°

R.N. agreed with Bacon's assessment, but added that singers who were capable of true expression still chose to ornament, thus effectively ruining the piece.

When, therefore, 1 hear a singer, who has both the talents and the power of giving a Song the true expression by the addition of these flights of fancy, 1 can but Iarnent that any artist should so prostitute his talents and acquirements-should so totally disregard a11 the fme attributes of his art by the introduction of any thing so void of judgment. (Quarterly Musical Maga~ine:1 825, 1 1)

However, the author of a letter to the editor of the Harmonicon maintained that without ornamentation, singers were unable to obtain the level of expression necessary to give pleasure to the spectators. He stressed the importance of vicissitude that he believed only singers could achieve through expressive singing: " There is not less diversity in the human voice, than in the human countenance. Great as this diversity is in voices when speaking, it becomes a hundred times more striking in voices when singing. In the system of Rossini, this variety, this surprising diversiv of shades is not aUowed to appear" (1824, 107).

Bacon, 21. 'O Ibid. Whiie critics adrnired the extraordinary abilities of a singer who codd perform the most complex ornarnents, they insisted on certain restraints. One author wrote: "Crowds of omament in a Song, &c. only serve in such case to exhibit the skill of the performer, and to ddeand deceive the good taste of the audience, and to weaken the effect of the composition" (Quarterly Musical Magazine: i 825, 12). Engiish critical taste did not

propose a complete lack of decoration, but advocated appropriate omarnentation: " The beautiful is oniy one and simple; it excludes every meretricious ornament" (Harmonicon:

1823, 197). In a review of one of Catalani's performances, Robertson explained that

the mischief of exuberant omarnent is, that it levels all music to one character, and produces a fatiguing monotony. It is indeed remarkable that few singers seem aware how impolitic it is to exhibit the whole extent of their taient on every occasion, without accornmodating their style to the nature of the composition. (Examiner: 5 June 18 14)

Those singers who were tastefùlly restrained in their decorations received criticai acclaim, but perfonners who introduced excessive embellishments met with censure.

Manuel Garcia, for example, suffered consistent reproach for his overabundant technicai display. Mthough Garcia avoided cc meretricious omarnent" in the works of Mozart," he displayed his füll versatility in Rossini's operas. Hunt opposed Garcia's vocal virtuosity more than other English critics and included severai harsh remarks in his reviews. He excIaimed that in a performance of Il barbiere Garcia cc went ninning about in vain with his gratuitous notes like a dog that scampers about ten miles to his master's one"

(Examiner: 7 June 18 18,3 63). The foIlowing season, Hunt related Garcia's cc superabundant flourishes" in his performance of Rossini's cc Languir per una bella"

" Times: 15 June 1818. fiom L 'Italiana in Algieri to a joke that had appeared in the Examiner a few weeks

earlier:

A Hint to Florid Singers, which were asked 'what they would think of a beautifil passage in Twelflh Night delivered in a the following mamer;- If music be the food of-fdiy rd de riddle iddle , tum te iddle-love, play-turn, tum, riddle iddle fa1 de rally-on. Give me excess of-tot loi de fiddle fol, liddle toddle-its that surfeiting. The appetite may sicken, and so-ti tum de tiddle liddle, tiddle loddle ro-ri tol fal de nddle tute iddle--die, But this is nothing to Signor GARCIA.

In the actuai text of the review, Hunt drew a parailel between the joke and Garcia's

rendition of Rossini's aria:

We wish some friend of his would translate the Note below for him, or take some other method of shewing the absurdity of this extravagance, which, carried to such a pitch, is really like nothing better than so much stammering set to music;-La-a- .-..---*. a-a-a-a-a-a-a-an-gu-1-I-L-1-t-r-1-rr-per u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-una be-e-e-e-e-e-e-e- ella. It is ridiculous as is a Gentleman, in asking a Lady how she did, were to Say Ho-and then take a scamper around about the pavement,-do, and then another scamper-you (scamper again);-and so on, to the astonishment of the gathering spectators- (Examiner: 3 1 January 18 19, 76)

While other critics-such as Alsager and Bacon-noted Garcia's omate style they did not condemn him for it as much as Hunt. Maria Garcia-Malibran, despite having studied

singing with her father, found favour in the press as many critics were surprised to note

her taste and complimented her on the appropriateness of her ornament."

Principles of Singing

The interest of the English critics in the Italian vocal style led to a number of treatises on singing in which the art of ornamentation figured prominently. Writers devoted considerable space to their opinions and advised to students on the proper uses and application of vocal embellishment. Two treatises-ne by Bacon and the other by

Manuel Garcia, the younger-both published in London, illustrate the ideds of this

practice. Aithough not a professional musician, Bacon published articles on Italian

singing in the Quarterly Musicd Magazine and Review over a period of five years, and

reprinted them dong with a couple of others as a treatise on the Elements of Vocal

Science (1 824). Because of his lack of training, Bacon avoided technical accouats of the

workings of music-a subject he believed best left for a music teacher-and instead

presented an intellechial and philosophical point of view. Manuel Garcia, the younger,

(1805-1906) developed his musical skills under his father's tutelage and became an

influentid voice teacher and *ter on singing throughout Europe. The younger Garcia

studied the voice closely and compiled his theories on singing techniques in several

publications." An English translation of his method-book from the 1840s appeared in

London in 1857 as Garcia 's New Treatise of the Art of Singing. Garcia's 1857 treatise presented precise discussions on music and the various vocal devices employed in expressive singing. Both Bacon and Garcia offered their opinion on the state of ornarnentation in Itafian opera, but because Bacon's discussion concentrated more on the phiIosophical aspects of the practice, his treatise consisted of more personal observations on the subject. Garcia's writing was designed as an instructional tool and focused on the procedural and technical aspects of ornamentation. Despite the difference in approach

-- -- pp - 12 See for example, Times: 27 April 1829.

l3 Manuel Garcia, Mémoire sur la voir humaine (Paris: E. Duverger, 1847); École de Garcia: Traite complet de f 'Art du chant en deux parties (Mayence: B. Schott's Sons, 1847); Nouveau Traité sommaire de l'Art du Chant (Paris: M. Richard, 1856). English translations of some ofthe îreatises: Garcia S New Treatise on the Art ofSinging (London, 1857) and Hints on singing (London: E. Ascherberg, c 1 894). between the two publications, both provide important information about the performance conventions of the period, including prescriptions for omamentation.

In discussions of the voice, Bacon, dong with other EngIish critics, employed the tem cLv~calscience." Though most critics used the term to describe "the proper regdation of ornament," Bacon used it in a general sense that encompassed the whole art of singing: "the perfect union of taste and knowiedge-the complete combination of style and manner-a thorough acquaintance with the rules of art, and a power of reducing them to just practice." l4 He expanded this defuiition in the following way:

Science (so taken) indicates itself in apprehending and preserving the generai character of the Song. The first thing is to determine the range as to sentiment. .. This rightly understood, the singer wiIl adapt his entire deportment accordingly. He will become energetic, declarnatory, soothing, tender, or pathetic, in his general manner; and in his application of ornament sparing and erudite, or easy, florid, and lumiriant, agreeably to the cast of the melody. His cadences will be plain or chromatic, his modulation will be similar in kind and effect, as the example of the composer warrmts.15

Ln his treatise, Bacon airned to present the elements of vocal science and outline the principles of omamentation necessary for excellence in the hope that singers would follow his rules in their "invention and application of those passages which it is common to substitute or add to the text notes of the composer, and are classed under the appellations of Graces or Omaments." l6 Bacon defmed omarnent (or Rzjioramenti) as

"the combined production of invention, science, execution, and taste." " Because

Garcia's focus was narrower that Bacon's and proposed to teach students about the uses of embellishment, Garcia began his discussion by outlining the different reasons for

l4 Bacon, 86. '' Ibid., 86-87. l6 Ibid., IOO. omamentation. He noted that singers often had to adapt an air to suit their compass and

A part may be either too high or too low for the voice of an executant; or the style of a workdeclaimed or ornamented-may not be altogether suitable; in either case, the artist will be compelled to modi@ certain parts of a composition,- raising or lowering some passages, simplifying or embellishing others, in order to suit them to the power and character of his vocal capability."

However, the most cornrnon reason for embellishrnent was the desire to produce new effects: " When there is no accent to give color to melody, recourse is had to omaments

(orfiorirure)." '' Garcia submitted that certain types of compositions were more suited to omamentation because of their formal design, and that those pieces "must be entrusted to the free and skilful inspiration of their executants,-as for instance, variations, rondos,

Both authors discussed the relation of omaments to expression. Bacon asserted that graces could not be assigned specific meanings because, depending on the speed at which they were executed, the sarne types of omaments couid be used for passages of widely varying expression- Moreover, he submitted that the performance of the omament could often convey more than its actual construction, and he explained that minimal, but weil-sung, oniaments were more likely to produce effect than extravagant passages:

Hence it is that composers frequently leave the accentuation to the singer, and sirnply put in the notes without assigning any separate duration to each, writing them al1 as crotchets. Nor does such allowance refer to the sensibility alone; it Sords the performer opportunity to display the best part of his voice to advantage, by prolonging those sounds which bear the nearest analogy to the passion he wishes to express; for the effect of an ornarnent fiequently depends

l7 Ibid., 100. '' Garcia, 56. l9 Ibid, 'O Ibid.. 57. more upon the power of the singer to execute it with a certain tone that conveys the true sentiment, than upon the construction of the notes--This is a fact which ought never to be forgotten in the choice of ornaments, for even a simple appoggiatura, well performed, witl give more effect than the most elaborate rifiorumenti, if the singer fails in a single note."

Bacon advised singers to alter the melody to closely correspond to the changing

affections in the text, and he emphasized the importance of execution for this purpose:

cc Execution of course is expected to Vary with the nature of the emotion or passion the omaments are designed to express, and this wilI modi@ the degree of energy, tendemess, and rapidity, of smoothness or emphatic articulation, to be employed."" Garcia agreed that omaments did not convey particular feelings, but he dso pointed out that some Spes of omamentation were more suited to certain sentiments in opera? He believed that the invocation of a particular sentiment depended on the way in which the omaments were

accented, and encouraged singers to choose decorations based on cc the meaning of both words and music." 24

Bacon stressed the importance of an intimate understanding of the text in the

creation of embellishment: " Consider the analogy between the passion to be expressed and the means of expression." He insisted the embellishments follow the passions: slow and soft decorations relate images of sorrow; louder, more rapid, and marked

" Bacon, 10 1. Ibid. a Garcia provided an example of his opinion: "such omaments as would be used to depict a grandiose sentimenf wouid be unsuitable to the air of Rosina in the Barbrère.. .the merest discrepancy between the character of the piece and itsfiorirures would constitute a striking fault." Garcia, 57, Z4 Ibid. zs Bacon, 102. passages invoke a more intense feeling: " In a word, the adficial must conform to the

naturd language of passion in the greater features."

In the application of ornaments, each author proposed severai general precepts

that singers should consider. Both authors urged singers to invent ornaments which

conformed to the siyle of the individual composition as well as the composer's other

works. Garcia asserted: " We especially insist on the necessity for the strictest affiriity 4sb tween the composition and its ornaments,-because, without such agreement, it would be impossible to preserve the origuiality of character peculiar to each author and

composition." " Sirnilarly, Bacon stated:

A very plain rule has hitherto been laid down for the application of ornarnents-. .. That they be of a cast resembling the air upon which they are engrafted, and it proceeds justly upon the conservation of that unity of design which is considered so essential to the effect of the fine arts, Much however is to be Iemed, not from the character of the one air alone, but fiom the general manner of the composer.'8

In order for ernbellishments to correspond to the style of the work, Bacon urged singers to study the composition thoroughly:

Examine not the passage itself done, but its relation to the other parts of the Song; for it not unfiequently happens that a composer leaves one part (as it seems to the negligent observer) incomplete and unfinished, when in point and fact he purposely keeps down the polish, in order to contrast its seeming roughness with other portions of his work.">

Both writers expressed the importance for singers to show restra.int in their application of ernbellishment. Bacon placed the creative genius of the composer above the creativity of the average performer:

'6 Ibid. " Garcia, 57. '' Bacon, 102- 29 Ibid., 103. It is rarely that an author of reputation leaves much, indeed any thing that is important, to chance; and we ought always to suppose that the person who has dwelt upon a composition long enough to invent and arrange and publish if has weighed the effects and allotted the proportions fa-more judiciously than our casual acquaintance enables us to do."

Furthermore, students must be prudent in their application or ornaments and be aware of the " Iegitimate application of any alteration that rnay strike his fancy," because one of the greatest faults of rnany Italian singers was over-indulgent decoration:

Never let a singer be anxious to display himselftoo suddenly. Reputation is never gained but by repeated efforts. The most common fault that brings the judgment into disrepute, is an ovenveening solicitude to concentrate al1 the graces of art and expression into too narrow a compass. It is this desire to maaifest every sort of power, as it were, at once, that entails upon a singer the charge of ignorance, vanity, bad taste. and al1 the censures that attend an exuberantly florid manner. Every species of ornarnent as well as of power has its place; never let the student forget that it is impossible to reconcile opposites."

Similarly, Garcia professed that singers should only introduce changes that would not destroy the work. He presented a general de:"Al1 embellishments shodd be soberly employed, and in their appropriate place, and that some knowledge of harmony is indispensable to their skilfül introduction." 32

As a guideline for singers of Italian opera, Bacon wrote: "Forbearance is as necessary, and is as great a virtue in singing as in Me. To abstain fiom the exhibition of ill assorted, even if well executed ornarnent, is in a great measure the criterion of sound taste" (QuarterZy Musical Magazine: 1825.9). Moreover, he urged "upon the student's

30 Ibid. '' Ibid. 3' 3' Garcia, 57. attention the general laws which he is to observe in the application of ornament. His taste

will here be tasked and his judgment censured or applauded."33

Sontag's Tasteful Floridity: "Una voce poco fi"

The desand prescriptions presented in the treatises cmbe placed in their proper

context by exarnining the ornarnentation of one of the greatest exponents of the florid

style, He~ettaSontag. The embellishments that she introduced into "Una voce poco

fà" (A? barbiere) at the King's Theatre are detailed below. Sontag's appearance in

London elicited much response as we saw in chapter three, and her renowned virtuosic

style was scnitinized by reviewers. Aisager wrote: cc Her style of singing is, owing to the

extraordinary facility with which her voice is naturally gifted, more fiorid than that of any

other singer in Europe" (Times: 16 April 1828). Although the critic for the New MonthZy

Magazine did not believe Sontag's style to be the best, he described how her voice was

perfectly suited to decorative passagework:

The scalar range is equally extraordinary; it not only extends fiom the C under the stave to E above the stave; but reaches the higher notes with extreme readiness and ease, so as not to betray any effort. In executing active passages in the higher part of the scale, passages of ornament especially, this artist, like Madame Pasta and some others, resorts to a " silken" sort of under-voice-a kind of falsetto stop which evidently facilitates and neutens the execution, if we may be allowed the term. (New Monthly Magazine: May 1828,203)

Considered one of the finest Continental singers, Sontag's career was based to a large degree on her ability to invent and execute complex ornarnents. Opinions differed on the vocal merits of Sontag, but on the whole reviewers applauded her expertise in varying and embellishing the composer's vocal line. Many writers commended Sontag for her invention in ornamentation. For example, Alsager applauded Sontag's delicate restraint in her application of

embellishment: " her musical taste is so highly cultivated, that the introduction of ornament, even in the obligato passages with which the part of Rosina abounds, could in no instance be pronounced inappropriate or overcharged" (Times: 16 Apd 1828)- The

London Magazine agreed: " [Sontag] made no effort to astonish the audience; but executed passages as though she had command over an iofite deal more. Madlle.

Sontag is highiy accomplished in her art, and ha.received that kind of education in the science which singers have hitherto too much neglected" (May 1828,268).

While critics generally approved of her approach to ornaments, they attacked her neglect of expression in their execution. Alsager remarked:

But in consequence of the extraordinary facility of execution with which nature has endowed her, it appears that she has been induced to neglect the study of expression; and having thus, to a great degree, sacnficed the sou1 of melody to the bravura style, the effect of her singing is more calculated to excite astonishment than delight. (Times: 16 April 1828)

Similarly, the New Monthly Magazine chastised her inability to invoke any emotional response in her performance:

Fer voice] wants the essential aid-an aid which compensates many physical defects-of inward emotion and feeling. The heart does not seem to CO-operate with the instrumental organs. It is this charm which enables much Senor singers to excite our sensibilities, to enter, as it were, into silent communion with our own heart- ( May 1828,203)

However, most critics excused Sontag's lack of expression because of her abundant vocal skills and because the part of Rosina did not suffer from Iess attention to expressive detail: The school to which Mademoiselle Sontag belongs, and of which her extraordinary powers enable her to exhibit the most perfect specimens, does not dernand that style of expression in which she seems deficient; and, as far as we have heard her, we conceive that the exquisite taste of her redundant ornarnents exercises too powerful a fascination on her auditor to aUow him to think of deficiencies. The absence of expression, which we look upon as the only defect of her vocal attainrnents, will be the less regretted, provided she confines herseif to parts sunilar to that of Rosina. (Times:18 April 1828)

Sontag published a version of" Una voce poco fa" (Act 1, scene 5) which included the embellishments she performed on the night of her début. The fiontispiece reads: "Rossini's / Admired Cavatina / 'Una voce poco fa' / Wiîh the Embellishments & the Graces / as sung by / Mademoiselle Sontag I on the Night of her Debut at the / King's

Theatre.. .. This arrangement is Property & the only one Published under the / express

Sanction & with the Graces of Mademoiselle Sontag."

Bacon commented on the suitability of" Una voce poco fa" for embellishment:

Upon the whole, its character is that of an agreeable levity mingled with some portion of expression, but neither calling upon the perforrner or the auditor for the exercise of any very intense degree of sensibility. The words of the song are a soliloquy, expressive of her own situation and disposition.. .its expression is not of any certain application. (Qzrarteriy Musical Magazine: 1820,70)

Because writers were not concerned with expression in the role of Rosina, they focused more on Sontag's omarnentation. Alsager noted: "The Cavatina, llna voce poco fa, she sang in a style which was as exquisitely tasteful as it was new. This, in our opinion, was the ne plus ultra of vocal expression. Of course she was encored" (Times: 16 April

1828). Not al1 critic's favoured Sontag's omate style, however, and the critic for the New

Montlzly Magazine provided a detailed criticism of the aria, especially her choice of embellishments:

34 London: GouIding & D7AImaine, 1828. See Appendix 4. Mademoiselle Sontag is wicommonly successfiil in the variety and neat execution of her ornaments; but these omaments are not always best, and they are infinitely too abundant- A characteristic feature of Rossini's music is the positive notation by the maestro of perhaps dlthe embellishments which he conceived to be congenid to his melodies, and admissible in them, whether they suited or not the individual talent, taste, or organization of the singer. This is particularly evident in the air, "Una voce poco fa;" and fortunate rnay the vocalist be termed who has the power to do well al1 that is written down in the original. But Me. Sontag found yet many little vacancies, which she filled up with additional passages of her own invention; and where she did not fmd the blanks she made them, with a view to substitute other matters of her own. We thought of her countryman Handel and Carestini: " You tog! don't 1know petter as yourself vaat is pest for you to sing?" &c. In introducing the chromatic scale in ascent and descent, by way of fiorimento, Mademoiselle Sontag was less successfid than several of her contemporary rivals. The semitones followed each other indistinctly, in quarter- tones rather, or even at narrower intervals, a.lmost resembling the sliding up and down on a violin string- A staccato-scale or two were cleverly brought out, and astonished many. For ourselves we are not over partial to tbis species of vocal tour de force, especiaily when delivered with Iabial tension, as in the present case. We never Wed the staccato passages of Mrs. Salmon, who excelled in them. (New Monthly Magazine: May 1828,203-04)

Nevertheless, an examination of the aria with Sontag's added decorations elucidates several of the principles of 'correct' ornamentation that were outlined in the treatises by

Bacon and Garcia,

Both writers advised singers on the tastefüi invention and suitable application of ornamentation. To enhance the colouration and vocal effect, singers custornarily introduced additional figuration into simple passages. This tendency was one of Bacon's three ways to apply ornaments: " When a simple passage is changed into one more complicated by the addition of notes in conjunction with those of the composer, or the introduction of an entirely new combination, which occupies the place and time of the original." 35 Bacon noted critics prknarily crïticized " such copious additions," because they were the most easily and fkequently overdone by singers: " they are cdculated principally to af5ect by surprise and admiration." 36 In her performance of" Una voce," except for the portions of the aria for which prescriptions in vocal treatises allowed ornamental changes, Sontag left Rossini's original essentiaily in tact.

One of the principles perrnitted shgers to introduce change for any return of the same material, Garcia wrote: "Ornarnents should be placed where the remof the same values.. .is considered insuffkient.. .. A musical idea, to be rendered interesting, should be varied, wholly or in part, every tirne it is repeated." " Garcia noted that compositions

"whose beauty depends on recurrence of the theme,-as rondos, variations, polaccas, arias, and the cavatinas with a second part,-are particularly adapted to receive changes." '' Ln a footnote, he included Rossini's " Una voce" in a list of severai pieces which he felt were particularly well suited to embelli~hment?~Similarly, Bacon remarked that, because of the space allowed by the composer, singers of great vocal agility particufarly evinced their virtuosic skills in airs with variations. Bacon explained that the uiherent repetitive quality of Rossini's melodies ailowed singers to create some

variety through tasteful omarnentation: " Where the same passage occurs repeatedly in the sarne air, it is not only the customary but the most Iegitimate use of this iicense, to substitute variations of the author7sphrases, because they afYord an agreeable diversity." 40 Garcia encouraged the practice of variation in repeated passages, noting that composers themselves varied instrumental and vocal parts for repetitions: "The preceding

- -

35 Bacon, 103. j6 Ibid. 37 Garcia, 57-58. 38 Ibid., 58. '' Ibid, '13 Bacon, 103. rules are confÏrmed by the practice of the best composers, who never repeat a thought

several times without introducing new effects, either for voice or instruments."*'

Sontag based most of her alterations on the repetitive design of" Una voce,"

following the conventions of the tirne. Rossini himself provided an example of this type

of modification in this aria by varying the recurrence of some phrases. For example, at

the words " si Lindoro mio sarà 10 giurai la vincero" (mm- 21-25 and 25-29)42he

introduced an ornarnented version for the second statement of the phrase, while

maintainhg the overall melodic outline. When Rossini repeated the same words in mm-

34 to 42, he used the same music for the first part, but simplified the setting of the last mesure, "la vincerb," fiom its original appearance. Another example of Rossini's fondness of embellishing repetitions occurs between mm. 74 and 83 (Example 5.1). The fairly simple melody of the first phrase, "ecento trappole prima di cedere farb giocar"

(mm. 74-78), returns (mm. 78-83), embellished by appoggia~iras,accents, and an extended virtuosic close.

Example 5.1. Rossini, "Una Voce poco fâ" fiom IZ barbiere di Siviglia a) mm. 74-78 (vocal line, Rossini's melody)

e cm- ro mp - po Ic *ma dt cc - de - rc fa- rrj gio - ur a - ro pic - wr

4' Garcia, 58. b) mm. 78-83 (vocal line, Rossini's meiody)

Sontag's embellishrnents generally followed the prescriptions of the vocal treatises, particularly that of Garcia. Garcia insisted that the alterations foliow in an increasingly complex fashion in which the performer first sings the phrase simply, and then presents more, or different omaments and accents at each repetition: " These changes should be introduced more abundandy, and with ever-heightening variety and accent; the exposition of the theme alone should be preserved in its simplicity.. .. This derespecting variety, follows the thought Ïn its most minute de ta il^."^' Garcia also urged the singer to consider the compositional style and to only introduce omaments whose nature corresponded to the progression of complexity allowed by the composer by way of repetitions. The bipartite structure of" Una voce," and its use of recurrent thematic materid, allowed ample opportunïty for embellishment. Sontag enhanced Rossini's own pattern of alterations, but included her own variations in some places where Rossini did not. Her decorations tended to be virtuosic and displayed her vocal dexterity. To ensure a suffrcient development from the first occurrence of a theme to its final statement,

42 For references to the score not presented in illustrations see Appendix 4. 43 Garcia, 58. Sontag employed severai ornamentai techniques. As each phrase recurred, she incorporated variations that became increasïngly omate, and she typically saved her most extreme vocal display for the conchding staternent.

Sontag's alterations ofien did not involve the addition of notes. One of her most common, and perhaps least intrusive, changes entailed aïtering the rhythmic design, often only slightly, of Rossini's melody. " Una voce" contains many instances of this technique, which Sontag generally used in portions of the vocal line that were already omamented by Rossini, or in initiai statements of repeated material (see for example mm.

22-23 and m. 77)- Sontag also rnanipulated the onginal rhythm to create a more complex texture fiom one statement of a theme to the next. Her presentation of the melody in mm.

8 1 to 83, and its subsequent reappearance in mm. 105 to 107 (Example 5.2), illustrates this type of subtle intensification.

Example 5.2. Rossini, " Una Voce poco fa" fiom i7 barbiere di Sbiglia a) mm. 8 1-83 (vocal line, Sontag' s embellishments)

b) mm. 105- 1 07 (vocal he,Sontag's ernbellishments) Sontag altered the fairly straightEorward rhythm of the f~stoccurrence to produce some

slight syncopaiion. For the restatement of the phrase, she introduced Merchanges to

the rhythm, modified the melodic design, and introduced a leap of a major tenth to

highlight her flexibiliq and precision.

To create varieV from one statement of a phrase to the next, Sontag often changed the accentuation or the tessitura of a passage. The addition of accents (stresses fiequently

indicated by >) attracted attention to particular phrases and ofeen emphasized Sontag's rhythmic dterations (mm. 24-27,40, IO 1, and 106). For example, the accent Sontag introduced in m. 106 (Example 5.2) highlights the moment of syncopation in her most embellished version of the phrase. Because Rossini initially wrote the aria for a mezzo soprano, Sontag raised the tessitura of many passages to accommodate her higher range and to faciIitate the execution of some of the ornamental sections. However, she did not always add embellishments every time the opportunity arose, and in the second part of

the aria, the two statements of " saro una vipera saro" remain unomamented (m.68-70 and mm. 92-94). In the first occurrence of this passage, Sontag raised the pitch by a perfect fifth and only slightly altered the melody, changing the first major second of each quadruplet to a major third (Example 5.3a). To create increased intensity for the repetition of the words in mm. 92 to 94 and to explore the upper portion of her range, she raised Rossini's melody by an octave (Example 5.3b). Example 5.3. Rossini. "Una Voce poco fa" fiom II barbiere di SivigZiu

a) mm. 68-70 (vocal IÏne, Rossini's melody, and Sontag's embelIishments)

de bo - le sa - ro una VI - pc - n sa-m

b) mm. 92-94 (vocal line, Rossini's melody, and Sontag's embellishments)

do- bo le sa - no ma vi - pt - u-m

One of the most extensive melodic manipulations occurs in the second part of the aria, where Rossini repeats the same melody twice in the course of one verse, at the

words cc ma se mi toccano dov'è il mio debole" and " ecento trappole prima di cedere"

(mm. 66-68 and 70-72). The phrase is restated without change when these words are repeated in mm. 90-92 and 94-96. Here, Sontag incorporated omaments of increasing diaculty appropriate for the repeated melodic material (See Example 5.4). Example 5.4. Rossini. " Una Voce poco fâ" fkom ïZ barbiere di Sivigiia

mm. 66-68 (vocal line, Rossini's melody)

mm. 70-72 (vocal line, Sontag's embellishments)

po - Ic pnma dl cc - de- rc

mm. 90-92 (vocal line, S ontag' s embellishments)

w mi roc - ua no do v"l mm do- bo Ir:

mm. 94-96 (vocal line, Sontag's embellishments)

e cen - [O mp - p-le pri-ma di n - de re

She lefi the fust statement without embellishment so that it was "preserved in its simpli~ity,"~~but dtered Rossini's melody more extensively for each repetition of the theme. By altering the intervallic structure of the notated tum, adding notes to alter the melodic contour, and creating ascending lines to highlight her flexibility (Example 5.4b),

Sontag introduced only slight changes for the frst recurrence (mm. 70-72). For the third statement, she altered the passage more significantly; this provided contrast and displayed other aspects of her technical skills. Sontag highlighted the retum of the text '' ma se mi toccano dov'è il mio debole" in m. 90, and Merenhanced the contrast of sentiment in the text at that point (Exarnple 5.4~).She drew attention to this turning point by

anticipating the word "ma," placing " may' in its proper place at the end of the phrase,

iostead of at the beginning of the next phrase. After a newly placed rest, Sontag

manipulated the melody into a semitonal scalar ascent to an a", which likely tested her

critically acclaimed perfect tuning and precision. The New Monthly Magatine wrote:

"She sings perfectly in tune, and the flexibility, the precision of intonation, are wonderfid

certainly" (May 1828,203). Bacon agreed: " The ear of Madlle. Sontag is perfect-her

intervals are deliciously in tune-which is an invaiuable recornrnendation to musicians"

(London Magazine: May 1 828,268). The final rendering of the musical phrase in mm.

94-96 (Exarnple 5.4d) is based on Sontag's embellishment of the same words in mm. 70-

72, but diversified both rhythrnically and melodically to demonstrate her flexibility and tuning in the execution of large intervals and to explore the full extent of her range.

Despite her ability to ornament, Sontag did not always choose to elaborate

Rossini's music, opting on occasion to simpliQ the melodic line instead. Sontag apparently used this approach to place in better relief the increase in complexity she wanted to introduce in subsequent repetitions. Such is the case for the words cc la vincer6." To establish a simple starting point, she substantially reduced Rossini's ornarnental triplet melody in its occurrence to a descending chromatic line (mm. 24-25,

Exarnple 5.5). At the recurrence of tbose words, the melody was made more ornamental in character (mm. 28-29). She reverted to the simpler version for the third occurrence

(mm, 37-38), saving her most florid treatment for the fmal statement (mm. 41-42, see

Example 5.7). Ersmple 5.5. Rossini. "Una Voce poco fâ" from fl barbiere di Siviglia, mm. 24-25 (Rossini's prescription and Sontag's simprification)

In mm, 100-102, Sontag again simplified the original passage to create contrast within the

vocal Iine. In this instance, the sixteenth-note figurations of the first statement (mm. 76-

78) were curtailed, and this preserved the basic outline of Rossini's original melody

(Example 5.6). Although reduced in terms of its floridity, the disjunct contour of the

abridged version demonstrated Sontag's control of leaps, exact sense of tuning, and ease

of transition between the different registers of her voice.

Example 5.6. Rossini, "Una Voce poco fâ" fiom L? barbiere di Siviglia a) mm. 76-78 (Sontag's embellishments)

fa - r0 gio - fa - 6 gio - car

b) mm. 100-102 (Sontag's embeHishrnents)

fa - gio - car fa - r6 gia - car Sontag saved her most extravagant singing for cadences, conventionally left

unadorned by the composer so that singers would have the oppominity for vocal display.

In cadenzas, singers typicaily doubled the notated duration of the cadence in order to

exploit their range, agility, and chromatic capabilities. Over a suspended

accompaniment, singers usudly inserted passages of great virtuosity and

Bacon encourageci the use of virtuosiQ " on pauses, either merely for embellisiment or to

connect one part of a Song with another," and at "cadences, or those additions at the

close of an air, which it is customary for singers to append."" He also stated that the goal of the cadenza was to " impress the auditor anew, or affect him more intensely, to

manifest the science and imagination of the performer, and to display any parts of his voice or of his execution that the song may not have enabled hirn adequately to demon~trate."'~Moreover, he felt that a cadenza should "equal if not exceed the other parts of the Song in fire, force, and meaning.. -.It follows that whatever he does should be so chosen, combined and executed, as to accord with and transcend the former parts." ''

Garcia provides merinformation on the singing of cadenzas: "To avoid monotony in developing these passages [that is, cadenzas in a single breathl, they are usually composed of two, three, and sometimes even four different ideas, unequal in value, and varied in light and shade, which gives them animation, and avoids the impression of a vocal exercise." 49

45 Bacon defined the cadenza as a place " where the composer places a pause to afford the performer an opportunity, as it were, of expressing externpore the prevailing sentiment of the composition, according to his individual feeling." Bacon, 110. 46 Ibid., 103. 47 Ibid., 1 10. 48 Ibid. 49 Garcia, 63. Sontag only included florid cadenzas in two places in the aria, both of which followed the rules prescribed in the vocal treatises- The bipartite structure of the piece allowed room for an ornamental transition f?om the first part to the second, and Sontag took advantage of the opportunity afforded by Rossini's sparse chordal accompaniment tu show off her facility in the execution of complex passages and ernphasize the change in emotion between the two parts. In this passage, Sontag used omarnentation to create the appropriate increase in cornplexity, and from m. 38 to the conclusion of the section at m.

42, Sontag exercised her finest techniques in an elaborate sequence of ffourishes

(Exarnple 5.7). By raising the tessitura and adding extensive figuration, Sontag sang " Si

Lindoro mio sarà" in its most decorative guise of the aria, raising the tessitura, adding extensive figuration, and more than doubling the length of the original passage. She created an elaborate cadenza in two parts, each marked by a fennata, instead of Rossini's recitative-like melody for the final " la vincerb" (mm. 4 1-42). The extravagant vocal line explored her flexibility through increasingly wide and accented intervallic leaps, and demonstrated her extensive range through a series of arppeggiated chords. Example 5.7. Rossini, " Una Voce poco fa" fiom L? barbiere di Sivigïiu7mm. 3 8-42 (Rossiai7soriginal and Sontag's embellishments)

rà lo gru

The next opportunity for cadential display appeared in mm. 88-90 in preparation

of the retum of the repeated material and Rosina's change in sentiment from self-

cornmendation to a re-discovery of her shrewd nature. Rossini suspended the orchestral

accompaniment and pIaced a fermata over the word "dar," and-Sontag introduced an

intricate, rapid, ascending and descending scalar passage that explored her full range. At the final cadence Rossini dici not aUow room for any ostentatious display, and instead of a showy cadenza at this point, Sontag simply replaced the descending iine with an ascending arppeggiation of the dominant harmony (up to c"'), which included accented

passing notes (mm. 1 12-1 14, Example 5.8)-

Example 5.8 Rossini, "Una Voce poco fa" Erom II barbiere di Siviglia, mm. 112-1 14 (Rossini's original and Sontag's embellishments)

gic - car

Y gio car fa - rü gio - ur

In examining Sontag's embeiiishments for " Una voce poco f%" it is evident that she closely followed the conventions of her tirne as described by Bacon, Garcia, and others. Although Rossini was said to have hcluded al1 the meiodic decorations that he desired, the repetitive design of the aria allowed Sontag to create diversity and display her vocal dexterity, Because most of her alterations did not involve the addition of cascades of extraneou graces, Sontag avoided any kind of 'meretricious ornament' and critics adrnired her restraint. Typicaily, she lightly varied the passages notated by the composer and concentrated her most extravagant virtuosity at important cadential points in which

Rossini himself indicated a desire for ornarnentation. Sontag's performances at the

King's Theatre, especialiy through her introduction of tastefid omaments, led to virtually universal acclaim fiom both the public and press and secured Sontag a position as one of the most successfui prime donne in the role of Rosina. Sontag represented the pinnacle of the art of vocal embellishment, an art which allowed singers to exhibit their capabiiities to the audience and heighten the overall eEect of the music they sang. Conclusion

The examination of reviews of R barbiere demonstrates that critics focused on the

singers' vocai effects, acting abilities, and physical demeanor, while other aspects of the performances were virtually ignored. Remarks on features of the productions, other than the singers themselves, appeared bnefly and infi-equently, but usually only because they were linked to the singers in some way--encores for favourite airs, abndgment of the opera (such as the removal of choruses), and extravagant interpolations and embellishments. Because foreign singers captivated the English opera-goers' attention and drew them to the opera firequently, it is no wonder that the cntics focused on the topics their readers cared most about and that managers Iike Ebers " spared no pains and no expense to obtain" the finest Continental singer^.^^ This ovenvhelming emphasis on singing in the press suggests that the nature of ItaIian opera in London at this thewas as

'the singer's art'.

By the time Rossini's works reached the London stage, some managers, critics, and composers were beginning to resist the liberties singers took in performance.

However, as cornrnents fiom the musical press demonstrate, singers rnaintained control over the performances, and their alterations haà enduring consequences for both the opera itself and its subsequent reception. Although some accounts-such as Stendhal's anecdote about Velluti' s over-indulgent ornarnentation5'-sue that Rossini included

50 Ebers, 58. See Chapter 5, page 98-99 and footnotes 5 and 6. ail the details of ornamentation in his score, an examination of the London performances of Ll barbiere reveals that singers treated his music flexibly.

In altering the work fiom one performance to the next, singers such as Garcia,

Malibran, and Sontag, followed the Itaiian custom at the King's Theatre, a custom in which the singers' varying hterpretations were used to both amact and maintain the interest of the English public. Carl Dahlhaus points out that operatic scores "couid be adapted to the changing conditions goveming theatres without violating [theid meaning." 5' Indeed, continuai modifications of a work to suit the cast for any given evening, may have produced a preoccupation with the singers rather than the opera itself.

R barbiere introduced Rossini's operas to English audiences. Although it initially received mixed reviews, the work became a perennial favourite in London. Bacon wrote in 1820 of Rossini's enormous popularity:

SIGNOR ROSSINI has succeeded, and in this cowtry at least, the exalted name of MOZART, and if he has failed to make the same indeiible impression, he has had the honour of maintaining hirnself upon the same stage with that elevated genius. His works have not only been endured but applauded on altemate nights with the finest specimens of the German's skill and fancy, in a country where we boast not merely our sensibility to the powers of music, but aiso of reflecting, andyzing, and judging with fairness and precision. These circumstances should seem to award ROSSINI a high degree of intrinsic excellence-rnore indeed than we as sober critics are able to allow to his meritSs3

Such favourable cornparisons with Mozart ensured Rossini's continued success on the

London stage for many years beyond 183 0.

'' Carl Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-CenfuryMusic, tram. J. Bradford Rob inson (Berkeley: Univers iv of California Press, 1989), 10, 53 Bacon, Quarierly Musical Maguzine: 1820,67. Appendix 1: Announcernent Notices in the Dailies for II barbiere di Sivigliu

Times: '

Friday January 30, 18 18 : The subscribers to the Opera and the public are most respectfully informed, that Signor Garcia is engaged at this theatre, and will shortly make his first appearance in this country.

Tuesday February 3, 18 18 : Signor Garcia is engaged at this theatre, and will shortly make his first appearance in this country in Rauzzini's popular opera entitled II Barbiere di Seviglia.

Saturday Februq 7,1818: Signor Garcia is engaged at this theatre, and will shortly make his fïrst appearance in this country.

February 13,14, and 16, 1818: Signor Garcia is engaged at this theatre, and will shortly make his first appearance in this country, in Rosini7spopular Opera, entitled Il Barbiere di Siviglia.

Saturday Febniary 21, 1818: Rosini's celebrated opera, entitled Il Barbiere di Siviglia, is in rehearsal, and will shortly be produced, in which Signor Garcia will make his Grst appearance in this comtry. Attendance is given, as usual, at the Opera-office, from 10 to 4 (Sundays excepted).

February 27 and 28, 1818: On Saturday, March 7, will be produced (for the first time at this theatre) Rosini's highly popular opera, entitled Il Barbiere di Siviglia, in which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country.

March 2, and 3, 1818: On Saturday next, (for the 1st time at this theatre) Rosini's highly popular opera, 11 Barbiere di Siviglia, in wfich Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country.

' These announcements are found in the King's Theatre section ofthe Times, usually at the end of the other King's Theatre Iistings, but before seatkicketkheatre information, and are set in smailer type. Ctoser to the première, advertisements for II barbiere became more prominent by being set in larger type and placed at the beginning of the listings, Saturday March 7, 18 18: On Tuesday next, March 10, will be produced (for the first time) Rosini's celebrated opera, entitled 11 Barbiere di Siviglia, in which Signor Garcia will make his fust appearance in this country.

Monday March 9, 18 18: TO-MOWW EVENING, March 10, wil1 be perfonned (est time) Rosini's celebrated opera, entitled IL BARBIERE DI SMGLJA; in which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country. Merwhich, the favourite new Ballet entitled ZEPHIR; ou Le Retour du Printemps.

Tuesday, March 10, 1818: THIS EVENING, March 10, will be performed (first time), Rosini's celebrated opera, entitled IL BARBIERE DI SIVIGLIA; in which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country. After which, the favourite new Ballet entitled ZEPHIR; ou Le Retour du Printemps.

Morning Chronicle:'

January 30,3 1, and February 2,18 18: With entirely new Music, Scenery, Dresses, Decorations, &c. The Subscribers to the Opera and the Public are most respectfully informed, that Signor Garcia is engaged at this Theatre, and will shortly make liis frst appearance in this country.

February3,6,7,9, 10, 13, 14, 16, and 17, 1818: With entirely new Music, Scenery, Dresses, Decorations, &c. Signor Garcia is engaged at this Theatre, and will shortly rnake his first appearance in this country, in Rossini's popular Opera, entitled Il Barbiere di Siviglia.

February 20,21,23, and 24, 1818: Rossini's celebrated Opera, entitled Il Barbiere di Siviglia, is in rehearsal, and will shortiy be produced, in which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country.

These notices appear in the Theatre section of the Morning Chronicle, immediately afier the " Mirror of Fashion" segment. Similar to the Times, the announcements in the Morning Chronicle received more focus as the première approached both in tems of its type face and placement within the King's Theatre section. February 27, 18 18: On Saturday, March 7, will be produced (for the first time at this Theatre), Rossini's highly popular Opera, entitled II Barbiere di Siviglia, in which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country.

March 2 and 3, 1818: On Saturday next (for the first time at this Theatre), Rossini's highiy popular Opera, entitled II Barbiere di Siviglia, in which Signor Garcia wiil make his fxst appearance in this country-

March 7, 18 18: Next Tuesday will be produced, for the first tirne, Rossini's ceIebrated Opera, entitled Il Barbiere di Siviglia, in which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country.

March 9, 1818: To-morrow Evening (first time) Rossini's celebrated Opera, en- titied IL BARBIERE DI SMGLIA. In which Signor Garcia will make his first appearance in this country. After which, the new favourite Ballet of ZEPHYR; ou, Le Retour du Printems,

March 10, 1818: This Evening (first time) Rossini's celebrated Opera, entitled IL BARBIERE DI SIVIGLIA, in which Signor Garcia wiIl make his fxst appearance in this country. Afier which, the new favourite Ballet of ZEPHYR; ou, Le Retour du Printems, Appendix 2: List of Seasonal Performances and Role Assignations at the King's Theatre London, 18 18-1830'

Almaviva Rosina Doctor Bartolo Figaro Don Basilio Fiorello Officer Beria

Manuel Garcla Josephine Fodor G iuseppe Guiseppc Naldi Carlo Angrisani De Giovanni Deville Miss Hughes Arnbrogetti

Garcia Terese Giorgi Ambrogetti Signor Placci Angrisani De Giovanni Deville Miss Mori Belloc(hi)

Alberico Laure Cinti (- Signor Placci Carlo Angrisani NIA NIA NIA Curioiii Damoreau) Zuc(c)tielli

Garcia Lucia Vestris Giuseppe De Signor Benetti Mathieu Porto De Giovanni NIA Grasiano Begnis

Garcia Vestris1 De Begnis Ranieri Porto Signor Crivelli NIA Miss Willis Maria Garcla Reiiiorini

Curioni Maria Caradori De Begnis Felice Pellegrini Porto NIA NIA NIA

Curioni Henrietta Signor De Pellegrini Porto NIA NIA NIA Sontag Angeli

Giulio Bordogni Garcia-Malibran Graziani Nicholas Le NIA NIA NIA Vasseur

Curioni Signora Blasis NIA Signor Santini NIA NIA NIA NIA

Figures in parentheses indicate the number of performances that season, Figures followed by a "P" signify partial performances of only one act. Appendix 3: Comparison between performances of Mozart and Rossini operas, 18 16- 1830 Table 1: Nuiiiber and Percentage of Mozart Perforinances at the King's Theatre per Season 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 Total

Total Mozart 2 1 43 35 32 19 14 12 7 7 4 Total Pcrf, al King's 65 64 62 69 52 45 56 5 6 67 52- % Mozart 32% 67% 56% 46% 37% 31% 21% 13% 10% 8% Table 2: Nuniber nnd Percentage of Rossiiii Perfotaiiiancesat tlie King's Tlientrc per Scasoii 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 'l'o~nl--

Il Barbicrc di Sivigliu Eiisnbettn L 'Iroliatra iri Algieri L'Itrgonr~oFelice La Cenercntolo II Taricrecli La Gazza 1ach.a Il Tirrco in I!olin P ietri L 'ere~rtito Otcllo La Donrta del Lago Ricciardo e Zoruide A.latildc e Corrodino Zclrnira Seni iranlide Aureliario itl Polniiru II Corite Ori

Total Rossini O O 16 2 1 23 29 32 47 44 3 1 14 4 9 35 4 1 45 427 Toial PcrC Ai King's 65 64 62 69 52 4 5 56 56 67 52 39 90 69 62 75 923 % Rossini 0% 0% 26% 30% 44% 64% 57% 84% 66% 60% 36% 54% 51% 66% 60% 46% Appendïx 4: Mademoiselle Sontag's pubiished embeliishments for "Una voce poco fa'? (Act 1, no.5) as perforrned by her on the night of her King's Theatre début.

Il ,, -f- Ic -iC * +- -F +- I 1 - mm- - -* - - , 9 m II l / - * 1 Y v ir v r Lr r v

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

PhqSources

Early-Nineteenth-CenturyNewspapers, Joumals, and Magazines:

A thenaeum [andLiterary Chronicle] (weekly) ; 1828-3 0 British Stage and Literary Cabinet (monthly); 18 17-22 Champion (weekly); 18 14-22 European Magazine (monthiy); 1789-1826 Examiner (weekly); 1808-3 0 Harmonicon (monthly); 1823-3 0 Literary Gazette (weekly); 18 17-3 0 London Magazine (monthly); 1820-29 Morning Chronicle [and London Advertiser] (daily); 178 1-87, 1790-95, 1800-3 0 New Monthly Magazine and Literary Journal (monthly); 1822-30 News, a Weekly Paper, being a Faithfil and Comprehensive Digest ivt ReguZar Series of every interesting Article of Foreign and Domestic Inteiligence (weekly); 1 8 05-35 Qu~rterlyMusical Muga7ine and Revie w; 18 1 8-28 Tatler (daily); 1830-32 Theatrical Inquisitor [and Monthly Mirror] (monthly); 18 12-20 Times (daiiy); 1788-1830

Period Literature:

Addison, JO hn. Singing Practically treated in a Series of Insîmctions. London: DyAlmaine, 1850,

Andrews, Alexander. The Histor y of British Journal, fiom the Foundation of the Newspaper Press in England, to the Repeal of the Stamp Act in 1855, with sketches of Press Celebrities. 2 vols. London: Richard Bentley, 1859.

Mossi, Maria. Trattato teovico-pratico sztll 'arte del canto ...A Theoretical Treatise on the Art of Singing. London, c. 1840.

Bacon, Richard MacKenzie. Elements of vocal science; being a philosophical enquiry into some of the principles of singing. London, 1824. Reprint with notes and Introduction by Edward Foreman. Champaign, Illinois: Pro Musica Press, 1966.

Beyle, H~M(The Count de Stendhal). Vie de Rossini. Paris, 1824. Reprint translated by Richard N. Coe as Lzye of Rossini. New York: Orion Press, 1970.

. Rome, Naples and Florence, in 181 7. Paris, 18 17. Reprint, London: Henry Colburn, 18 18. Busby, Thomas. Concert Room and Orchestral Anecdotes of Music and Musicians, Ancient and Modern, 2 vols. London, 1825.

Chorley, Henry Fothergill. Thirty Years ' Musical Recollections- 2voIs, London: Hurst & Blackett, 1862- Reprint edited and introduction by Ernest Newman, New York: Aified A. Knopf, 1926.

Ebers, John. Seven Years of the King's Theatre. London, 1828.

Garcia, Manuel. Garcia S New Treatise on the Art of Siplging. London, 1 857.

Hogarth, George. Memoirs of the Musical Draza. 2 vols. London: Richard Bentley, 1838.

Hunt, Leigh, The Autobiography of Leigh Hunt. London, 1850. Reprint edited by Jack E. Morpurgo, London: Cresset Press, 1948.

. Critical Essays on the performers of fhe London Theatres, including general observations on the practice and genius of the stage by the author of the Theatrical Crificism in the weeklypaper called the News. London: John Hunt, 1808.

Kelly, Michael. Rerniniscences of Michael KelZy, of the King S Theatre and Theatre Royal Drury Lane, including a period of nearly hava century; with original anecdotes of many distinguishedpersons, political, literary, and musical. 2 vols. London: Henry Colbum, 1826-

Lumley, Benjamin. Rerniniscences of the Opera. London: Hurst and Blackett, 1864.

Mount Edgcumbe, Richard (Earl). Mzuical Reminiscences, containing an account of Italian opera in England, fiom 1773 to 1834.4th ed., New York: Da Capo Press, 1973-

Peacock, Thomas Love. The Workx of Thomas Love PeacoclC, Volume Nine, Critical and Other Essays. New York: AMS Press, 1967-

Peake Richard Brinsley. Memoirs of the Colman Family. 2 vols. London: Richard Bentley, 184 1.

The Periodical Press of Greal Britain and Ireland: or an Inquiv into the State of the Public Journals, chiefly as regards to their moral and polifical influence. London: Printed for Hurst Robinson, 1824.

Phillips, Henry. Musical and Persona1 Recollections During Halfa Century. 2 vols. London: Charles J. Skeet, 1864. S.D. " Chronicles of the Italian Opera in England." Harrnonicon (1830): 10-338 passim.

Sontag, Henrietta. "Una voce poco fa" fiom Li' Barbiere (Act 1, no.5). London: Goulding D'Almaïne, 1828.

Sterbini, Cesare. Almuviva, O sia L 'inutile precaurione. Roma: Cnspino Puccinelli presso S. Andrea della Valle, 18 16.

Vestris, Lucia. Mernoirs of the lve, public and private adventures of Madame Vestris. London: Printed for the bookseIlers, 183%

Weaver, John. Anatornical and Mechanical Lectures upon Dancing. London, 172 1, facsirnile in Ralph, Richard, ed. The LiYe and Worh of John Weuver. New York: Dance Horizons, 1985,853-103 1.

Secondary Literature

Altick, Richard D. The English Cornmon Reader: A Social History of the Mass Reading Public 1800-1900. Chicago: uni ver si^ of Chicago Press, 1957.

Anuidell, Dennis. The Critic ut the Opera. London: Emest Benn, 1957.

Aspinall, Arthur. Politics and the Press c- 1 780- 18.50. London: Home & Van Thal, 1949.

Baker, Henry Barton. History of rhe London Stage and its Famous Players, 15 76-1903. London, 1904. Reprint, New York: Benjamin Blom, 1969.

Bauer, Josephine. The London Maga~ine,1820-1829. Copenhagen Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1953.

Bini, Annalisa. " Echi delle prime Rossiniane nella Stampa Romana dell'epoca." In Rossini a Roma-Rossini e Roma. Rome: Fondazione Marco Besso, 1992.

. cc Rossini a Roma, ossia la cornicità in trionfo." In Rossini 1792-1992: rnostra storico-documentaria, edited by Mauro Bucarelli. Perugia: Electra Editori Umbri, 1992.

Boulton, William B. The Amusements of Old London. 2 vols. London: John Nimmo, 1901.

Bourne, H.R. Fox. English Newspapers: Chapters in the History of Journalism. 2 vols. London: Chatto and Windus, 1887. Bushnell, Howard. Maria Malibran. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1979.

Cametti, Alberto. " La musica teatrale a Roma cento anni fa." Annuario della Regfa Accademia di Santa Cecilia 332 (19 15-1 6): 44-69.

Carlson, Marvin. " Theatre Audiences and the Reading of a Performance." In Interpretation of the Theatrical Past, edited by Thomas Pastlewait and Bruce A. McConachie. Iowa City: University Press, 1989.

Caswell, Austin. " Mme Cinti-Damoreau and the Embellishment of Italian Opera in Paris: 1820-1 845." Journal of the Arnerican Musicological Socieîy 28, no. 3 (1 975): 459-64.

Celani, Enrico. " Musica e musicisti in Roma." RNista musicale italiana 22 (19 13, 257- 300.

Celletti, Rodolfo. Origini e sviluppi della coloratura rossinianna." Nuova rivista musicale italiana 2 (1 968): 872-9 19.

. Storia del Belcanto. Discanto Edizioni, Fiesole, 1983. Translated by Frederick Fuller as A History of Bel Canto. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.

Cowgill, Rachel. " Re-genderïng the Libertine; or, the Taming of the Rake: Lucy Vestris as Don Giovanni on the earl y nineteenth-century London stage." Cambridge Opera Journal 10, no- 1 (1 998): 45-66.

Dahihaus, Carl. Nineteenth-Century Music. tram. J. Bradford Robinson. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989.

Derwent, George Harcourt Johnstone (Lord). Rossini and Some Forgotten Nightingales. London: Duckworth, 1934.

Femer, Theodore. Leigh Hunt and Opera Cuiticism: The "Examiner " Years 1808-1821. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1972.

. Opera in London: Vie ws of the Press 1785-1830. Carbondale: Southern I1Iinois uni ver si^ Press, 1994.

Fiske, Roger. English Theatre Music in the Eighteenth Century. New York: Oxford Universis Press, 1986.

F&Ayon, Apnl. Maria Malibran: diva of the Romantic Age. London: Souvenir Press, 1987. Gossetf PhiHip. cc 'Ah se è ver': An Additional Aria for Soprano." Descriptive notes, Gioacchino Rossini: L? Barbiere di SivigZiu, recorded under the direction of Claudio Abbado (Deutsche Grammophon , 19W), 17- 18.

. "Gioachino Rossini and the Conventions of Composition." Acta Mzrsicologica 42, no.3 (1970): 48-58.

. "The Operas of Rossini: Problems of Textual Criticism in Nineteenth-Century Opera" Ph.D. diss., Princeton Universiv, 1970.

. Preface to II Borbiere di Sivigk FacsimiZe of the Autograph Manuscript, by Gioachino Rossini (Bologna: Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale, 1993), 3-48.

Hughes, Alan. "Art and Eighteenth-Centuty Acting Style." Theatre Notebook 41 (1987): 24-3 1, 79-89, 128-39.

Langely, Leanne. " The English Musical Journal in the Early Nineteenth Century." Ph.D. diss., Universi5 of North Carolina at Chape1 Hill, 1983.

Marchand, Leslie A. The Athenaeum: A Mirror of Victorim Culture. Chape1 Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1941.

Nalbach, David. The King 's Theatre, 17041867; London 's First Italian Opera House. London: Society for Theatre Research, 1972,

Osborne, Richard. Rossini. London: J.M. Dent, 1986.

Price, Cecil J.L. Thealre in the Age of Garrick. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield, 1973.

Quinlan, Maurice J. Victorian Prelude: A History of EngZish Mamers, 1700-1830. Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books, 1965.

Robinson, Michael. " The Barber of Seville: An Introduction." Descriptive notes, Gioacchino Rossini: Il Barbiere di Siviglia, recorded under t!ae direction of Claudio Abbado (Deutsche Grammophon , 1992), 16.

Rognoni, Luigi. Gioacchino Rossini. Turin: Edizioni rai radiotelevisione italiana, 1968.

Rosselli, John-Singers of ltulian Opera: The History of a Profession. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Rossini, Gioachino. i7 Barbiere di Siviglkz: Facsimile of the Autograph Manuscript. With a preface by Philip Gossett. Bologna: Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale, 1993-

Scott, Michaet. "Rossini in England." Opera 27, nos. 3, 5 (1976): 21044,434-39.

Senici, Emanuele. " 'Adapted to the modern stage': La clernenza di Tito in London." Cambridge Opera Journal 7, no. 1 (1 995): 1-22.

Shaw-Taylor, Desmond, Covent Garden. New York: Chanticleer Press, 1948.

Smith, William Charles. The Italian Opera and Contemporury Baller in London: 1 789- 1820. London: Society for Theatre Research, 1955,

Tartak, Marvin. "The Two 'Barbier? ." Music and Letters 50, no. 1 (1 969): 453-69-

Till, Nicholas. Rossini: His Lzye und Times, New York: Hippocrene Books, 1983.

To ye, Francis. Rossini- a study of tragi-comedy. London: W. Heinmann, 1934. Reprint as Rossini: The Man and His Music. New York: Dover, 1987.

Ward, William Smith. Index and Finding List of Serials Published in the British Mes, 1 789-1 832. Lexington: Universi@ of Kentucky Press, [1953].

Weinstock, Herbert. Rossini: A Biography. New York: Alfied A. Knopf, 1968.

Williams, Raymond. The Long Revolution- London: Chatto and Windus, 196 1.

Wyndham, Henry Saxe. The Annals ofCovent Garden Thearrefi-om 1732 to 1897.2 vols. London: Chatto and Windus, 1906.