Paolo Rolli and the Italian Circle in London, 1715–1744 9783111560786, 9783111190143

Citation preview

STUDIES IN ITALIAN

LITERATURE

II cfo cfo gfa cfo efe cfa cfs cfs cfa cfa gjfc cf? cfo cfo cfa gfa gfs cfc gfs cfì gfo

cfe cfo cf? cfa gfe cfa cfo cfa cfo gfo cfc

PAOLO ROLLI AND THE ITALIAN CIRCLE IN LONDON 1715 -1744 by GEORGE E. DORRJS Queens College, Flushing,

N.Y.

1967

MOUTON & CO. THE H A G U E • PARIS

© Copyright 1967 by Mouton & Co., Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

Printed in The Netherlands by Mouton & Co., Printers, The Hague

PREFACE

During the too many years that I have been working on this study, many individuals and institutions have lent their assistance — too many to list separately. The first part of the research was done while I was on a Fulbright Fellowship in Italy, which gave me an opportunity to work in a number of European libraries, especially the Biblioteca Estense in Modena, the British Museum, and the private archive of Count Baidasserone in Florence, which he generously opened to me. The staffs of Deering Library of Northwestern University, Newberry Library, the Duke University Library, Widener Library (indeed, all of the Harvard University libraries), the Music Room of the Library of Congress, the Rutgers University Library, the library of the University of California, Berkeley, and the Paul Klapper Library of Queens College, all have been unsparing of their time, and the facilities of all of these libraries have been opened to me. Among the many individuals who have assisted me at one time or another, I should like to single out Patrick Trevor-Roper, Esq., for the loan of the papers of the late Alan Yorke-Long, among other kindnesses; Professor P. J. Powers of the University of Oregon; Mr. Donald Ransted of Santiago, Chile; Professor Oliver Ferguson of Duke University; Professor Sears Jayne of Queens College; Professor Wolfgang B. Fleishmann of the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee; Professor Robert Halsband of Columbia University; Professors Virgil B. Heltzel, Arthur H. Nethercot, Robert Mayo, John F. Ohl, and Dean Moody E. Prior of Northwestern University; Mr. James Wells of New-

6

PREFACE

berry Library; Eugene and Edith Soules of Stockton, California; Professor Paul Ramsey of the University of the South; Professor C. F. Main of Rutgers; and Mr. Jack Anderson of N e w York City. Above all, I am grateful to Professor Jean H . Hagstrum for kindness and assistance beyond the call of friendship, and to my parents, Ben F. and Klysta Dorris, for their untiring encouragement. Without their help and patience my work would have been impossible, and therefore it is dedicated to them. N e w York City, July, 1965 Portions of this work have appeared in Italica and Review English Studies.

of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5

Preface I. The Italian Tradition

9

II. The Italian Opera in England III. The Life and W o r k s of Paolo Rolli . 1. Rolli as Poet 2. Rolli als Translator 3. Rolli as Editor 4. Rolli and the Royal Society 5. Rolli as Polemicist

36 .

.

.

124 162 168 184 189 192

IV. Conti, Maffei, and Cocchi Appendix: A checklist of Operas Produced in London, 1705-1744 Bibliography

205 269 278

Index

288

I THE ITALIAN TRADITION

Literature, like nature, knows no vacuum. Rather it exists as the complex product of the interaction of a man and society. If it is often necessary to abstract a work of art from its setting in time in order to examine those elements which make it unique, it is only when the work has been examined also as a part of its setting that those unique features may be understood and properly evaluated. This is one of the principal justififcations for the study of the history of literature, as opposed to the critical act. Only when the age has been fully explored, when the strands which make it up have been unraveled, the currents and crosscurrents charted and separated, can the individual artist and the individual work of art be fully understood. Only when all of the skeins have been disentangled, can the critical act take place without fear of errors of initial, essential misinterpretation. The present study is an attempt to reconstruct a part of the social and literary background of the earlier eighteenth century in England. In dealing with what I propose to call "the Italian circle" as it then existed in London, this work will touch upon literary history, for most of these men were poets and scholars. It will touch often upon social history, for they moved freely in the artistic and social spheres in that most political of ages, when London was still small enough for the people of power and fashion, the worlds of art, the court, and politics, to overlap. Because of a surprising conjunction of Italian opera with social and political currents, this study must also contain elements from the history of music; further, such a seeming incongruity is important, because the critical theory of the age often drew sug-

10

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

gestive parallels between the arts, linking poetry with painting and with music. Because this study is concerned with an Italian circle in London, by definition much of it will belong to the field of Comparative Literature, especially where questions of neo-classic theory become important. However, because of the setting and the natural bias of this group toward England and English literature, I hope to show that it is essentially a study of the early eighteenth century in relation to England, which can be illuminated by showing certain connections between the most important Italian and English artistic movements, between the Italian world of the Arcadia and the English world of the Dunciad. The most important figure in this cultural interchange was the Roman poet Paolo Antonio Rolli (1687-1767), who spent nearly thirty years in England between 1715 and 1744, teaching, editing, and writing. Although Rolli is properly considered a lesser figure in Italian letters — a poet who might rank with Waller or Prior among the English — he was also the first to translate Paradise Lost into Italian; he taught Italian to the royal family and to many of the nobility; he engaged in polemic attacks on Voltaire and Sir Robert Walpole; and he provided libretti for the operas not only of Handel, but also for the German composer's most notable rivals, Bononcini and Porpora. Rolli, then, provides the continuum for an examination of his circle. The most important among the Italians with whom he came in contact in London were the dramatist-critic Antonio Conti, who introduced Shakespeare to the Italians, the Florentine doctor Antonio Cocchi, later the friend and physician of Francis Colman and Horace Mann, the learned poet-antiquarian Scipione Maffei, and the shadowy Modenese diplomat Giuseppe Riva. Of these, Rolli was the one who lived and worked in England for an extended length of time, while Conti, Cocchi, and Maffei provided a continuing link with Italy, and almost as important was the close friendship between Riva and the great Modenese scholar Ludovico Muratori, and the most important Italian poet of the age, Pietro Metastasio. One tie which bound these men was their background in, and

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

11

devotion to, the Italian classical tradition, which culminated in the movement known as the Arcadia, for the reform of Italian letters and the restoration of the artistic glories of the Italian past. Rolli and Metastasio were both pupils of one of the founders of Γ Arcadia, Gian-Vicenza Gravina, and Muratori had contributed one of the central critical texts of the movement in his Della perfetta poesia; Maffei and Conti were the most important dramatists of the movement, always excepting Metastasio, who limited himself to the dramma in musica. All were devoted to the spread and development of Italian art, in an attempt to restore the commanding position in the arts and aesthetics, which Italy had lost to France in the seventeenth century. But as a part of their program, they were devoted to neo-classic principles, whether Italian or French, and they represent one of the last important attempts to introduce the concepts of neo-classic art into England. Surprisingly enough, this effort was concentrated largely upon the Italian opera. The reason for this has not always been understood, but the blend of music, poetry, scenic display, and often dancing, as found in the Italian "reform-baroque" opera at its best, represents one of the peaks of Italian neo-classic art.1 And the opera, although highly formal, was not static, but was brought passionately and brilliantly to life by the great virtuoso singers of the age, notably by the castrati, such as Senesino and Farinelli. The decisive collapse of the London opera in 1738 marks one of the significant defeats of neo-classic art in England. One important point in studying this particular group is the 1 I have preferred to lump together the operas of such diverse composers as Alessandro Scarlatti, Handel, Porpora, and Hasse under the general term "baroque", or "reform-baroque", in order to clarify certain relationships. T o have called the first two "reform-baroque" and the last two "pre-classical" might be more accurate from a purely musicological standpoint, but would also lead to confusion with "neo-classical" as I have taken it from both literary historians and art historians. Since I am not concerned here with the development of the classical style of Mozart and Haydn, through Hasse, J. C. Bach, and Gluck, but rather with the earlier style and period in and for itself, I trust that my terminology will be comprehensible and consistent. For an admirable discussion of the development (and terminology) of the classical style in opera, see Edward Downes, "The Operas of J. C. Bach" (unpublished Harvard Diss., 19S8).

12

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

neatness of the chronological limits. The first important event is the introduction of the Italian opera in 1705, followed by the gathering of the Italian circle about 1715. The collapse of the operatic structure, followed by the retirement of Handel from the operatic scene in 1741, and Rolli's return to Italy in 1744 mark the closing stages of the circle. Interestingly enough, this is closely parallel to the career of Alexander Pope, from the time of the alleged beginnings of "Windsor Forest" to the year of his death — and Rolli's last English gesture seems to have been an epigram on the death of Pope, which was reported to Horace Mann by Walpole. Indeed, the group so decisively ended with the departure of Rolli that there are no points of contact between Rolli's circle and that of his successor as English apologist for Italian letters, Giuseppe Baretti. The friend of Dr. Johnson belonged to a different generation, a different age from that of Rolli and his friends, one that took for granted the accomplishments of the Arcadia, and could therefore react against its decline: the age of Alfieri and revolution, rather than that of Metastasio and absolutism. A natural question at this point is why the subject has not been more widely investigated. Rolli, it is true, has been treated in several Italian monographs, but never in English, nor in specific reference to the English scene. J. G. Robertson studied Conti and Maffei in his Studies in the Genesis of Romantic Theory in the Eighteenth Century, but dealt more with their development of the concept of the creative imagination. Music historians have too often been content to pass rapidly over the baroque opera, considering the operas of Handel, for example, as imperfect studies for the oratorios. It has only been within the last few decades that the baroque and the neo-classical have come into their own, first in art history, then in music and literature, and that such pioneering work as Edward J. Dent's on Alessandro Scarlatti has been developed systematically. In Italy, for example, an opera completa of Metastasio was published in 1953, the first since the eighteenth century, while Maffei has been honoured with both a biography and an Epistolario, and Muratori studies have flourished especially since the bi-centenary of

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

13

his death in 1950. The work of such scholars as Hugo Lichtentritt, Wilfred Meilers, Cuthbert Girdlestone, Manfred Bukofzer, and Egon Wellesz has permitted the student to re-evaluate the principles of the baroque opera, and to understannd the conventions of eighteenth century performance. For the present study, the Twickenham edition of Pope and the publication of Professor Sherburn's edition of Pope's correspondence opened new vistas, as did Professor Halsband's work on Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. Professor Hagstrum's discovery of the Cocchi archive in Florence made available a sizeable body of material dealing with the Italian side of the London circle, which has proved of considerable value. One of the most important books which encourages work in this area has been the monumental Handel: A Documentary Biography by Otto Erich Deutsch. This compilation "of all known documents referring to Handel's life" is an inexhaustible mine of information on the musical life of London between 1710 and 1759; since much of it is presented with little comment, it cries out for digging of this kind. It would seem, then, that the moment has arrived when an investigation of Paolo Rolli and the Italian circle in London, considering both their influence on English society and literature, and the English impact on Italian letters, is possible.

I Before an examination of the Italian circle in London is undertaken, two matters should be examined by way of preface. The first is a consideration of the Italian influence in European letters during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, with particular regard to England. Second, as it is a part of the present study to attempt to place the Rolli circle in a larger, more revealing context, a brief examination of the state of Italian letters at the end of the seventeenth century and the beginning of the eighteenth century is necessary. These two investigations, taken together, trace the decline of the once dominant Italian

14

THE ITALIAN

TRADITION

influence on literary Europe, and the emergence of the French supremacy under the banner of the Rules and Boileau. Only when this has been done can the work of Rolli and his circle be seen in proper perspective, as more than an isolated, or even accidental, occurrence. The first step, then, is to review briefly the high tide of Italian influence during the sixteenth century, and to suggest why it occurred and what were its results. This leads next to a consideration of why it declined, as well as the means of measuring such a decline. If the Rolli circle in the eighteenth century attempted to re-establish the Italian influence, it is necessary to understand the nature of the earlier influence and the reasons for its decline. And the most economical way is to point out the degree to which Italians and Italian letters penetrated the fabric of life in Tudor-Stuart England, why the strongest impact of Renaissance Italy was reserved for the sixteenth century, and why it had all but died out by the end of the next century. It goes almost without saying that the dominant literary culture of the Renaissance was Italy. T o suggest this is not for a moment to deny the extraordinary brilliance — perhaps unsurpassed anywhere, at any time — of Elizabethan England, nor to question the achievement of the French during the generation of the Pléiade. It is to assert, rather, that the impetus for the new literature clearly came from Italy. The critical doctrines, the areas of interest, the original forms, all were created by Italian writers and critics, however much they may have been modified and varied by local requirements to create entities as diverse as the English, Spanish, French, and Italian drama at the end of the sixteenth century. What is important, then, is not the diversity of growth or development, but rather the unity of source, Italy. Information and experience concerning the Renaissance in Italy, whether direct or second-hand, came to England only gradually, as, indeed, they did to France. Why, then, did the Renaissance take hold in England only in the sixteenth century, although the English had been aware of the brilliant developments as early as the late fourteenth century? The answer is the same as to why the French failed to respond to the Renaissance

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

15

before the late fifteenth century. The arts of the Renaissance were essentially those of prosperity, and both France and England had long been torn by internal and external strife. There was neither the leisure nor the money to devote to the cultivation of a revived antiquity or the artistic present as long as England remained an armed camp, consuming itself in civil war, and fighting the running series of wars with the French that were eventually ended with the loss of Calais in 1558, followed by the rather unexpected growth of a peaceful relationship between the two nations. The situation became, indeed, roughly parallel with that found in the first half of the eighteenth century. As Elizabeth made it the keystone of her policy to avoid foreign entanglements where possible, and to maintain peace so that England could flourish economically, so Walpole was to build his foreign policy on keeping England at peace with its continental rivals, encouraging an economic development which was able to surmount the South Sea Bubble and the defeat of the Excise. And in both periods, the developing prosperity permitted the encouragement of the arts — the English Renaissance and the Augustan age, the Gold and Silver ages of English literature. A general peace had descended on England with the beginning of the Tudor prosperity, and the reign of Henry VIII in particular. With the establishment of internal security, and the development of closer relations with Rome under Cardinal Wolsey, the growth of luxury was hastened by the prosperity and the example of the Italian courts, as well as by the burgeoning luxury of the French court under the same stimulus. One might cite the meeting between Henry and Francis I at the Field of the Cloth of Gold in 1521 as the effective beginning of the Renaissance in England. This suggests one problem that must not be neglected in tracing the Italian influence in England, not only in the sixteenth century, but in the eighteenth as well, although it further complicates a study of cultural relationships: the influence of France; for it is only through this closest neighbor that England has reasonable overland access to Italy. Further, Paris has always prided itself on being culturally ahead

16

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

of London, and the greater proximity to Italy and the more direct example of the Italian courts combined to make France the natural "middle-man" or (indeed) "strainer" of Italian manners and culture for England, especially when this was reinforced with the ever-high prestige of the French court. The Italian influence in France was greatly reinforced by the marriage of Catherine de' Medici to Henri II in 1533 and the domination of the French court by that remarkable woman during the reigns of her three sons (1559-1589). This completed the Italianization of the court, begun by her father-in-law, Francis I, the patron of Leonardo and Cellini. Under Elizabeth the Italian influence became more generally pervasive in England, and seems to have formed the foundation on which the native English growth took root, before developing upon its own lines. Thus to mention the indebtedness of Spencer to Ariosto, or Sidney to Minturno and Scaliger,2 or the host of sonneteers to the Petrarchans, is to suggest only the most obvious of such relationships. The debt of the Elizabethan drama to Italian models — especially in comedy and Senecan tragedy — to Italian prose fiction, and even to Italian history, is enormous. But this enrichment does not necessarily imply that all Elizabethans knew Italian, for the wealth of translations covered the wide range of contemporary Italian literature. There were some 171 translations from the Italian published in England between 1543 and 1603, including such monumental achievements as Sir John Harington's Orlando Furioso in English Heroical Verse (1590) and Edward Fairfax's Godfrey of Bulloigne, or the Recoverie of Jerusalem (1600) from Tasso. By 1660, when the number dwindled sharply, there had been published 200 more translations from the Italian, according to the research of Mary Augusta Scott.3 In addition, Miss Scott lists twenty-five works published in Italian (all or in part) between 1552 (II Pelegrino Inglese by William Thomas) and 1597, and nine more by 1645 and The Poems of Mr. John Milton. 2

Joel Spingarn, A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance (New York, 1908), pp. 268 ff. 3 Elizabethan Translations from the Italian (Boston, 1916), passim.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

17

There is no occasion to rehearse further the conclusions of Lewis Einstein, Sir Sidney Lee, Miss Scott, and other early labourers in this field. The result of their endeavour, however, clarifies the enormous importance of the Italian influence on English letters in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Not only did the Italian world operate as a catalytic agent on the Elizabethan sensibility, but it provided models for emulation, examples for study, and critical theory for guidance and justification. The Italians stood as the great example of a modern culture which had created a vernacular literature that challenged that of the ancient world, and which had led Europe in that rediscovery of classic ideals and examples which is generally called the Renaissance. From Italy it spread north and west, to Spain, to France, to England, to Germany and Austria even, and the time-lag between the moment when one nation was prepared to accept this dispensation and the time when another was ready, allowed for the fascinating series of interlocking influences which complicate a study of cultural relationships. But the country of Ariosto, Tasso, Guarini, and Marino, of Minturno, Castelvetro, and Piccolomini, of Michelangelo, Raphael, Leonardo, and Palladio, furnished intellectual and artistic leadership to Europe into the early decades of the seventeenth century. Italian became a fashionable language among the Elizabethan nobility and others. For one thing, it was among the languages spoken fluently by the queen, while among her courtiers acquainted with Italian were Burleigh, Walsingham, the Earls of Rutland, Leicester and Southampton, and the Countess of Bedford.4 But for reasons both historic and geographic, French was even then better known in England, and spoken more fluently, although Italian was certainly the more highly regarded.5 As A. Lytton Sells has commented in writing of the midsixteenth century in his The Italian Influence in English Poetry:

Lewis Einstein, The Italian Renaissance in England (London, 1902), p. 193. 5 This is clear from Ascham and the other writers on education up through Milton's tractate "Of Education" (1644).

4

18

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

A small but increasing number of writers, not all of them nobles, appear to have been learning Italian; but a much larger number knew French, which has always been our language of preference and which was often the medium between the Italian novel and English drama as well as between Italian poetry and English; while most, though not all, of our poets had a good knowledge of Latin, a knowledge which rendered accessible to them the remarkable neo-Latin of Poliziano, Angeriano, Mantuan (who was very popular), Marullo, Pontano and others.® T h u s it may be seen that Italian was not the sole medium f o r becoming acquainted with the literature of Italy, but that those works that were not available in English versions might be found in French or Latin. T h e latter, of course, still made a w o r k most easily available to an international audience as late as the midseventeenth century, when Milton considered writing his epic in Latin, as had Petrarch with his Africa, and he prepared his "Defenses of the English People" in that language. Of more interest here is Sells' comment on the knowledge of French, f o r this was to increase at the expense of Italian during the seventeenth century, as part of a larger intellectual revolution. If the sixteenth century may be considered as the age of Italian influence, so the seventeenth century is undeniably the great age of French domination over cultural Europe, and where the one is the age of Castelvetro and Minturno, the other became the age of Boileau. T h e movement toward French dominance was a gradual one. W h e n the treaties of 1598 and 1603 made travel on the continent both simpler and safer, the lure of Italy drew an increasingnumber of English visitors and merchants, especially to Venice, with its ancient tradition of liberty and opposition to the Papacy, and to Florence, with its treasures of art. W h e n Charles I married a French — hence Roman Catholic — princess, this not only brought England closer to France politically, but also opened Rome and the Papal States as a safe attraction for discreet y o u n g Englishmen. 7 A t this same time, the English began to 6

The Italian Influence in English Poetry, from Chaucer to Southwell (Bloomington, Ind., 1955), p. 84. 7 Jean H . Hagstrum, The Sister Arts: The Study of Literary Pictorialism and English Poetry from Dry den to Gray (Chicago, 1958), pp. 108-109.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

19

develop a taste for paintings, an interest in connoisseurship, so that the accumulation of the first great English collections — those of Charles I and the Earl of Arundel in particular — began. The return of Inigo Jones from study in Italy had brought new ideals in architecture, and he popularized the early Baroque style in his many designs and in such buildings as the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, or the plan for the piazza at Covent Garden. But this burgeoning interest, which was matched in literature by the interest in the marinist style, was doomed. Not only was England moving into a struggle inimical to such influences — the Civil W a r and the Commonwealth — but the Italy on which they fed was exhausted creatively, just as it was exhausted politically by the warfare that had raged up and down the peninsula for over a century. Indeed, the beginnings of the decline, both political and artistic, might be placed as early as the sack of Rome by Imperial troops in 1515, and the madness that overcame the melancholy Tasso becomes suggestive of the decay of his country. T o speak of decay is not to deny virtue to Marino or marinismo, but rather to point out that the creative energy, and with it the atmosphere necessary to original and vital work, were rapidly becoming exhausted; at best it was a silver age, and a rapidly tarnishing one. If the poets, critics, and scholars made the proper gestures, and were lively and intelligent, even such important figures as Tassoni and Beni were not enough to make up for the critical creativity of a Minturno or a Scaliger, any more than Guido Reni or Bernini could replace Raphael or Michaelangelo. And with their sensitivity to trends, the French began to feel this, and to throw off the discipleship of Italy. Malherbe and Balzac, after a thorough schooling in their Italian predecessors,8 declared their independence, while the foundation of the Academy by Richelieu in 1635 encouraged the codification of Malherbe's reform, which was to determine the course of French neo-classicism. One important reason for this Gallic flourishing was the rise George Saintsbury, A History of Criticism and Literary Taste in Europe from the Earliest Texts to the Present Day (Edinburgh, 1900-04), II, pp. 240 ff. 8

20

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

of French criticism and the development of a new literary world in France, a loose federation of coteries, which, however much they may have quarreled among themselves, made letters a lively field of creation and conversation. Thus the group that gathered at the famous Hôtel de Rambouillet (1618-1645) could nurture the talents of a Voiture, Malherbe, or Racan, a Scarron, Corneille, or Bossuet, at a time when the English literary world was being split by the political and religious controversies which culminated in the Civil War, and when the Italians were beginning to run after the dullest pedantry or the most involved Marinistic conceits. It is ironic that the greatest triumphs of Corneille were between 1636 (Le Cid) and 1643 (an annus mirabilis when he produced Polyeucte, Le Mort de Pompée and Le Menteur), the very years which saw the end of the Carolingian drama and the closing of the theatres. At the moment of discontinuity in English literary life, France was developing a creativecritical tradition. With the successes of Louis XIV in politics and war establishing France as the great central power in Europe, France was a nation and culture on the rise. Standing between Spain and the Empire, while attempting to keep England neutral if not friendly in continental wars, the young monarch became worthy to stand as symbol of the national glory, much as Elizabeth had symbolized the virtues and glories of the age that bears her name. It was this complex, political, critical, and artistic, allied with the inscrutable workings of the "spirit of the age", which brought France to this extraordinary peak of accomplishment, such as Italy had attained in the fifteenth century and England in the sixteenth. The results are most clear in the second half of the century, of course, with the development of Boileau into a kind of literary law-giver, so that his smallest comment might be amplified, developed, and distorted by his followers, while the neo-classic doctrine, which he gave its most influenential expression, dominated critical thinking well into the second half of the next century. To see the results of this resurgence and of its triumph, one need only turn to the literary products of the last half of the seventeenth century in France, with its remarkable flourishing

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

21

of a large number of writers of the first rank. These few decades saw Corneille, Racine, and Molière in the theatre, Bossuet and Fenelon in the pulpit, aided in prose by La Bruyère, Boileau, La Fontaine, and Charles Perrault in satire, while La Rochefoucauld worked with the exquisite Mme. de la Fayette, and Mme. de Sévigné wrote her celebrated letters. It was not merely the military triumphs or the personal charm of le grand monarque that made this le grand siècle, but neither is it likely that this array of genius could have been gathered in a minor court, even an Urbino or Ferrara. They gave to the court — and it is significant how many of them were connected with the court — much of its glory, but they in turn were bathed in its light. It was all part of the tangled inter-relation between society, the age, and the artist that is involved in creation, both of the individual work of art and of the body of work which characterizes a given era. The English reaction to this French splendor was, typically enough, mixed. Reserving a token independence in some few things, as in the question of the Unities and mixed genres, the English surrendered the citadel of criticism, and fell beneath the onslaughts of the neo-classic theories of Malherbe and Boileau. The French taste in these matters had been formulating its final position in the years just before the restoration of Charles, the same years when the English court-in-exile was most closely connected with Paris and Versailles. Thus it was natural that those who spent the lean years abroad learned to enjoy the delights of their hosts and to accept the standards in aesthetics which ruled Versailles as well as those in manners. That this was at least partially the case in music, for example, is suggested by the importation of Louis Grabu as composer to Charles II and the formation of a royal orchestra in imitation of Louis' famous violons du roi, or by the typically French opéra-ballet that Dryden prepared, shortly before Charles' death, to honour the king, and later revised into Albion and Albanius (1685). Further, the course of the Restoration theatre in general shows the French influence, undoubtedly furthered by the exiles of the 1650's. The treatment of love, honour, and duty in the heroic

22

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

drama, for example, often recalls Corneille, while also borrowing from the Spanish drama. The French stage is further recalled by the many adaptions of Molière (in particular) by dramatists as varied as Dryden and Wycherley, and by the introduction of actresses in the public theatre. Even in the forms of prose fiction, the models or sources are no longer the novelle of Bandello and his fellows, but the interminable romances of Mme. de Scudéry and d'Urfé, or their briefer prototypes, and the popular setting is more often France than Italy; the center of manners and examples is just across the Channel in the works of such a weathervane as Aphra Behn, as much as in Dryden himself, where it would have been in Italy for the romancer of a century earlier. This is not to suggest that London became a mere literary suburb of Paris, but it did come heavily under the influence of French theory and practice, supplementing the native product with an infusion of neo-classicism which widened the gap between this and the previous age, rather as Charles II received a pension from Louis X I V to render him independent of Parliament. As the dominant influence in intellectual Europe had been Italian a century early, now it was French, and as the landscape had once been dotted with Italian villas and palazzi, like Fontainbleau and Nonesuch, now it became spread with imitations of Versailles, from Hampton Court and Blenheim to Dresden, St. Petersburg, and Naples.

II The Italian seventeenth century suffered from what may best be called préciosité, a turning of metaphysical manner into a mannerism which is not so much convoluted (the besetting sin of marinismo) as rhetorically empty. Affectation is the principal fault, resulting in part from an assumption of heroic attitudes in an unheroic age, and the difference between the pretension and the reality may be measured in bombast. Thus it is only through ironic undercutting that Tassoni could achieve his triumph in La Secchia rapita, but he found this technique only after scrap-

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

23

ping his epic proper, Oceano. As De Sanctis summarized the problem, "In the Seicento there was nothing... but a hypocritical inquisitorial world in which religious and social life were outside of the consciousness, mechanized and immobilized into fixed inviolable forms." 9 As a result, the followers of Marino — and most writers were at least touched by his influences — put the "inquisitorial" world of the counter-reformation into their tumid religious verse; the genuine lyric talent of Chiabrera was turned fruitlessly in the heroic vein, echoing the hypocrisy of an unheroic age, while the lyric turned sickly, as in the poems of Carlo Maggi, once so admired by his friend Muratori. It was this absence of any real strength or energy that made Italy such an easy target for the followers of the neo-classic dispensation, and when the inevitable reforms began and the new literature made a hesitating appearance, it wore the garb of — or was at best in family revolt against — the neo-classic doctrines of Boileau and the literary standards of France. The reform, when it came, was in two parts, the one the direct result of outside criticism, the other more self-inspired. The end of the seventeenth century was notable for two attacks on Italian literature by the French, one from Boileau himself, the other from Père Bouhours, a relatively minor critic. The quarrel — for such it became — began with an almost chance remark on Tasso by Boileau, but not even in the extended discussion of the heroic poem in "Chant III" of VArt Poétique. If Tasso's was not a style which would find favour with the stern critic, who frowned upon his excesses, Boileau still admired many of the more "regular" beauties of the Gerusalemne. In Satire IX, however, he turned out an epigrammatic quip which was too clever not to stick, the famous comparison of the gold of Virgil and the tinsel of Tasso. But it should be seen in context, for it is not part of a discussion of poets as such, but of his description of "un sot de qualité": Tous les jours à la cour un sot de qualité Peut juger de travers avec impunite; ® Francesco De Sanctis, History of Italian Literature, (New York, 1931), II, pp. 686-687.

trans. Joan Redfern

24

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

A Malherbe, à Racan, préférer Théophile Et le clinquant du Tasse à tout l'or de Virgile. (11. 173-176) It was as much on the basis of this single, all too memorable line as on that of neo-classic necessity that Tasso — and by extension, Italian literature — became fair game for French critics. Not the first to take up the hint, but the most noteworthy, was Bouhours. This is in his principal work, Le Manière de Bien Penser (1687),10 a dialogue on taste between Eudoxe, the defender of "le bon sens" and Philanthe, the admirer of the showy and brilliant — of the Italian and Spanish over the ancients. The work is a defense of the rules against the relativistic and comparativistic doctrine of national taste, recalling the issues to be debated in Voltaire's Essay on Epic Poetry (1727). An attack on Italian (and Spanish) literature and taste, Bouhours' work concludes with a resounding victory for "l'or de Virgile" over "le clinquant du Tasse". The reaction to Bouhours' attack didn't crystallize, however, until 1703, when the Marchese Gian Giuseppe Orsi of Bologna published his Considerazioni nelle opere degli antichi, sopra un famoso libro franzese intitolato: La Manière de bien penser dans les Ouvrages d"1 esprit, cicè La Maniera di ben pensare ne' Componimenti. If others had moved before Orsi, none produced an answer of interest except for an incidental refutation of some of Bouhours' points by Muratori in his Vita di C. M. Maggi ( 1699) . u It is unnecessary to summarize the details of Orsi's answer to Bouhours, for J. G. Robertson's extended account is more than sufficient. What is important here is the reaction of the Italian literary world to Orsi, for it began to feel vindicated by his protest and by the absence of a satisfactory answer from the French. This initial reaction became one of the elements in the struggle toward a regeneration of Italian literature, and especially toward a simplified diction and more regular form. It is not that the Italians were attempting to deny the French influence or even neo-classicism, but rather that like the English, they were 10

See J. G. Robertson, Studies in the Genesis of Romantic Theory in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1923), pp. 63 ff. for the best treatment of this controversy in English. 11 Ibid., p. 12.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

25

insisting upon their own version of it, one more in line with the long tradition of Italian literature, which they would not repudiate. The most important work in this reconciliation — although it is still a refutation of Bouhours — came in 1706 from a friend and protégé of Orsi, the Modenese scholar and critic Ludovico Antonio Muratori, in his Della perfetta poesia. Muratori (16721750) was one of the most productive scholars of his age, and perhaps of all time. Except for five years in Milan (1695-1700) as a librarian at the Ambrosiana, his life was spent in Modena, as archivista and bibliotecario to the Duke of Modena, publishing the monumental series of chronicles and documents which have given him the title "Padre della storia italiana".12 These works include the Anecdota Graeca (1709), the Anecdota Latina (1710), the Antichità Estensi (1717-1740), the Rerum Italicarum Scriptores (1723-1751), the.Annali d'Italia dal principio dell' era Crista.no sino al anno 1500 (1744-1749), and the posthumous Dissertazione sopra le Antichità italiane (1751). Although these are the products of Muratori's later years, they demonstrate his devotion to Italy as well as to his own city, which made him one of the defenders and reformers of the national literature. His first two books on the literary problems were suggestions for the foundation of a literary republic for the reformation of letters, published under the pseudonym of Lamindo Pritanio, I primi Disegni della Repubblica letteraria d'Italia (1703) and Riflessioni sopra il buon Gusto nelle scienze e nell' arti (1708-1715). His most important work, the Della perfetta poesia, was originally to be titled "La riforma della poesia italiana".13 Since this work is considered at length by Robertson,14 there is no need to review more than a few points here. In dealing with Muratori, one must always remember that he was a priest and a Franciscan, so that his division of the nature of good taste into the beautiful and the good is a division into the aesthetic and the moral, but both See the Annali della Commorazione del Bicentenario della morte di Ludovico Antonio Muratori, 1150-1950 (Modena, 1950). 13 See Muratori's letter to Apostolo Zeno in Epistolario di L. A. Muratori, ed. Matteo Campori (Modena 1901-12), II, p. 516. 14 Op. cit., pp. 67-87. 12

26

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

governed by the same faculty of judgment. Poetry is concerned with the beautiful, but it must also be "true" in the sense of "probable", unless it is intended to be ridiculous. Well known names, as Aristotle says, render wonderful events more credible. The poet has a certain licence to invent; but he must not contradict established opinions familiar to us from h i s t o r y . . . Existing opinions must not be warped; it is in the silent gaps of history that the fictitious may be built up. 15 This may suggest something of the nature of Muratori's achievement, for he has taken the French concept of good taste, and of probability, and developed it along a characteristically Italian line. He was the first to popularize the idea of il buon gusto in Italy, while his idea of the treatment of "the silent gaps of history" provides an aesthetic justification for the treatment of historical characters and events in the works of Zeno, Rolli, and Metastasio, where the great names of ancient history are manipulated to demonstrate the Christian virtues, especially mercy and magnanimity; it may even justify in some degree the hordes of historical novelists of more recent times. Muratori had another important "function" in the literary and scientific world of his time. Over a considerable period of years, he served as a kind of fixed point of reference for those both inside Italy and abroad who were trying to develop and propagate Italian letters and thought. He maintained a voluminous correspondence, much of which has been preserved, and it provides a clue to the activities of such Italians abroad as Rolli, Antonio Conti, Antonio Cocchi, Giuseppe Riva, and Scipione Maffei. His contacts with England were particularly warm, and in 1717 he was elected a corresponding member of the Royal Society, along with Orsi, at the suggestion of Conti. For the Italian colony in London especially, Muratori stood as a symbol of all that they were trying to establish, an embodiment of what was best in Italian culture and of the enlightened humanism which they all were attempting to re-establish. This led to the efforts abroad to develop a wider knowledge of Italian language and letters, and to bring to Italy the best works produced abroad, 15

Ibid., pp. 74-75.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

27

with such results as Rolli's translations of Milton and Racine, and Conti's of Dryden and Pope. Zeno, Metastasio, and Riva in Vienna, Rolli and Riva in London, Conti, Cocchi, and Maffei wherever they might travel, all seemed to have carried a similar concept of an Italian culture, and a dream of restoring it to the glory which it had once known, and the influence which it had once possessed. Muratori was a part of this, and one of the focal points of this cultural Internationale. There was, however, an even more important force in the reanimation of Italian letters than the Bouhours affair, but one which developed less directly out of the French criticism of Italian literature. This was the Arcadian Academy, which grew up in Rome during the last years of the seventeenth century. The usual method of artistic reform in Italy has always been the foundation of an academy — indeed, academies were formed for nearly every purpose — and Muratori's suggested Republic of Letters was in this tradition. The most famous of the earlier academies, and the most successful, was the Florentine Accademia della Crusca, founded in 1582 for the reform of the Italian language. Thus in 1690 the Arcadian academy was begun for the reform of Italian letters, against the convoluted seicentismo style developed by the imitators of Marino. The academy developed among the letterati who met at the salon of Queen Christina of Sweden, who lived in Rome from 1659 (she had abdicated in 1654) until her death in 1689, a convert to Catholicism.16 The Arcadian ideal was the simplicity implied by their name, and the guise of membership was an association of shepherds bearing pseudo-classical names. Thus Giovan Mario Crescembeni, the first custode of VArcadia, was Alfesibeo Cario, Gravina was alternately Opico Erimanteo and Bione Crateo, while Rolli was Eulibio Brentiatico, and Christina was inscribed, posthumously, on the rolls under her favorite Greek name, Basilissa. After 1726 the Academy met in the Bosco Parrasio on the Gianicolo, the gift to Γ Arcadia of Joäo V of Portugal, later the patron of 18 For an excellent account of the court of Christina in Rome and of the early Arcadia, see Ralph Kirkpatrick, Domenico Scarlatti (Princeton, 1953), especially Chapter III.

28

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

Domenico Scarlatti. Here were held, at the beginning of each Olympiad — for so time was measured — their literary Olympic games. The pastoralism of the Arcadians was based upon the sophisticated Virgilian style rather than upon the more realistic version of Theocritus, and its nature is close to that described by Fontenelle in his Discours sur PEglogue (1688). For Fontenelle, as for the Arcadians, the pastoral charm is found not in the rather distasteful reality, but in "the idea of tranquility attached to the life of those who tend sheep and goats",17 and in addition to trcifiquilité, the eroticism introduced into the pastoral by Tasso, Fontenelle's douce volupté. But the relation between these as ideals, and the realities of sheep-herding are wittily suggested near the end of the Discours: Ainsi, nous avons trouvé à peu près la mesure d'esprit que peuvent avoir des bergers, et la langue qu'ils peuvent parler. Il en va, ce me semble, des églogues comme des habits que l'on prend dans des ballets pour représenter des paysans véritables; ils sont même ornés de rubans et de points, et on les taille seulement en habits de paysans. Il faut aussi que les sentimens dont on fait la matière des églogues soient plus fins et plus délicats que ceux des vrais bergers; mais il faut leur donner la forme la plus simple et la plus champetre qu'il soit possible.18 The application of Fontenelle's examination of the nature of the pastoral may best be seen, perhaps, in a work by the first Arcadian custode, Crescembeni's elaborate account of the early years of the Academy, L'Arcadia (Rome, 1711, rev. ed.). A brief example should suggest this French-Italian relationship, especially since it concerns the three musicians admitted to the Academy in 1706, Alessandro Scarlatti, Bernardo Pasquini, and Arcangelo Corelli. The occasion was the celebration of their second Olympic Games, the place the palace of the Abate Rivera, or as Crescembeni preferred, "la Campanna di Metauro". The Accademia di Musica organized by Terpandro (Scarlatti) began with a symphony by Arcomelo (Corelli), while Terpandro and Cuthbert Girdlestone, Jean-Philippe Rameau, (London, 1957), p. 377. 18 Fontenelle, Œuvres (Paris, 1818), III, p. 68. 17

His

Life

and

Works

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

29

later Protico (Pasquini) presided over performances of their cantatas on texts by Tirsi (the Neapolitan advocate Giambattista Zappi). The climax of the evening came, however, when verses improvised by Tirsi were all but simultaneously set and performed extempore by Terpandro, ending the performances with what must have been a brilliant flourish of improvisatory fireworks, which seems to have sent the assembled shepherds home well-whetted for the poetic delights of the Giuochi Olimpici in Elide. The cantate and arie of Tirsi — which of course deal with love, usually requited — are written in a relatively simple style, which matches well both their pastoral subject and their musical purpose, and is in considerable contrast to the rather labored elaboration of Crescembeni's prose. But even these have traces of the gallant, in the many flattering references to the ninfe who join these pastore in their simple pleasures. Tranquilité and douce volupté remained sophisticated, which was one of the strongest charms and paradoxes of Arcadia. Of the five "bouts" that made up the Games the next day, the second is of particular interest in the present context. Each event was, of course, a kind of contest, one being called an Oracle, another the Transformation, and yet a third the Garland. The second was the Contest, or bout between two shepherds on the model of the Virgilian contests in the Eclogues. This one, according to Crescembeni, was arranged because "Eniso had harboured great bitterness in the depths of his heart against Eulibio",19 and so had challenged him to a poetic duel. The contest seems to have been improvisations, one poet taking up the rhymes thrown out by the other, first in tercets, then in longer stanzas. Why Eniso, or Domenico Petrosellini, was jealous of Eulibio, or Paolo Rolli, is never suggested, and the entire business may have been mere Arcadian convention. Although the resulting eclogue is quoted at length, the winner is never named, and one can only wonder whether or not Rolli triumphed over his jealous rival. The vogue of the Arcadia was enormous, and branches of the academy soon mushroomed throughout Italy. Within twenty19 Crescembeni, L'Arcadia (Rome, 1711), p. 301.

30

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

two years there were 1300 "shepherds", including most of the important names in Italian letters and science, such as Redi, Salvini, Marchetti, Magalotti, Zeno, and Maffei. 20 As Carini points out, This was not an academy of mere poetry, but rather an eclectic athering of the learned, devoted to every branch of human nowledge, brought together only in this: to reclaim good taste in Italy, where it was running to madness; to impede the announcement of great truths in insipid and rude language; to place in honour over every other thing the art of giving form to thought; and to join the amenity of style and the adornment of the word to the real historical, moral, physical, and mathematical disciplines; a purpose, as is clearly apparent, nobler than any other. 21

f

Indeed, it is interesting to note that the aims of the Arcadians, when stated in this way, appear similar to those of the English Royal Society at the time of its founding, when its partial aim was to reform the language from the excesses of the writers of baroque prose and metaphysical poetry, with a neo-classic aim in style and content similar to that desired by the Arcadians, and also modeled after the French. The results, however, were very different, for the Arcadians failed to develop the scientific interests of the Royal Society, and, as its reforms began to take effect, sank gracefully into a pastoralizing decay toward the middle of the eighteenth century. The Arcadia nearly came to a stormy end long before that time, however. Gravina, who had drawn up the original rules of the Academy, and Crescembeni began a quarrel which split Arcadia in 1711-1712, and led Gravina and his friends to withdraw from the original group and to found their own society, claiming, however, the name "Arcadia". The bitterness of the antagonism eventually dragged the matter into the law courts, the Pope himself intervened, and Gravina finally was forced to call his "splinter" academy by another name, the Accademia dei QuiriniP· 20 21 22

Robertson, op. cit., p. 17. Isadore Carini, L'Arcadia dal 1690 al 1890 (Roma, 1891), pp. 46-47. Robertson, op. cit., pp. 31-32.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

31

As the Arcadia came to give at least an appearance of unity to the literary worlds of the Italian peninsula — an appearance which perhaps obscured the diversity of the many parts — it is not remarkable that so many of the Arcadians tackled the larger literary problems of the day, and especially the reform of the theatre. By the end of the seventeenth century, the Italian drama was dead, and the theatre dying, except for the non-literary (if not anti-literary) commedia deWarte, which had not yet been discovered by sophisticated critics. It was the learned Scipione Maffei of Verona who particularly stirred his compatriots to join his attempt to recreate a national drama, in collaboration with Luigi Riccoboni, a leading actor-manager. Their efforts produced little of note. The all-but-forgotten tragedies of Pier Jacopo Martelli (he wrote fourteen) had some success, especially the Ifigenia in Tauris (1710), but he is now remembered largely as a critic on the side of the Moderns. His opponent among the Ancients, Gravina, produced four tragedies in 1712, under the stimulus of the Riccoboni-Maffei seasons in Verona, but they are justly characterized by Robertson as "cold, academic productions of which no critic has a good word to say".23 Under the influence of his stay in England (1715-1718), Antonio Conti wrote the first of his four Roman tragedies, Il Cesare (1717P-1726?), modeled on Shakespeare and on Sheffield's reworking of Julius Caesar. Conti's biographer speaks of the "gran successo" of this play, but it must yield to the only truly important eighteenth century Italian tragedy before Alfieri, written for the Riccoboni company by Maffei himself, Mer ope (1713). Translated into French, English, Spanish, Russian, and even Hebrew and Serbian, it was imitated by Voltaire, and admired by Pope and Lessing.24 But Maffei, becoming immersed in archaeology and scholarly disputes, attempted no further theatrical work of any importance, and in 1716 Riccoboni and his actress-wife left to re-establish the Théâtre Italien in Paris, where Ibid., p. 32. Giuseppe Silvestri, Un europeo del Settecento, Scipione Maffei ( T r e viso, 1954), pp. 88-92. Lessing devoted fifteen issues of his Hamburgische Dramaturgie to a comparison of Maffei's and Voltaire's versions, and Maffei's comes out generally ahead. 23

24

32

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

he died in 1753. These, then, were the attempts to restore the glory of the Italian stage, but the literary tragedy made little headway, and comedy none, until Alfieri and Goldoni emerged in the middle of the century. Despite the appearance of unity, there was none, and in the theatre, as in all of Italian letters, the great revival had to wait for the growth of a unifying idea, that of national freedom, and the unification of the entire peninsula under a single government, to re-establish past glories. This brief account of the Italian drama, however, has left unmentioned the dominant theatrical form, and the poet who was considered the greatest Italian writer of his age, if not the greatest in Europe: the opera and Pietro Metastasio. By 1700 opera had become one of the dominant theatrical forms. From its beginnings among the Florentine academies at the end of the sixteenth century, and its spectacular success through Italy during the seventeenth century, it had spread over most of Europe from Lisbon to Warsaw within a hundred years.25 As European music tended to become Italian, except in France, so European opera was Italian — except in France, where under the Italian Lully it was metamorphosed into the opéra-ballet and the tragédie lyrique. What is important in the present context is the result of the enormous popularity of the form in Italy, for it was the success of the dramma in musica that effectively prevented any popular revival of a literary drama — indeed, of any theatre other than the commedia dell'arte. It was to the opera that both dramatic and lyric talent turned, and the most important dramatists were considered to be those who produced the best libretti. Although the writing of libretti was a task too often assigned to whatever hack versifier might be available, it also drew the finest poets for the important productions. The centers of the art were in the great cities, alternately Naples and Venice. But the place of highest honour in the operatic-literary world was not even in Italy, but in Vienna, at the court of the Emperor. The Austrian court was largely Italian in culture as late as the second half of the eighteenth century, with Italian as the polite language and 25

See the historical studies by Grout, Worsthorn, Kirkpatrick, Wellesz, and Yorke-Long in the bibliography.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

33

Italian music performed (and imitated) by Italian or Italiantrained musicians as the polite entertainment; 26 only the decorum was French. As late as the 1780s, the Viennese opera was almost exclusively Italian — vide the works of Calzabigi and Da Ponte, of Gluck, Mozart, Cimarosa, and Salieri written for it — despite the occasional efforts of Joseph II in favour of vernacular opera. This, then, was the tradition, and the symbol of it was Metastasio. Although the nature of the melodrama is to be discussed in the next chapter, and an account of Metastasio's education fits best in Chapter III, some suggestion should be given here of the fame of the poet, and the glory which he was considered to bring to Italian letters. It was he who seemed to combine the Arcadian ideal of a rebirth of classical literature, the dramatic reforms of Maffei, and the theoretical and ethical aims of Muratori. As the friend of princes, and successor to the erudite Apostolo Zeno as Cesarían poet, he dominated the Italian literarydramatic world, and in his libretti, cantatas, and odes, he proved perhaps the finest expression of Italian neo-classicism. Because of this, he was the most obvious target for the reaction which came late in the century, and for the even stronger Romantic reaction in the early years of the next century. Of his fame, Dr. Burney could write in his Memoirs of the Life and Writings of the Abate Metastasio, "the lovers of Italian Poetry, as well as vocal Music, (if I may judge of the feelings of others by my own) regard Metastasio as the primary source of their most exquisite delight in the union of those arts". 27 If Metastasio is not the paragon sketched by Burney ("his innocuous life and moral character . . . give a kind of dignity to innocent pleasures, and to humanity"), neither does he deserve the scorn lavished by Violet Paget ("Vernon Lee") in her Studies of the Eighteenth Century in Italy (1880), where he is little more than a selfish, parsimonious parasite, or (as she summed it up, apologetically, in her preface to the second edition in 1907) a "timid, sentimental

A reminder of this is the presence of the Italian Singer at the Marschallin's levee in Act I of Der Rosenkavalier (1911). 27 (London, 1796), I, iii. 28

34

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

egoist".28 In his own day, with his operas set to music by Hasse, Handel, or Porpora, and sung by Senesino, Caffarelli, or Farinelli, Cuzzoni or Faustina, before the fantastic settings of one of the Bibienas, Metastasio must have seemed the apotheosis of magnificence. T o the nineteenth century, however, he seemed intolerably stiff and contrived, with Porpora and Caffarelli a symbol of the ancien regime from the pages of Consuelo-, and it is only with the renewal of interest in the baroque that he has been seen in any proper perspective. Always admired for his lyric grace, only recently has the raison d'être of his dramaturgy become clear and meaningful again. Metastasio, then, was at once the acknowledged doyen of Italian poets and the leader of the Italian expatriate colonies by virtue of his genius and his position at the Imperial court. His was an age when every foreign city of importance, and especially those which boasted an opera company, had an Italian group, perhaps permanent, perhaps transient. Vienna, with its diplomats and merchants as well as poets and musicians, had undoubtedly the most important, but Paris — the European literary capital — sheltered a theatrical and intellectual colony, which at times included not only Riccoboni and his players, or visiting savants like Conti or Maffei, but eventually Goldoni himself, from 1762 until his death in 1792. Spain had a flourishing Italian musical colony, especially under Metastasio's "caro fratello" Farinelli, which included Domenico Scarlatti. Portugal, like the German courts, usually had a resident composer and musicians, and imported famous singers for particular occasions, as did the court at St. Petersburg. But after Vienna, and ranking with Paris, the most important center for Italians abroad was London. The unity of the group of Italians to be found in London during the earlier eighteenth century is difficult to define. I should like to concentrate, therefore, on what I consider the important core of this Italian invasion, that small circle which retained a national identity within the larger world of London, and which maintained close personal and literary relations with Italy and with its literary circles. Because from 1715 until 1744 28

P. xix.

THE ITALIAN TRADITION

35

the unchanging center of the group was found in Paolo Rolli, this study will deal primarily with the years which mark his residence in England. Rolli was a pupil of Gravina, and the fellow-student of Metastasio; his close friend Riva was a friend and correspondent of both Muratori and Metastasio; he knew Conti when he first came to England, and was there when Maffei came on a short visit. For thirty years he represented the Italian literary tradition in England, teaching, writing, translating, and editing. Whatever his other activities, he remained best known there for his connection with the Italian opera as poet and general adviser. Therefore, before turning to Rolli, the opera — the best-known manifestation of Italian culture and most profitable of exports — should be examined in detail, in an effort to determine the influence of this typically Italian manifestation on the English consciousness, in a brief history of the early years of the Italian opera in England.

II T H E ITALIAN OPERA IN E N G L A N D

Generally speaking, opera is an anomaly. As a combination of music and drama with the other arts of theatrical display — the dance and stage design in particular — it partakes of the essential nature of no one of these, but forms rather a new synthesis. Even more than a play, it exists only in performance, a combination or synchronization of voices and instruments. Even at its simplest, it is a highly conventionalized art form, so that its fundamental stylization far surpasses that even of the poetic drama, and approaches that of the dance. Although the final judgment will be musical, the success of an opera is also based to a considerable degree on its relation to the dramatic conventions and theories of the age, and in every age opera — however scorned — has drawn sustenance from the theatre, transmuted by the sensibility of the composer. Thus the relation between the baroque opera and the plays of Corneille and Racine, between Mozart and Beaumarchais, Verdi and Hugo or Dumas, Debussy and Maeterlinck, Berg and Buechner or Wedekind, becomes a part of the complex sensibility by which common understanding of dramatic convention and meaning is transmuted into musical substance. Therefore it is instructive to examine the opera of any age or notion where it has flourished for what it reveals in the history of the taste of that time or place. The opera is popular at any given moment for several reasons, partly social and partly aesthetic. Over the centuries, opera has been the plaything of courts and "society" because it is expensive. It encourages an enormous amount of "conspicuous waste" through the elements

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

37

of display, and the enormous cost of good singers and musicians. Because of its growth in courts, it has carried social prestige for its supporters, and its very costliness is a sign of their wealth and generosity. Most opera houses even today are as well arranged for the display of the patrons as of the performers — the Metropolitan, Covent Garden, the Vienna Staatsoper, the Paris Opéra, or the great Italian houses. But opera also appeals to a musical audience which may or may not be interchangeable with the social audience. These are the people who delight in the music or in the voices, or in the combination. Some seek sheer beauty of tone from singers, while others will sacrifice something of this for a musical-dramatic intensity; some insist upon rigid standards of musicianship, while others look only for display. This part of the audience may include princes (like Frederick the Great) or footmen (like Joseph Andrews), but this is the audience which is necessary for the artistic success of a season, and which eventually measures the accomplishment of any given composer or work over a period of time. These prelimaries may seem unnecessary for remarks on the opera in England during the first half of the eighteeenth century, but they suggest the reasons for both its success and its failure. The initial success of the opera was because of the exotic element, especially of the full-blown Italian music and, eventually, the superiority of its performers over any that English stages had known before. The development of the opera came as a result of the social prestige of supporting the costly establishment, but this developed from the genuine love for music of the Hanoverian royal family and of many in both the nobility and gentry. The opera eventually failed as a result of too great competition, which developed until there was no more exotic quality, no surprise value, and the wealthy "social" supporters revolted against the enormous expense in the face of declining public support. The purely musical public has seldom been large enough to support the financial burdens without the aid of an Otto Kahn or a Lady Cunard, and, failing such enlightened support, in the 1740s the London opera became the plaything of wealthy amateurs. Without the direction of a musician of

38

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

the stature of Handel, or even of Porpora, the opera sank into a respectable mediocrity, drawing the best singers and composers only for brief visits, and even then seldom using them to the limits of their ability. The symbol of this undoubtedly becomes the Ober on of Weber, composed for Co vent Garden in 1826, a gigantic Singspiel with its moments of fine music quite buried under a typically English pantomine plot. This was the same attitude which rendered unworkable the Dryden-Purcell operas of the late seventeenth century, a catering to the least satisfactory elements of public taste. Since the days of Handel, English opera has tended to pursue its public, not to lead it, and the result — however spectacular the performances may have been at times — has been a creative void. If at times the present study appears to be as much concerned with pointing out matters that are omitted as with those included, it is because there seems little reason to repeat material which is familiar or easily available elsewhere. The history of opera in the early eighteenth century might seem to fit into one or both of these categories, but there is a great deal which has yet to be treated adequately. If the familiar outline of the history of the Handelian opera will be treated lightly, then, it is in order to concentrate on certain interpretive details and less familiar moments which will perhaps illuminate better the matter at hand. In most of eighteenth century Europe outside Italy, the opera was a court function, and even in Italy there was a flourishing public opera only in Venice and in Rome. Thus in the Austrian and German courts, the problem of expense was only incidental, as the singers, composers, and instrumentalists were on the court pay-rolls. In Germany only Hamburg had a public opera, on the model of Venice, and this was also the only German city where the opera was sung in the vernacular, although the works were Italian in structure. It is important to remember that the English theatres, like those in Venice and Hamburg, were public, supported by their receipts and not by royal susidy, and that the opera could pay its way only when it had public support. Indeed, in view of the heavy expenses, it could not pay its own way even then, so that some subscription arrangement and

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

39

occasional court bounty were necessary in addition. George II, for example, subscribed £ 1000 annually to the opera, even during its most prosperous days. Opera (like chamber music on the opposite extreme) almost never pays for itself, and this enormous cost may have been one reason for the delay in its introduction into England. But before the history of the Italian opera in England is examined, something should be said about the international style of reform-baroque opera, for its conventions are now unfamiliar and too often misunderstood. Today the repertoire seldom reaches further back than Mozart or those slightly earlier operas of Gluck, reform operas themselves, that completed the transition from the reform-baroque style to the classic buffa style of Mozart. But from the end of the seventeenth century to about 1765, the European musical scene outside of France had been dominated by the opera seria, the reform in opera as established around 1700 by Apostolo Zeno and twenty-five years later revitalized by Metastasio. These matters of baroque aesthetics are worth emphasizing, since even so perceptive a writer as Winton Dean misrepresents the emotional — dramatic structure of the opera. T h e popular pre-reform Venetian-style opera of the midseventeenth century, as Edward J . Dent succinctly puts the matter, was overcrowded with both incidents and characters; its arias were numerous and mostly short; the eighteenth-century type established by Zeno and perfected by Metastasio had fewer incidents, fewer characters, and fewer songs, and the result was that the separte songs all became much longer, and entirely new musical forms were invented for them. This is the period of the extended da capo aria, the horror of modern audiences and the delight of our ancestors. 1 T h e subjects of the opera seria were largely classic and heroic, and even the simplified action more involved than essentially dramatic. T h e cast of characters was standardized by the Edward J. Dent, "The Operas", in Handel, A Symposium, ed. Gerald Abraham, (London, 1954), p. 14. 1

40

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

make-up of the usual company, as operas were written for particular occasions and companies, often to revisions of preexisting libretti. The villain was usually sung by a bass, old men by tenors, and the parts of the hero and "second man" by castrati (male sopranos or altos who are said to have developed the power of the normal male voice, while retaining the sweetness and range of the unchanged treble). It is, of course, the absence of the castrati that prevents the revival of baroque opera as it was heard in the days of its glory. The reform-baroque opera moved largely on two levels of discourse. T h e first was secco (or "dry") recitative, in which all of the action of the opera was carried on. It was sung at the rhythm and general pitches of speech, and was accompanied only by the continuo or harpsichord. The second level was the aria, almost invariably a da capo structure, in which the opening movement of the aria is followed by a second, contrasting movement, after which the first section is repeated. The aria might be rendered more dramatic if not only the music but the words — the intent — of the middle section also contrasted with those of the opening, but the inevitable da capo repetition rendered the form essentially static. As a matter of course the singer extemporized ornaments as he performed, and these were expected to be not only different in the repetition, but more elaborate. In usual practice, each scene ended with an aria by one of the characters, who then left the stage, and another scene followed, like the first in recitative, and which was in turn ended by an aria, and so on. Occasionally there were two arias in a row, but not often. Duets were infrequent, and differed from arias only in that two people divided the vocal line. There did exist, however, a third level of discourse, which partook of both the recitative and the aria, the formal accompanied recitative. Here the recitative became slower and musically more varied, approaching melody; it was accompanied by the orchestra and not just the continuo, for a heightened emotional-dramatic effect, but was neither so formal as the aria proper, nor so formless as the recitativo secco.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

41

What is too frequently misunderstood about the structure of the reform-baroque opera is its rationale, for the rigidity of structure was neither accidental nor meaningless. The dramatic intent was not to develop or explore an action in the modern fashion, to bring it to its inevitable consequences. Rather, the aim was to break a pregnant situation into the separate emotional states which it contained, as a prism refracts a ray of light, and to explore these individually. It was in order to break down as many states as possible that the action began near to the climax, as in the Greek drama, so that the point of highest tension would not be long delayed, and might be probed more thoroughly. This is also the technique of the French classic drama, and especially of Racine, upon whom Zeno and particularly Metastasio based their dramatic method, with such success that Voltaire wrote of Metastasio that he was "worthy of Corneille, when Corneille is not declamatory, and of Racine, when Racine is not Insipid". The emphasis, then, is clearly not upon action, but upon the emotional states, the "affects" into which it may be broken. The unit is not the act, but the individual scene, and the unity of the work as a whole is less important than the effect of the scenes themselves. In Racine the expression of a particular "affect", or state of sensibility, rose out of the scene as a whole, without any necessary epigrammatic summary at the end. In the opera, a given sensibility was isolated in the recitative, but when it had been separated, it was explored, or crystallized, in the aria. As one critic put it, "the recitative loads the gun, the aria fires it". 2 The structure, then, was derived from the French neoclassic models; each scene was the examination of a sensibility, culminating in an aria, often a soliloquy, after which the singer left the stage, in order to emphasize the individuality of that scene, and to set off both scene and aria as formal entities now completed. Of course as a device for getting applause, the exit has never been overlooked by virtuoso performers, but here the principal reason was aesthetic, the necessary completion of the design. Willi Fleming, quoted in Donald J. Grout, A Short History of Opera (New York, 1947), p. 184, n. 12.

2

42

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Further, the individual characters were not introduced as given, known quantities from the beginning of the opera, but rather were built up in separate layers by the effect of each aria, of each different sensibility. Only at the end of the opera was a given character complete, the synthesis of the individual sensibilities examined in the arias. Much more than in the French drama, the character develops synthetically, one aspect at a time, rather than organically. As a result, such a favorite Handelian character as the managing matriarch is far less real than Racine's Phaedra, from whom the race descends, and operatic characters in general are more abstract, less credible and complete than their non-singing counterparts. Finally, it might be observed that the additive method is architectural rather than organic. A modern opera or play is like an enormous painting in which every detail has its place, while the baroque opera is like a magnificently designed hall of statues, each of which is separate, admirable in itself, but gaining greatly from the effect of the whole. The simplicity of structure is classic, but its regularity —like that of all classic art — tends to monotony unless handled by a master, as the pentameter couplet is managed by Pope, or the aria-scene relationship by Handel. In dealing with this highly stylized art form, however, Handel and the other directors of the London operas were faced with linguistic and dramatic problems unknown in Italy. The differences may best be seen in a letter written in 1725 to Muratori by Giuseppe Riva, the commercial representative of the Duke of Modena in London: The operas which are given in England, however fine as music, and however well sung, are nevertheless ruined by their poetry. Our friend Rolli, who when the present Academy was formed, was commissioned to write the librettos, began by producing two very good ones, but he then quarreled with the directors, and they then took into their employment a certain Haym, a Roman 'cellist, [who has] . . . for the last three years employed himself in adapting a number of old librettos for the use of the composers who write operas for the English stage, making worse what was bad before . . . in England people like very few recitatives, thirty arias and one duet at least, distributed over the

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

43

three acts. The subject must be simple, tender, and heroic — Roman, Greek, or possibly Persian, but never Gothic or Lombard. For this year, and for the next two, there must be two equal parts for Cuzzoni and Faustina. Senesino takes the principal male r o l e . . . If the Duchess of Marlborough, who gives ,£500 a year to Bononcini, will allow him to give the Academy an opera, it will be Andromaca, which is almost a translation of Racine's drama, omitting the death of Pyrrhus, cleverly turned into an opera libretto. 3 There are several points that should be developed from this revealing letter, Riva's preference for Rolli over Haym aside: the reason for the differences between the Italian and the English practice; the subjects of the operas; the happy ending; and finally the influence of the French drama, and its results.4 If Riva failed to mention why the English demanded more music and less drama than the Italians, the reason was certainly understood at the time. The problem was at once theatrical and linguistic. In Italy, where the opera was as much a theatrical performance as a musical one, it was often the only form of drama available. Although all of the recitative and many of the arias might be lost in the din of a Carnival audience,5 at least that audience could know what it was missing, for the work was written in its own tongue. Even in Vienna and the larger German courts, Italian was widely spoken as the polite language. In London, which had a flourishing theatre and theatrical tradition, Italian was not generally spoken, so that the emphasis in the opera was thrown much more upon the music and on musical Richard A. Streatfield, "Handel, Rolli, and the Italian Opera in London in the Eighteenth Century", Musical Quarterly, III (1917), p. 433. The Italian original is printed in Ercole Sola, "Curiosità storico-artistico-letterarie trasse del carteggio dell' inviato estense Giuseppe Riva con Ludovico Antonio Muratori", Atti e memorie della R. Deputazioni di Storia Patria per le province modense e parmend, Ser. III, vol. IV, pp. 296-297. 4 This adaptation of Racine, the Bononcini-Haym Astianatte of 1727, was not only a succès de scandale, for at the last performance Faustina and Cuzzoni engaged in their celebrated on-stage hairpulling session parodied in the Polly-Lucy scenes of The Beggar's Opera. 5 This would not have been the case at a premiere, but travellers report it to have been true of all subsequent performances. s

44

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

display in the performances.6 The opera, then, was sung in a language unknown to most of the audience, which had to follow the action with a translation. Quite naturally this audience became bored with the extended and melodically uninteresting recitativo secco, so that the scenes were cut to at least half of the corresponding length in a libretto intended for Vienna, Venice, or Naples. As a result of this cutting, the action is greatly foreshortened dramatically, as most of the motivation is removed, leaving only its results. In the individual scenes, most of the psychological subtlety is cut, enforcing a less exact delineation of the "sensibility" of the scene. More scenes and more arias become necessary, making for a more rapid pace, but with a corresponding musical gain. The results, then, are of mixed quality: less psychological exploration and development, but more music. This brought the opera away from the pure Zeno-Metastasian ideal, in the direction of the greater activity of the English stage, but not close enough to endear it to the English theatrical taste. It was the dramatic instinct of Handel which showed the way to turn these enforced short scenes to advantage. Wherever opportunity permitted, he molded the scene as a dramatic unit, effecting a more delicate balance between recitative and aria, which became of more nearly equal importance in his time scheme. The long scenes, building slowly but inevitably toward the point of repose which crystallized the sensibility of the scene, were cut to a more nervous movement in which the moment of repose becomes more a part of the dramatic effect, and less its explanation. It is more dramatic and less analytic, thus β Pope comments on this changing emphasis as a part of the progression from the drama to opera to pantomime, in the "Imitation of Horace", " T o Augustus": What dear delight to Britons Farce affords! Farce once the taste of Mobs, but now of Lords; (For Taste, eternal wanderer, now flies From heads to ears, and now from ears to eyes.) (11. 310-313) Warburton's note (1751) emphasizes that the progress in the last line is "From Plays to Operas, and from operas to Pantomimes". The Poems of Alexander Pope (Twickenham Edition), II, ed. John Butt (London, 1953), p. 221.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

45

moving in the direction of English taste. Accompanied recitative was developed with particular effect, permitting a greater fluidity of movement between levels of discourse. Thus in Handel's Giulio Cesare — where Haym's libretto deals with essentially the same action as Shaw's Caesar and Cleopatra — the third unit of the first act opens with a highly expressive accompanied recitative in which Caesar addresses the murdered Pompey, with whose head he has just been presented. This is accompanied by sustained strings, and moves easily into a brief secco recitative, during which Caesar sees Cleopatra for the first time. In a charming aria he praises her beauty, and leaves. The scene ends as Cleopatra, in a recitative and aria, delights in her easy conquest of the great general. Within the relatively brief compass of this scene, the plot has been advanced by the meeting of the famous lovers, but even more important, the characterization has been advanced. Caesar has been examined in two contrasting moods — the elegiac and the amorous — as expressed through two contrasting musical forms, the continually unfolding recitative and the static aria da capo, a developing movement and a point of repose. Further, Cleopatra has given voice to an effect as different from the questioning of her aria in the preceding scene as from the allegro optimism of her aria in the one following, which together present three different views of the character toward the final synthesis. Although Riva comments that the subject must be "Roman, Greek or possibly Persian", rather than "Gothic or Lombard" (i.e. mediaeval and northern) in setting, it is more his other dictum which characterizes the subjects of the London operas, "simple, tender, heroic". Pseudo-historical situations notwithstanding, the setting rarely mattered, for it was the sensibility that was essential, although the subjects were generally classical, or turned classical. Thus Matteo Noris' old libretto Alfonso Primo, about the twelfth century first king of Portugal, was easily turned into Handel's Persian Sosarme by a stroke of the pen. There were, however, two particular areas of exception to Riva's generalization, which emphasized respectively the tender and heroic, and the tender and simple. The first of these involved

46

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

the operas based on Tasso and Ariosto, in which the concept of "sensibility" is combined with a strong element of theatrical spectacle, suggesting an influence of the French opera, where the ballet and elaborate designs were as important as the music. In Handel, for example, Rinaldo (1711), Orlando (1733), Ariodante, and Alcina (both 1735) are based upon episodes from Ariosto. The other exception to the classical pattern also fits the neo-classic forms, for as classical subjects are formed on the tragedy and the heroic subjects on the epic, the third type is the pastoral,7 after the Aminta of Tasso and Guarini's II Pastor Fido (the source of Handel's second London opera in 1712). The revealing point is the manner in which both the general rule and the exceptions conform to the neo-classic genre, especially as developed by the reformers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The division by Renaissance genre lends particular interest to Riva's comment on the neo-classic turn of the libretti, through the adaptation of Racine for the operatic stage, although the French neo-classic reforms had never succeeded in the English theatre. This adaptation was in line with Metastasian reform, and the influence of Metastasio became increasingly strong in the 1730s, especially under the Opera of the Nobility. It proved, however, to be a style basically inimical to general English taste, however acceptable it may have been to such English virtuosi as Newcastle, Sheffield, or the young Earl of Middlesex. This neo-classic influence was felt not only in the construction of the individual scene, but in the introduction of the Unities and of a more symmetrical plot structure. The action, for example, was generally continuous, of limited duration (an occasional battle aside), and held to a single palace or city, while all violence was reported from off-stage. T h e obligatory happy ending which Riva mentions, however, tended to dissipate any tragic intensity thus developed, leaving at best tragi-comedy, but usuThe pastoral had already enjoyed some vogue in the English style. See Allardyce Nicoli, A History of English Drama, 1660-1900 (Cambridge, 1952-1959), II, pp. 223-225; also Jeanette Marks, English Pastoral Drama (London, 1908), -passim. 7

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

47

ally sheer melodrama. But the neo-classic reforms had already been seriously questioned by English audiences and critics from their introduction by Dryden and other Restoration dramatists under the influence of French criticism and practice, a questioning of such a nature and of such thoroughness that it foreshadowed the failure of any form that attempted to reintroduce them, even under the guise of Italian opera. Less neo-Aristotelean, perhaps, but equally French and Metastasian was the obligatory love interest, which even Addison had felt compelled to introduce so unsuitably into Cato. It is far less a blemish in Phèdre than in Cato, which it goes far toward rendering unperformable, but even the love between Hippolyte and Aricie is unconvincing. Equally neo-classic was the insistence upon a symmetrical structure, often combined with the love plot through pairs of lovers in similar situations, a device carried close to absurdity in Metastasio's La Clemenza di Tito. In the earlier operas such doubling had been rare, but during the 1720s it increased under the critical influence of the Italian reforms and the practical necessity of finding equal parts for the rival prime donne Cuzzoni and Faustina. In the 1730s, doubling became even more symptomatic of the neo-classic influence. Although it had been used in English as early as Shakespeare — The Comedy of Errors, of course, derives the idea from Plautus — it was first exploited systematically by Dryden. For example, in the Dryden — D'avenant rewriting of The Tempest (1667), Miranda is given a sister, Dorinda, who in turn is given as mate Hippolito, "one that never saw Woman", to balance the girls "that never saw Man". 8 T w o works might be used to show this use of doubling as a neo-classic "wedge", the first in 1724, when most of the symmetry was still being cut out of the operas in the process of adaptation, and the second in 1737, when the opera was making a last bid for support. In the Ariosti-Haym Coriolano of 1724, Coriolanus is betrothed to Volumnia (Veturia is his mother in this version), while his confidant, the Volcian 8

Dryden, of course, gave D'avenant the credit for this particular idea (in the Preface), but he himself uses doubling as a structural device in such a play as Marriage a-la-Mode (1672).

48

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

general Azzio Tullo (Shakespeare's Aufidius!), loves Coriolanus' sister Claudia. T h e plot is complicated by the love of the vile tribune Sicinius for Volumnia, and the action is melodramatic rather than Plutarchan, while the ending is the regulation happy one. As Rolli remarks in his preface to a libretto about the family life of Constantine the Great (Crispo, 1722). "The altering of the true history may be permitted by the License already granted to Dramatic Poetry." Doubling as a structural principle was dear to Rolli, and perhaps the most striking example is in his ill-fated adaptation of Milton's Comus as Sabrina (1737). T h e Lady, Grandalma (or Great Soul), is not only given a sister, Belcore (Beautiful Heart), but the two brothers, Brunalto and Crindoro, become their lovers. The action moves not unlike that of A Midsummer Night's Dream, complicated by Comaspes (Comus) and resolved by the always classical Sabrina. Although most of the moralizing went overboard with Milton, the work failed signally. These last examples begin to answer the question of why the Italian opera failed in London, despite the remarkable quality of so many of the operas and performers. Thirty years earlier the English opera had failed because of inadequate composers and a general failure to understand the problems of the drama for music, as evidenced by Addison's failure in trying to combine the Venetian style and English taste in Rosamund. The Italian opera collapsed, in large part, from a failure to understand the London public, and died of a surfeit of neo-classic virtues. The product of a baroque aesthetic, developed as a means of dynastic glorification in sophisticated courts, it failed with the more liberal English audience, which was bored and mystified by ritual. As part of a program for the re-introduction of neoclassic principles, it was doomed to failure. W h e n the novelty of the opera and the glamour of the exotic singers faded over the years, so that even Farinelli sang (in Sabrina) to a house of barely £35, the financial drain became excessive, and the fantastic structure of the London opera collapsed. This was more, however, than a mere gesture of ennui by the novelty-hungry London public; it can be seen, rather, as another, and perhaps

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

49

decisive, rejection of the principles of neo-classic art in favor of the greater looseness of the English style —an assertion of English provincialism over Continental sophistication. Despite the expense and elaborateness of operatic production, it is surprising that opera was never properly established among the costly spectacles on the Restoration stage. Music was frequently utilized in plays in the form of songs, choruses, or incidental music, but it was always an addition, and never an essential part. In its Italian (and modern) usage, "opera" came to mean drama articulated through music. On the Restoration stage, "opera" meant a spectacular production including songs, dances, and incidental music, but in which the primary action was carried by actors who spoke their parts — hence the "operatic" Tempest or Macbeth. This genre, which now might be called a "musical", was descended from the masque tradition and its French equivalent, the ballets-de-cour, in which much the same relation held between drama, song, and dance. As the first operas developed in Florence through the introduction of recitative in the drama, so the first suggestion of opera to be found in England came with the recitative "after the Italian manner" in Jonson's masque Lovers Made Men (1617).9 Such experiments were little followed, however, until 1656, when D'avenant introduced the stilo recitative in The First Days Entertainment at Rutland House and The Siege of Rhodes,19 but it seems to have been used more as a way of evading the rules against plays than as an end in itself. This is clear from the way that it was dropped after 1660,11 although D'avenant did • "the whole Maske was sung (after the Italian manner) Stylo recitativo by Master Nicholas Lanier, who ordered and made both the scenes and the Musicke". Ben Johnson, ed. C. H. Hereford, Percy and Evelyn Simpson (Oxford, 1925-1952), VII, p. 454. 10 The First Days Entertainment at Rutland House. By Declamations and Musick: after the Manner of the Ancients and The Siege of Rhodes Made a Representation by the Art of Prospective in Scenes and the Story Sung in Recitative Musick. See Arthur H. Nethercot, Sir William D'avenant, Poet Laureate and Playwright Manager (Chicago, 1938), pp. 295-336, esp. 304 ff. 11 Nicoli, op. cit., II, pp. 429-430.

50

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

revive The Cruelty of the Spaniards in Peru (1658) and The History of Sr Francis Drake (1658-9?) — his subsequent musicaldramatic productions under the Commonwealth — as parts of The Playhouse to the Let (1661), in what is more-or-less their original form. In the first act of that amusing olla podrida, the Player and Musician discuss the nature and purpose of stilo recitative: Mus. I wou'd have introduc'd Heroique story In Stilo Recitative. Play. In Stilo Recitative? 'tis well; I understand you, sir. But do you think that natural? Mus. Because 'tis not in custom, You therefore think, sir, it is out of Nature? Play. It seems so, sir, to me, unless you would Metamorphose men into Birds . . . Mus. Recitative Musick is not compos'd Of matter so familiar, as may serve For every low occasion of discourse. In Tragedy, the language of the Stage Is rais'd above the common dialect; Our passions rising with the height of Verse; And Vocal Musick adds new wings to all The flights of Poetry. 12 But even D'avenant's poetry seems to have been considered above such aids, for when The Second Part of the Siege of Rhodes (1659) was revived (also 1661), apparently the recitatives were dropped, while the incidental music was retained.13 When there was no need for the stilo recitative as a disguise or stop-gap, it disappeared. If it had any influence on the "operatic" Tempest or Macbeth, there are no traces of it, except in the legitimately musical portions —the songs, the anti-masque of devils, and the masque in honour of the lovers in the former, 14 and in the witches' scenes of the latter. 12 The Works of Sir William D'avenant Κ*· Consisting of Those "which •were formerly printed, and Those which he design'd for the Press (London, 1673), p. 72 (pt. 2). 13 Nethercot, op. cit., pp. 335-336, 372. 14 The anti-masque and masque are found in the Shadwell version (1674).

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

51

The strongest musical influence on the Restoration stage was not Italian, but French. This would be expected from the taste acquired by Royalist exiles in France during the Commonwealth, a time when the music at the French court was coming under the direction of Lully. Charles' twenty-four violins were in imitation of the celebrated violons du roi, and the Frenchman Grabu was preferred as composer over his English peers or superiors. His opera Ariane, ou Le Mariage de Bacchus, to a text by Perrin, was performed in French at Drury Lane (March 1674), the only known production of a French opera during the Restoration. It is relevant here to note that The Siege of Rhodes, Sir Francis Drake, and The Cruelty of the Spaniards are all divided into "entries" in the manner of the French ballet, rather than into acts and scenes. T h e Italian opera seems to have introduced in the early 1670s. On 5 January 1674 (NS) 15 Evelyn wrote, "I saw an Italian Opera in musique, the first that had bin in England of this kind." What opera he saw, he does not say, and scholars are still trying to decide. It could have been a rehearsal of Ariane,™ but it does not seem likely that the knowledgeable Evelyn would call a French opera "Italian", although he may have meant opera in the Italian manner, as different from the English style. It might have been an Italian performance arranged for Mary of Modena, then Duchess of York, 17 who seems to have had a great love of music — in 1687, when she was queen, her brother, Francesco d'Este, sent the celebrated castrato Siface to entertain her.18 More certain is the Italian influence on Thomas Shad well's Psyche (February 1675), his successful follow-up of the operatic Tempest of the preceding year. 19 W i t h elaborate scenes and 15

The Diary of John Evelyn, ed. E. S. de Beer (Oxford, 1955), IV, p. 30. See Alfred Loewenberg, Annals of Opera, 1597-1940 (Geneva, 1955), I, col. 55, 57-58. 17 Evelyn, Diary, op. cit., IV, p. 30, n. 1. 18 Angus Heriot, The Castrati in Opera (London, 1956), pp. 131-132. 19 The Complete Works of Thomas Shadwell, ed. Montague Summers (London, 1927), II, p. 275. If the ingenious argument for Downes' date of February 1673 (OS) given by Dennis Arundel is correct, then Evelyn may have seen a rehearsal of Psyche in January. See Arundel, The Critic at the Opera (London, 1957), pp. 126-127, n. 2. 18

52

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

dances by the Frenchman St. André, the vocal music for Psyche was composed by Matthew Locke and the purely instrumental portions by the Italian G. B. Draghi, although the rationale for this division is not clear. The work was on the usual English pattern, with the principal characters as speaking, not singing, parts, but the Italian influence is clear from Locke's preface to the score, The English Opera; or the Vocal Mustek in Psyche, with the Instrumental therein intermix1 d... By Matthew Lock [sic], Composer in Ordinary to His Majesty, and Organist to the Queen (London, 1675). Here he defends his omission of recitative while laying claim to the name opera: And therefore it [Psyche] may justly wear the Title, though all the Tragedy be not in Musick; for the Author prudently consider'd, that though Italy was, and is, the great Academy of the World of that Science and way of Entertainment, England is not: and therefore mixt it with interlocutions, as more proper to our Genius.20 The relation between music and drama seems even more tenuous in Charles D'avenant's Circe (1677) .21 In Psyche the singers are at least permitted as Gods, particularly Venus, along with Mars, Pluto, Proserpine, and Apollo, if not Jupiter, the deus-exmachina. In D'avenant's "tragedy",22 the music is all "incidental", songs, choruses, and two brief masque-like sequences, and John Banister, the composer, is not even mentioned in the libretto. For the son of Sir William, the "operatic" form may have seemed natural enough, but there is no sign of the stilo recitativo and little of his father's vigour, and it may have been for the father's sake that the prologue and epilogue were provided by Dryden and the Earl of Rochester. The closest that Dryden himself ever came to an opera was in the ill-fated Albion and Albanius of 1685, set by Grabu. But this allegorical glorification of the Stuarts is largely in the masque tradition, and avoids the problem of the dramma in musica by Fol. A3 2 . Circe, A Tragedy ...By Charles D'Avenant, LL.D. (London, 1677). The story is that of Iphigenia in Tauris. 22 Unlike Psyche, Circe ends most unhappily, with five corpses. 20 21

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

53

having virtually no drama —or plot —at all. It was originally designed as a prologue to his other big musico-dramatic work, King Arthur (1691), 23 with music by Henry Purcell. In typically English fashion, Dryden insisted upon designing the work so that no major character sings, as part of that separation between drama and music which has always dogged the English musical stage. This is rather surprising, in view of Dryden's definition

of opera in the Preface to Albion and Albanius: An Opera is a poetical tale or fiction, represented by vocal and instrumental musick, adorned with scenes, machines, and dancing. The supposed persons of this musical drama are generally supernatural, as gods, and goddesses, and h e r o e s . . . The subject, therefore, being extended beyond the limits of human nature, admits of that sort of marvellous and surprising conduct, which is rejected in other plays.24 But instead of acting upon the first part of this definition, and allowing the music a place in the articulation of the drama, in practice Dryden demonstrates that his interest lay in using music and dance only as elements of a spectacular and fantastic structure, the dramatic opera. There are some superb songs and choruses (on the French model) in King Arthur, but they do not add up to an opera. Neither do Purcell's settings of Restoration-Shakespeare, The Fairy Queen (1692), after A Mid-

summer Night's Dream, and The Tempest: or The Enchanted Island (1695), adapted from Shadwell's version. The dramatic operas, then, utilized music more as another element in the spectacle than as a legitimate means of articulating the drama. Only in a few places is the dramatic use of music even approached — as in the Frost Scene in King Arthur — and even these are never ones which would require the principal actors to sing. Indeed, the only true operas written in England during the seventeenth century were two short "chamberoperas" by Purcell and John Blow, but neither of them intended for the public stage. Blow's Venus and Adonis (date unknown, Charles de Saint-Évremond, Miscellanea: Edmund Malone (London, 1800), II, p. 204. 24 Ibid., II, pp. 152-153. 23

or

Various

Discourses...

54

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

c. 1680-1685) was written for presentation by Moll Davies and her daughter, Lady Mary Tudor, before the child's father, Charles II. Purcell's masterpiece, Dido and Aeneas (1689-1690?), to a text by Nahum Tate, was intended for production by the ladies of Josias Priest's boarding school at Chelsea. Each is a three-act work, requiring less than an hour to perform, but in both the action and the meaning of that action are carried by the music, and neither contains spoken dialogue. The last scene of Dido, in particular, is a flawless musical-dramatic entity, moving inevitably to the departure of Aeneas and the death of Dido. And this is not only the dramatic climax, as expected, but the musical fulfillment as well, leading to Dido's majestic recitative ( " T h y hand, Belinda") and Lament ("When I am laid in earth"). At such a moment, whatever weaknesses are to be found in the libretto no longer matter, for everything is swept into the music. It is therefore noteworthy, and ironic, that information concerning the performances of both Venus and Adonis and Dido and Aeneas is so limited that it is impossible even to date either exactly, and no details of performance are recorded.25 The best statement of the attitude held by the best critical minds toward the opera at this time is probably that of the mercurial Saint-Évremond. In his essay on operas, he justified the English semi-opera style, objecting to everything being sung, as "so much against nature, that my Imagination is offended with it". He suggests limiting music to "Vows, Prayers, and Praises, and generally every thing relating to the service of the Gods... Tender and dolorous Passions are naturally expressed in a sort of singing". In general, the opera is pleasing to the senses, but soporific to the mind. The decor, dances, and machines are pleasing while they surprise, but fail to content the intelligence. The literary, therefore, should always be supreme over the musical: The Mustek should be made rather for the Verse, than the Verse for the Mustek·, it belongs to the Musician to follow the Poets Order; from which course only Baptist [Jean-Baptist Lully], in Edward J. Dent, Foundations of English Opera (Cambridge, 1928), pp. 172, 176-177. Loewenberg, op. cit., I, col. 75-76, 85-86.

25

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

55

my Opinion, ought to be exempt, for his understanding of the Passions better and sinking further into Mens Hearts than the Authors themselves.26 Here Saint-Évremond has raised one of the central questions of serious operatic criticism, and the one which was to underlie the operatic reforms of Zeno and Metastasio, Gluck and Calzabigi, and Wagner: the question of the relation between poetry and music in the opera. Most literary men have followed SaintÉvremond, while most musicians have followed Lully. But the logical conclusion which the critic derived from this stand is hardly one which will draw assent from either the musical or the general educated public if they consider (within a hundred years) the operatic productions of Purcell, Handel, Gluck, and Mozart: "A Foppery beset with Mustek, Dances, Machines and Scenes is a magnificent Foppery, yet still its a Foppery : It's a pitiful mean thing under glorious outsides, which I look upon with much unwillingness.''''21 Following the course established critically by Saint-Évremond, although not necessarily under his influence, the English musical stage went its logical, but aesthetically unsatisfactory, way. Saint-Évremond's essay was published in Ferrand Spence's translation (which is quoted above) in 1686, the year following Albion and Albanius, and the next decade saw King Arthur, The Fairy Queen, and The Tempest on the public stage, and Dido and Aeneas performed in obscurity. Therefore one is not surprised to see the success of opera in the Italian fashion, nor alarmed when it sweeps the "logical" native product from the stage, with the production, in English, of Arsinoe. The success of Arsinoe on 16 January 1705 marks the dividing line between the early effort toward opera, based principally on French models, and the Italian opera itself. This was no glorified musical comedy or play with music, nor was it a masque or even a chamber opera. With a text adapted from the Italian of 26

Charles de Saint-Évremond, Miscellanea: or Various Discourses... Written Originally by the Sieur de Saint Evremond, and triade English by Ferrand Spenser (London, 1686), pp. 49-50. 27 Ibid., p. 44.

56

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Stanzani by Motteux, and the music arranged after the Italian style by Thomas Clayton, assisted by Charles Dieupart and Niccolò Haym, this was a taste of the real Italian product. The singers in this enterprise were all English, including the popular Catherine Tofts, and Burney comments that they "had not only all the absurdities laid to the charge of operas in general to answer for, but at once laboured under bad poetry, bad Music, and total inexperience".28 He further sums up the case for and against Arsinoe: the English must have hungered and thirsted extremely after dramatic Music at this time, to be attracted and amused by such trash. It is scarcely credible, that in the course of the first year this miserable performance, which neither deserved the name of a drama by its poetry, nor an opera by its Music, should sustain twenty-four representations, and the second year eleven! 29 The novelty value of Arsinoe, then, must have been remarkable, especially since artistically the work seems to have deserved Burney's scorn. What Clayton was attempting to achieve, however, is explained in the preface to Arsinoe, and in these terms the success of the work must be seen. The result, however unsatisfactory to the sophisticated, is the culmination of the earlier approximations of the dramatic and musical construction of the opera, although Clayton lays claim to even more originality than history would allow. The Design of this entertainment being to introduce the Italian manner of Musick on the English stage, which has not been The singers were Messrs. Hughes, Leveridge, and Cook, Mrs. Tofts, Mrs. Cross, and Mrs. Lindsey. On the popular Catherine Tofts, Pope wrote : "So bright is thy beauty, so charming thy song, As had drawn both the beasts and their Orpheus along; But such is thy avarice, and such is thy pride, That the beasts must have starved, and the poet have died." See Charles Burney, A General History of Music, ed. Frank Mercer (New York, 1957), II, pp. 655, 666. (Hereafter this is cited merely as "Burney"). 29 Ibid., p. 656. Nicoli, op. cit., II, pp. 389-390, lists only twenty-three and ten performances, divided into fifteen the first season and eighteen the second. 28

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

57

before attempted, I was oblig'd to have an Italian Opera translated, in which the words, however mean in several places, suited much better with that manner of Musick than others more poetical would do. The style of this Musick is to express the passions, which is the soul of Musick, and though the voices are not equal to the Italian, yet I have engag'd the best that were to be found in England and I have not been wanting, to the utmost of my diligence, in the instructing of them. The Musick being Recitative, may not at first, meet with that general acceptation as is to be hop'd for from the Audience's being better acquainted with it: but if this attempt shall, by pleasing the Nobility and Gentry, be a means of bringing this manner of Musick to be '1 ' "*·τ '' ^ untry, I shall think all my study and pains That Clayton's intentions were justified is to be seen in the reception of the piece, but the degree to which his abilities fell short of his intentions may be seen by comparing the career of Arsinoe with that of the next operatic production, MacSwiney and Haym's English version of Stampiglia's Camilla, as set by Antonio Maria Bononcini, the brother of Handel's future rival. First performed on 30 April 1706, it was played nine times before the end of the season, twenty-one times the following season, and fourteen times the next; 31 it was revived in Italian, with the complete original score (not Haym's revision) in 1717, 1719, and 1726-1728. Arsinoe died forever after three performances in 1707, clearly killed by the example of the superior work. That it was the newer work which was preferred, and not the performers, is evident, for the two works seem to have had the same cast. It was these two productions in particular that brought out the most famous operatic satire in English, Addison's Spectator No. 18 (Wednesday, 21 March 1710/11). ARSINOE was the first Opera that gave us a Taste of Italian music. The great Success of this Opera met with, produced some Attempts of forming Pieces upon Italian Plans, which should give a more natural and reasonable Entertainment than what can 30

Quoted in Sesto Fassini, Il Melodramma italiano a Londra nella prima metà del Settecento (Torino, 1914), p. 5, n. 3. 31 Nicoli, op. cit., II, p. 391.

58

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

be met with in the elaborate Trifles of that Nation. This alarmed the Poetasters and Fiddlers of the Town, who were used to deal in a more ordinary kind of Ware; and therefore laid down an established Rule, which is received as such to this Day, " T h a t nothing is capable of being well set to musick, that is not nonsense." T H I S Maxim was no sooner received, but we immediately fell to translating the Italian Opera's; and as there was no great Danger of hurting the Sense of those extraordinary Pieces, our Authors would often make Words of their own which were entirely foreign to the Meaning of the Passages they pretended to translate; their chief Care being to make tne Numbers of the English Verse answer to those of the Italian, that both of them might go to the same Tune. Thus the famous song in Camilla, Barbara si ? inende, he. Barbarous Woman, yes, I know your Meaning, which expresses the Resentments of an angry Lover, was translated into that English Lamentation, Frail are a Lover's Hopes, &c.32 It should be noted, however, that Addison is out to damn the Italian opera, for reasons which were in large part personal, as will be seen, so that his account is hardly an unbiased one. If this warning seems unnecessarily obvious, one can only point to the too many historians of both literature and music who reprint Addison's exaggerations as an accurate, if witty, account. A further result of the original success of Arsinoe — thirty-six performances in three seasons — was The Loves of Ergasto, the opera used to open Vanbrugh and Congreve's Haymarket Theatre. Surprisingly little is known of this work, which has given rise to considerable confusion. Downes, in his Roscius Anglicanus (1708) reports: r And upon the 9th oí A' '' ^ ' ' 1 open'd his new Theatre Opera, Perform'd by a ne , , σ (the worst that e're came from thence) for it lasted but 5 Days, and they being lik'd but indifferently by the Gentry; they in a little time marcht back to their own Country. 33 32

The Spectator (London, 1712-1715), I, pp. 100-101. John Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, ed. Montague Summers (London, 1927), p. 48.

33

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

59

Cibber, on the other hand, reports that "a translated opera, to Italian musick, called the Triumph of Love . . . had but a cold reception, being perform'd but three days, and those not crowded". 34 Allardyce Nicoli combines the two reports, identifying The Triumphs [sic] of Love with The Loves of Er gasto, but agreeing with Burney that it was performed but twice. Burney, however, identifies the work itself as The Temple of Love, actually produced in 1706. Grove dates the performance as 20 April, but this is only using New Style to Downes' Old Style. The truth of the matter, as clarified by Loewenberg in Grove and his Annals of Opera, is that Downes' account is substantially correct, the Haymarket Theatre having opened 9 April 1705 (OS) with a performance of Jacob Greber's The Loves of Ergasto, with an anonymous libretto. There were only two known performances, that of the 9th and another on the 24th. In the next year, an opera The Temple of Love was also performed but twice (7 and 18 March 1706), with libretto by Motteux and music by G. F. Saggione, a well-known double-bass player. Motteux also collaborated on Love's Triumph, produced at the Haymarket on 26 February 1708, translating a libretto by Cardinal Ottoboni, the patron of Corelli, which was set to music by Carlo Cesarmi, Francesco Gasparini, and Giovanni del Violine. It was performed eight times before disappearing.35 The language of the performance of Ergasto is also in some doubt, although the only known copy of the word-book —in the British Museum — gives both English and Italian, and the only known score (for a later Vienna production) gives only Italian. Loewenberg speculates that if Downes' account is correct (and the old prompter is seldom far wrong), it may well have been sung in Italian, which would make it the first opera in England to be sung in that language.36 Unfortunately the cast is unknown, so that there seems to be no answer to the problem, since the general inaccuracies of Cibber's account may include 34

Colley Cibber, An Apology for the Life of Mr. Colley Cibber, by Himself, ed. H. Lowe (London, 1889), I, p. 325. 35 Burney, II, p. 661. 36 Loewenberg, op. cit., I, col. 113-115.

Written

60

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

the language as well. Further, Samuel Garth's "Prologue Spoken at the opening of the Queen's Theatre in the Hay market" speaks only of the building and not of the work, nor is Congreve's Epilogue for the same occasion any more specific. Between The Temple of Love and Love's Triumph come two works of considerably greater interest. Thorny ris, Queen of Scythia, first sung on 1 April 1707 at Drury Lane, was written by Motteux,37 and adapted to music by Alessandro Scarlatti and Giovanni Bononcini, probably by Pepusch, who arranged the recitative — the same duty he was to perform for The Beggar's Opera twenty-one years later. Thomyris was successful enough to be revived as late as 1717-1718 and 1728, and its success must have seemed all the brighter by contrast with the failure at the same theatre nearly a month earlier of another opera. This was an English creation by no less than Joseph Addison, with music by Clayton, the ill-fated Rosamond (4 March) ,38 The three performances of this work would seem to have put an effective stop to any further attempts at a genuine English opera for a quarter of a century, when Thomas Arne, perhaps encouraged by the popularity of the ballad-operas, attempted a setting of Rosamond in 1733, with considerable success. This would seem to support the usual view that Clayton's music was bad enough to cause the failure of the piece despite its other merits. Undoubtedly Addison's lack of skill in handling music and his unfortunate taste for the music of Clayton were important in the failure of their work. Addison's libretto, however, is far from ideal, and its part in the failure generally has been overlooked. Indeed, Arne's success would seem to be in spite of the libretto rather than because of it. Addison had attended the opera in Paris and also a number of times in Italy, he reported in his Remarks on Italy, and perhaps at Vienna and Hamburg. His model was the old, unreformed Italian style, how-

37

Burney's editor says Hayni, but gives no authority — II, 659 n. For a fuller treatment of Rosamond, see Virgil B. Heltzel, Fair Rosamond, A Study of the Development of a Literary Theme (Evanston, 111., 1947), pp. 72-75. 38

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

61

ever, not the French tragédie lyrique, or the new libretti being produced for Venice by Apostolo Zeno, under the influence of French neo-classicism. The older libretti mingled a serious plot with a comic sub-plot, in the same fashion as the main RosamondHenry-Eleanor plot is combined with the comic action of Sir Trusty and his jealous Grideline. The work is in the Italian three acts, with the inevitable, and unlegendary, happy resolution, as against the French practice of five acts and occasionally even an unhappy ending when necessary, as in Quinault's Armide, set by Lully in 1686 and by Gluck in 1777. The dramatic action is not very well managed, with the third act coming as a distinct anticlimax after the supposed death of Rosamond. The lighter scenes are tedious rather than amusing, and Burney quite properly characterizes them as "of the lowest species of comic".39 Since Rosamond would seem to have been sung by the same cast that made a success of Thomyris so shortly afterward, there is little question that the opera by the author of "The Campaign" failed on its own merits. The singers seem to have been admirably equipped to sing Addison's lines, as all but one were English, Rosamond being sung by Maria Gallia, a pupil of Haym, the wife of Saggione, and sister to the more celebrated Marguerite de l'Epine. Queen Eleanor was sung by the popular Catherine Tofts, King Henry by Mr. Hughes, Sir Trusty by Leveridge (who was to create the same part for Arne in 17 3 3),40 Grideline by Mrs. Lindsey, and the Page by Master Holcombe, a treble generally called "the boy". Addison was a proud and sensitive man, and like many such was given to confusing pride and principle. It is certainly likely that his later opposition to the Italian opera, undeniably on points of principle, was strengthened and embittered by this ignominious failure, especially with the success of Thomyris following so shortly. It is also possible that he put the blame on the singers. Mrs. Tofts especially became a target for satire, for in a letter of 1708 she was unfavorably compared to a nightin3

»

B u r n e y , II, p. 659.

« Ibid., II, p. 1002.

62

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

gale,41 and in Tatler No. 42, her name appears in the inventory of a playhouse ("A Wild boar, killed by Mrs. Tofts and Dioclesian"). These are innocent enough, but the lady is accused of insanity in Tatler No. 20 (24-26 May 1709), under the operatic name of Camilla; nothing is known about this, although 1709 was the year of her retirement.42 There are also insinuations of pride, which are to be found enormously developed three years later in Spectator No. 443 (29 July 1712), a supposed letter from Camilla in Venice. This would suggest that Addison was taking out on the singer the blame that belonged to the composer and author, which undoubtedly added malice to his attacks on the opera; for although all of these essays, largely theatrical, are by Steele, they must have been published with Addison's consent and encouragement, if not at his instigation. It was with a revival of Camilla on 6 December 1707 that the Italian singers began the full invasion, and the performance is noteworthy for two reasons. First, the leading role of Turnus was sung by a castrato, Valentini Urbani, probably the first to appear on the public stage in England. Second, Valentini, Marguerite de l'Épine, and a singer known as "the Baroness",43 sang their parts in Italian, while Mrs. Tofts, Mrs. Lindsey, Leveridge, and the others sang in English.44 This was the first of the bilingual productions ridiculed in the Spectator, and the first time definitely recorded that an opera had been sung in Italian on the English stage, with the problematic exception of Er gasto. Valentini, if the first castrato to sing in public, was not the first to appear in London. There is a doubtful story that the first "star" among the castrati, the Perugian Baldassare Ferri 41

Letter to the Earl of Warwick, in Letters of Joseph Addison, ed. Walter Graham (Oxford, 1941), p. 114. 42 Burney, II, p. 669. 43 "The Baroness was probably the Johanna Maria Lindelheim who sang at Drury Lane on 23 January 1703. She appeared in Camilla, Thomyris, Pirro e Demetrio, and Love's Triumph, but seems to have disappeared after the season of 1708-1709. See Loewenberg in Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Eric Blom (New York, 1955), V, p. 243. This work is cited hereafter as Grove V. 44 Burney, II, p. 659.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

63

(1610-1680), sang in London, either as Zephyrus in an opera (perhaps the Shadwell-Locke-Draghi Psyche of 1675), or in some work at Whitehall on 3 June 1669. These claims would appear to rest upon a questionable anecdote in his often fanciful biography, 45 and further, there are no known English records for his appearance. It would be particularly surprising if Downes failed to mention a public performance by a singer so famous that for his sake an armistice was declared during a war between Sigismund III of Poland and Queen Christina of Sweden. Neither does Evelyn mention Ferri, although he was familiar with the castrati from his Italian travels, and twice heard Siface in 1687. Therefore it is likely that Ferri never sang in England, so that the even more famous Siface was the first to appear there. Giovanni Francesco Grossi, called Siface (1653-1697), however, appeared only in private and at court when he came as a special "artistic envoy" to Mary of Modena from her brother Francesco II.4® Evelyn heard him once at "the new popish chapel" on 30 January 1687 ("much crowding, little devotion" was his laconic comment), and again on 19 April at the home of Mr. Pepys, "Secretary of the Amiralty & a greate lover of Musick". Since Siface was in England only between 16 January and 19 June, and often indisposed, Evelyn did extremely well, which makes it even less likely that he would have missed, or failed to mention, Ferri. Pepys, unfortunately, no longer kept his diary after May 1669, so that there is no comment from him on any of this. Siface's success was enormous, and the queen wrote her brother, "I believe him to be the finest musico [castrato] in the world. Take good care of him, and remember that if after some time you should be willing to send him back to me, I should be obliged to you." 47 If the queen heard Siface again, it was not to be in England. The persistence of his fame in England, however, was such that in 1708, when Isabella, Lady Wentworth, wrote to her son Lord Raby concerning the success of Nicolino, 45

See Grove V, s.v. "Siface" and Heriot, op. cit., p. 123. Heriot dates Psyche 1673, after Downes; the probable date is February 1674/5. 44 Heriot, op. cit., pp. 129-135. 47 Ibid., p. 133.

64

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

she commented, "This man out dus Sefacoe, they say that has hard both." 48 The principal musicians to be found in London in the early years of the century were connected with the opera, both instrumentalists and singers. After 1707, the latter sang principally in Italian, but took parts in English when the occasion demanded. The most important of these was Francesca Marguerite de l'Epine. Her exact nationality is uncertain, for she signed herself "Françoise Marguerite" in the only known autograph, although she was usually thought to be Italian.49 Although she has been identified with "the Italian lady (that is lately come over that is so famous for her singing)" reported by the London Gazette (No. 2834) to be appearing in January of 1692,50 her biographer thinks it unlikely. Indeed, considering her fame after 1702, it would be strange if she had been totally anonymous for ten years. Probably she arrived in 1702 with the composer Jacob Greber, and sang as one of the "performers lately come from Rome" on November. 51 From her association with Greber, she was known as "Greber's Peg" for years after his departure in 1706. Although she frequently sang in Italian at the playhouse, including appearances both before and after the early performances of Arsinoe and Camilla, her only operatic appearance until the bilingual performances of Camilla in 1707 seems to have been in Greber's The Loves of Ergasto. It may well be, then, that she did not sing English, although her sister, Maria Gallia, created Addison's Rosamond. Her great rival was the proud Mrs. Tofts, and if the two singers never became as heated as Faustina and Cuzzoni, this first operatic rivalry gave rise to much laughter in the town, especially when the Earl of Nottingham took de l'Epine under his protection. This was laughingly noted by Nicholas Rowe in his verses "Horace, Book II. Ode IV. Imitated. The Lord G—, to the Earl of S—", with its reference in Stanza III to 48

The Wentworth Papers, ed. J. J. Cartwright (London, 1883), p. 66, letter of 10 December 1708. 49 Reproduced in E. L. Moor, "Some Notes on the Life of Françoise Marguerite de l'Epine", Music and Letters, XXVIII (1947), pp. 341-346. 50 Quoted in Burney, II, 652 and editor's note. 51 The Daily Courant, quoted in ibid.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

65

the Earl's writings against Whiston on the doctrine of the Trinity: Did not base Grebefs Peg inflame The sober Earl of 2V[ottingha]7«? Of sober Sire descended, That careless of his Soul and Fame To Play-houses he nightly came, And left Church undefended.52 The Earl of Halifax, Charles Montagu, laughed at the couple in his lines "On Orpheus and Signora Francesca Margarita": Hail tuneful pair! say, by what wond'rous charms One 'scaped from Hell, and one from Greber's arms? When the soft Thracian touch'd the trembling strings, The winds were hush'd, and curl'd their airy wings: And when the tawny Tuscan rais'd her strain, Rook furls his sails, and dozes on the main. Treaties unfinish'd in the office sleep, And Shovel yawns for orders on the deep. Thus equal charms and equal conquests claim; To him high woods and bending timbers came, To her shrub Hedges, and tall Nottingham.53 The rivalry between the two ladies was touched by John Hughes in his "Tofts and Margarita": Music hath learn'd the discords of the state, And concerts jar whig and tory hate. Here Somerset and Devonshire attend The British Tofts, and every note commend, To native merit just, and pleas'd to see We've Roman arts, from Roman bondage free. Then fam'd L'Epine does equal skill employ, While list'ning peers crowd to th' ecstatic joy: Bedford, to hear her song, his dice forsakes, And Nottingham is raptur'd when she shakes: Lull'd statesmen melt away their drowsy cares Of England's safety in Italian airs. Who would not send each year blank passes o'er, Rather than keep such strangers from our Shore?54 58

The Poetical Works of Nicholas Rowe, Esq; London... 1115. The Works of the English Poets, from Chaucer to Cowper, Dr. Johnson's series, rev. Alexander Chalmers (London, 1810), IX, p. 431. 54 Letters by Several Eminent Persons Deceased, Including the Correspondence of John Hughes, Esq. (Author of The Siege of Damascus) and Several of His Friends (London, 1773), III, Appendix, li-liii.

53

66

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

The rivalry seems to have been kept within bounds, without the public displays which marked the later quarrels. On the occasion of one very early outburst, on 5 February 1704, one Anne Barwick, a servant of Mrs. Tofts, "committed a rudeness... at the playhouse, by throwing oranges, and hissing when Mrs. L'Epine, the Italian gentlewoman, sung", a letter apeared in the Daily Courant (8 February 1704) from Mrs. Tofts, disclaiming any share in the proceedings.55 The rivalry was brought to a close, of course, with Mrs. Tofts' retirement in 1709, thus ending the first of a continuing series of musical factions. The success open to an able singer seems to have been enormous, which suggests that domestic standards of performance must have been rather low, and that skill was appreciated even in the public theatres. Thus Margarita seems to have had an enormous success, despite her swarthiness, foreignness, and lack of beauty — her husband, Pepusch, is said to have called her Hecate familiarly. Of course there is always a group which is willing to acclaim whatever is foreign simply because it is not native, just as there are those unwilling to praise anything that is not native, only because it is foreign. And the snobs tended to support the Italian opera, just as the nationalists attempted to destroy it, or to "English" it, at whatever cost. That Margarita overcame this prejudice is evident from Downes' statement (1706) concerning the enormous profit taken by the foreign singers (Italian) and dancers (French) at little profit to the theatres. "Madame Delpine [sic] since her arrival in England, by Modest Computation; having got by the Stage and Gentry above 10000 Guineas."58 Although Downes' "Modest Computation" is probably over-generous — the takings of foreign performers, like the length of a fisherman's catch, generally being overestimated — her earnings must have been unusually large for the day, and her popularity was long-lived. She continued to sing in the opera, as second lady, until 1714, including parts in Almahide (10 January 1710), the first opera known for certain to have been sung entirely in Italian, and the premieres of 55 54

Quoted in Burney, II, p. 654. Downes, op. cit., p. 46.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

67

Handel's II Pastor Fido (22 November 1712) and Teseo (1713). She received a benefit conceit on 25 April 1713, which realized ¿76.5.8, and the takings of a performance of the pasticcio Arminio on 1 May 1714. After the success of Anastasia Robinson in 1714, she sang in a series of masques at Drury Lane in 17151716. These were arranged by Colley Cibber in effort to divert the public from the Italian operas (see his preface to Venus and Adonis), but the verse is not at all superior to the "nonsense" he deplores in the Italian libretti. Perhaps Pepusch's music hid most of the words, for Venus and Adonis (12 March 1715) was frequently performed, and revived as late as 1730. Myrtillo (5 November 1715) found rather less success, although it too was sung by Margarita and Mrs. Barbier. If de l'Epine's biographer rejects Burney's 1718 as the date of her marriage to Dr. Pepusch, proposing 1726 instead, there is no evidence either way, although Hawkins also suggests a date after 1724, and from her retirement in 1718 until her death in August 1746,57 little is known of her. The most interesting point about her, however, is her popularity during her career, and she is notable particularly as the first Italian singer to establish herself on the English stage, providing an important link in the transition into the Italian opera, the success of which she and her sister had done so much to promote. The first great star of the London opera, however, was the castrato Nicolo Grimaldi, generally known as Nicolino — most performers took as a stage name a diminutive form, either of their own name (as Nicolino), of their birthplace (as Senesino, from Siena, or of the name of someone they wished to honor (as Giziello, for his teacher Domenico Gizzi). A Neapolitan who achieved his greatest successes in Venice and London, Nicolino was hailed as the ideal combination of actor and singer by writers as diverse as Steele and Algarotti. From his first appearance in

England on 14 December 1708, in Pyrrhus and Demetrius, Nicolino was admired by all who heard him, from Lady WentMoor, op. cit., p. 345. Sir John Hawkins, A General History of the Science and Practice of Music (London, 1853), II, p. 884. 57

68

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

worth to Addison, Steele, and Cibber. The apologist, for example, wrote: . . . no Singer since his Time has so justly and gracefully acquitted himself in whatever Character he appeared as Nicolini. At most the Difference between him and the greatest Favourite of the Ladies, Farinelli, amounted but to this, that he [Farinelli] might sometimes more exquisitely surprise us, but Nicolini (by pleasing the Eye as well as the Ear) fill'd us with a more various and rational Delight.58 The choice of Scarlatti's Piro e Demetrio (Naples, 1694) for his debut was a natural one, for Nicolino had been connected with the successes of a number of Alessandro's Neapolitan operas, although this performance was presented in a mixture of Italian and English (translated by Owen MacSwiney, the manager), while the score had been supplemented by Nicola Francesco Haym. From this absurdity of bi-lingual performances,59 it was a natural step to the performance of opera entirely in Italian, and this logical position was achieved on 10 January 1710, with a version of A. M. Bononcini's Almahide, which was popular enough to require fourteen performances the first season. But even more popular was Nicolino's next success, the favorite of the Spectator, Hydaspes, or Uldaspe Fedele (25 May 1710), the elaborate scenes for which were the work of one Rizzi and of Nicolino himself. The famous scene of the combat with the lion, which aroused such glee in Addison (in the thrice-familiar Spectator No. 13, 15 March 1711), gave Lady Mary Wortley 68

Cibber, op. cit., II, pp. 51-52. This absurdity was not restricted to the eighteenth century or opera. During the nineteenth century, the great Salvini toured the United States playing Othello in Italian, while the rest of the company recited their parts in English. Duse always spoke in Italian, even when playing outside of Italy with actors w h o used the language of the company. During the 1920s, Mary Garden habitually sang Tosca in French at the Chicago Opera, while her confreres sang in Italian (to which tongue she would switch for "Vissi d'arte"). Emergencies, of course, can result in a hastily summoned performer singing in whatever language he can, despite the rest of the cast. Thus in the fall of 1957, (for example), in San Francisco Mme. Leonie Rysanek sang Amelia (Ballo in Maschera) in German, while the others proceeded in Italian, while the Chicago Lyric Opera's Mignon was a mixture of French and Italian throughout. 59

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

69

Montagu cause to consider the hypocrisy of her sex,80 and must have been long a familiar topic around London, whether for laughter or admiration. As late as 1737, Carey parodied it yet another time in his Dragon of Wantley. Of Addison's wellpointed jibes and Steele's barbs in both the Tatler and Spectator, one can only agree with Burney: "I am as ready to allow the force of Mr. Addison's and Sir Richard Steele's humorous papers on the opera, and to laugh at them as heartily as anyone; but as theatrical praise and censure are always suspicious, we should not forget who were the authors of the Tatlers and Spectators, nor how they were circumstanced." 61 Addison, it would appear, was still smarting over the failure of Rosamond and the public's rejection of his ideas on opera in the vernacular, while Steele was not only connected with one of the playhouses, but had a concert-room in York-buildings, where Clayton, Dieupart, and Haym (no longer in charge of the opera) were giving concerts in competition with the opera, which were heavily puffed in the Spectator (Nos. 158 and 178, both by Steele). As critics, however valid many of their criticisms may have been, Addison and Steele were hardly disinterested. Therefore their praise of Nicolino is all the more striking, and gives strong evidence of his quality. The opera had developed a public; it now found a firstmagnitude star and a good supporting company. Only one thing was lacking, a man able to direct the enterprise and to write music worthy of the artists at hand. By December of 1710 such a man had reached England, and the London opera was ready for its first step toward greatness. Handel had arrived. It is interesting to note that both the singer and the composer arrived in England quite on their own, with no ready engagements to draw them. Further, despite the rather casual management of the opera, both Nicolino and Handel were pressed into service immediately, and were appreciated for something of their real value. This bears out the contention that a public was being 60

Letter to Mrs. Hewet, The Letters and Works of Lady Mary Montagu, ed. W . Moy Thomas (London, 1898), I, p. 31. « II, p. 675.

Wortley

70

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

educated to support the opera as a form, able to recognize quality, and interested in obtaining it. Part of this support was obviously social, and many of the accounts in diaries and letters are concerned more with who was seen and with the judgment of the audience in general, rather than that of the writer. There was a solid core of real cognoscenti, however, either men of superior sensibility, capable of realizing the potentialities of the form and its conventions, or those who had become familiar with its glories by traveling on the continent — men like Francis Colman, the reputed author of the "Opera Diary" now in the British Museum, one of the primary sources for the history of opera in England.62 Handel's Rinaldo came as the culmination of a series of events. The manager of the opera at this moment was the cultivated Aaron Hill, although the theatre was under the management of William Collier, who leased the operatic concession to Hill for /600. 6 3 . The scenario of Rinaldo was by Hill, after the familiar episode of Rinaldo and Armida in Tasso's Gerusalemme Liberata (Cantos X I V - XVI) ,β4 and was turned into Italian verse by Giacomo Rossi, a minor poet then living in London; in turn, Rossi's version was translated into English blank verse by Hill for the word-book. But the emphasis in Rinaldo is not upon poetry, but on scenic display, utilizing both machines and elaborate transformations for a theatrical spectacle intended to equal the magical events in Tasso, while the original story was reshaped to fit conventional operatic requirements, and to give a coherence to the fragment which it would otherwise lack. Thus The "Opera-Register from 1712-1734", often called the "Opera Diary", listed as " A brief account of operas presented at the Haymarket Theatre", is Add. MS. 11,258, ff. 19-22. It could not be entirely by Colman, who died in Pisa in 1733, and may not be by him at all. See Loewenberg, op. cit., I, col. 180. The Handel entries, ed. E. R. Page, are in The Mask (July 1926, January 1927), and revised by R. W . Babcock in Music and Letters, X X I V (1943). 63 Dorothy Brewster, Aaron Hill, Poet, Dramatist, Projector (New York, 1913), p. 86. 64 This episode has given rise to operas by composers as various as Lully, Handel, Gluck, Haydn, Sacchini, Mysliweòek, Salieri, Traetta, Rossini, and Dvorak, and as recently as 1955 to a ballet by Frederick Ashton, Rinaldo and Armida (Sadler's Wells), with music by Malcolm Arnold. 62

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

71

Rinaldo is not joined with Armida, but with Geoffrey's daughter Almirena, and Armida with Argante for a grand conversionand-nuptial finale. The work was presented on 24 February 1711, and the haste with which it was conceived and prepared is suggested by Rossi in his "Il Poeta al Lettore": The haste in bringing it to the light was due to my attempt to gratify the nobility with works of an uncommon note; and I was prevailed upon in a worthy contest (not indeed with regard to the perfection of the Opera but only to the brevity of the time), for Mr. Hendel, the Orpheus of our century, while composing the music, scarcely gave me time to write, and to my great wonder I saw an entire Opera put to music by that surprising genius, with the greatest degree of perfection, in only two weeks.85 It was this preface, and in particular this reference to Handel's incredible facility, that brought about Addison's petulant "Such are the wits [i.e. Rossi and Handel] to whose tastes we so ambitiously conform ourselves", before proceeding to a comparison of modern Italian and English writers, as measured by the standard of Cicero and Virgil, much to the advantage of the English. He concludes that, "as for the poet himself, from whom the dreams of this opera are taken, I must entirely agree with Monsieur Boileau, that one verse of Virgil is worth all the clinquant, or tinsel, of Tasso" (Spectator No. 5, 6 March 1711). Addison is here drawing upon all of the accumulated rancour of years of anti-Italian criticism in order to belabour one work, as well as to damn the entire Italian structure; but he was unable to influence public opinion. A masterpiece had been created, whatever its faults or absurdities, and if Addison's imperceptive ear failed to recognize it, the public did not share his disability. La fretta di darlo alla luce provenne da chi cerca sodisfare la nobilita con cosi non commune; ed in me prevalse una gara virtuosa (non già nella perfezzione dell'opera, ma solo nella brevità del tempo) poiché ü signor Hendel, Orfeo del nostro secolo, nel porla in musica, a pena me diede tempo di scrivere, e viddi, con mio gran stupore, in due sole settimane armonizata da quell' ingegno sublime al maggior grado di perfezzione un opera intiera. The Dramatic Works of Aaron Hill Esq; (London, 1760), I, p. 77. Translated in O. E . Deutsch, Handel: A Documentary Biography (London, 19S5), p. 33. 65

72

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Fifteen performances were called for between 24 February (only four days before the first Spectator and ten days before the one in question) and 2 June, and eight more the following season, while it was revived with Senesino as late as 1731. As an opera, Rinaldo draws from both the French and the Venetian traditions for the effects called for in the libretto, but the music is purest Handelan-Neapolitan, with all of the warmth and melodic flow of the school of Alessandro Scarlatti, but with typically Handelian turns of phrase. T h e magical element, the spectacular scenes, and the general turn of the libretto are certainly Venetian, while the dances and general display suggest the French school of Lully, himself the composer of a famous opera on the same subject. The speed with which Handel composed the music is perhaps more easily understood when it is remembered that he borrowed liberally from his earlier works. For example, the famous sarabande, "Lascia ch'io pangia", sung by Almirena, had already served as a dance in his first opera (Almira, 1705) and as an aria in his early oratorio II Trionfo del Tempo e del Disinganne (1708), while "Bel piacer" came from Agrippina (1709), and other pieces from various cantatas and oratorios. The success of the work is easily understood, for musically it contains some of Handel's finest work, dramatically it is adequate, and scenically it must have been spectacular, Addison to the contrary: otherwise there would have been little point to his jibes. Rinaldo's lovely "Cara sposa" is reported to have been one of Handel's favorites among his own songs, and even Gay liked the march for four trumpets enough to adapt it as "Let us take the Road" (Air X X ) for Matt of the Mint and the Gang in The Beggar's Opera. It is amusing to note that Handel replaced this march for the revival of 1731, perhaps not wanting to recall the parody. Nicolino's success in Rinaldo continued for two seasons,69 and in the second of these he also appeared in one of the stranger In June 1712 Nicolino returned to Italy, but sang again in England in 1715-1717, including Handel's Amadigi (25 May 1715) and revivals of Hydaspes and Rinaldo. His last years were divided between Venice and Naples, where he sang until 1730. H e died at Naples in 1732. 86

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

73

works in the repertoire, Ambleto, or Hamlet (27 February 1712),67 the second opera of Apostolo Zeno to be adapted for the English stage, with music by Gasparini. This version is not based upon Shakespeare, however, but on Saxo Grammaticus' account of the prince. Burney comments, "if Zeno is much inferior to our divine Shakespeare in variety of character, knowledge of the human heart, and genius, in its most unlimited acceptation, his drama is exempt from all the absurdities and improprieties which critics, insensible to the effects of Music, had leisure to find in former operas" 98 — this is indeed the friend of Dr. Johnson speaking. It might also be noted that Zeno's drama is considerably better than the version of Shakespeare, with a coloratura mad-scene for Ophelia and a happy ending, prepared by Barbier and Carré for Ambroise Thomas' opera of 1868. Zeno's characters include Ambleto, Fengone (Claudius), and Gerilda (Gertrude), while the elder Hamlet is called Orrendello. According to certain of the writers of the age, there was by this time an Italian circle connected with the opera, apparently including Nicolino and the rather shadowy Rossi. A moving power, however, seems to have been Adelhide, Duchess of Shrewsbury, who was of Italian birth, the daughter of the Marchese Palleotti of Bologna. After an extended courtship in Rome, she married Charles Talbot, 12th Earl and 1st Duke of Shrewsbury, in Augsburg on 20 September 1705, when she abjured the Church of Rome and became a Protestant.88 Her mother, whose first husband had been in the service of Queen Christina, the patroness of the first Arcadians, was a daughter of Sir Robert Dudley, a descendant of the great Earl of Leicester. One of the many tales reported about the duchess concerns her supposed influence in the failure of John Hughes' Calypso and Telemachus (14 May 1712), with music by the German Johann Ernst Galliard (1680-1749). According to the editor of Hughes' correspondence, 87

The first was the short-lived Antioco,

68

II, p. 679.

69

12 December 1711.

T. C. Nicholson and A. S. Turberville, Charles Talbot, Shrewsbury (Cambridge, 1930), pp. 149-150, 159-160.

Duke of

74

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Such was, at the time, the partiality in favour of Italian operas, that, after many such had been encouraged by large subscriptions, this of "Calypso and Telemachus", originally written and set in English after the Italian manner, was prepared with the usual expense of scenes and decorations; and being much crowded and applauded at the rehearsals, a subscription was obtained for it as usual [i.e., raising the prices well above the general level]. This alarmed the whole Italian band, who apprehending that their harvest would soon be at an end, had interest enough, (the duke of Shrewsbury, whose dutchess was an Italian, being Lord Chamberlain) to procure an order, the day before the performing of this opera, to take off the subscription for it, and to open the house at the lowest prices, or not at all. This was designed to sink it, but failed of its end.70 It is now difficult to judge the truth of this charge, but it seems to be largely an attempt to place the blame for the failure of the piece elsewhere than where it belongs, on the authors. It was not a success, playing only five times before the end of the season, and three times on its revival in 1717. Since the cast was the standard second string at the opera, including Margarita de l'Épine, Mrs. Barbier, and Leveridge,71 the performance can hardly have been that poor. Concerning the libretto, even Hughes' biographer, after repeating this tale, adds that while Calypso and Telemachus "offers some beautiful lyrical paspassages, . . . considered in itself, it is a rather tedious recital in Arias, Recitatives, and Duets".72 To whatever degree true, however, this tale gives some suggestion of the power at least credited to the duchess. She was not popular in court circles, apparently because of her continental manner, and was considerably more popular in Paris, or at the court of George I, than in the England of Anne. A lady of the bedchamber to Queen Anne (1711) and later to Caroline of Ansbach as Princess of Wales, she had considerable influence 70 Op. cit., I, 76n. This is the source of Dr. Johnson's paragraph on the subject in his biography of Hughes in The Lives of the Poets. 71 Burney, II, p. 681. 72 Emmy Weidenmann, ]ohn Hughes: His Life and Works (Zurich, 1915), p. 56.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

75

when she cared to exert it. 73 She appears to have been a prominent hostess, for Lady Strafford wrote to her husband on 15 November 1711 that "I am told the Duchess of Marlborough intends to sett up an Assembly to out do the Duchess of Shrewsberry's". 74 She figures also in Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's " T o w n Eclogue", "Roxana, or The Drawing Room", as Coquetilla, Roxana herself being the Duchess of Roxburgh, who had been passed over in favor of Lady Shrewsbury as lady of the bedchamber to Princess Caroline. Roxana speaks: Yet Coquetilla's artifice prevails, When all my merit and my duty fails; That Coquetilla, whose deluding airs Corrupt our virgins, still our youth ensnares; So sunk her character, so lost her fame, Scarce visited before your Highness came: Yet for the bedchamber 'tis her you choose, When zeal and fame and virtue you refuse.75 As usual her Grace's high spirits, frank temper, and continental manner had been misinterpreted, and not without malice. Lady Roxburgh is not the only other peeress satirized in the poem, and the Princess herself escapes but narrowly. Following the death of her husband in 1717, the Duchess seems to have exerted less influence, but apparently she still served as a rallying point for the Italian colony. This becomes increasingly clear when one sees the many references to her in the English portions of the diary of Dr. Antonio Cocchi, who was in England in 1723 - 1726, and — like the Duchess — was particularly close to Rolli, Senesino, and Bononcini. Thus she seems to have retained her interest in things Italian during her twenty years in England, and to have served as a kind of social arbiter for the group around the opera, both in its early days and in the days of its glory. She died 29 June 1726, at just the time when Cocchi left England to return to Florence. 76 The Wentworth Papers, op. cit., pp. 325, 4Î9. Ibid., p. 208. 75 Letters and Works, op. cit., II, p. 448. 78 One particular bit of scandal became attached to the duchess through the brutal actions of her brother, Ferdinando Palleotti, who was publicly 73 74

76

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

With the success of Rinaldo in 1711, the Italian opera was well established in London, although not as yet on a permanent footing, so that there seems little need for a chronological account. Burney and Nicoli give lists of the operas produced, the former chronological, the latter alphabetical,77 and in the Appendix there is a revised chronological listing of the operas produced, with what information is available concerning authors and composers. This is often difficult to ascertain for certain, for not only were titles frequently altered, but all or part of an existing libretto might be rewritten to suit the requirements of a particular company, or to suit the taste of a particular audience. The original music might be used, although altered to meet the requirements of a particular cast or audience, as Camilla was revised by Haym, or a new score might be written by a resident composer. Almost as frequently a score might be assembled from the works of various composers, often including the favorite show-pieces of the leading singers (these were called "arie di bagaglio", or "baggage arias"), and the whole thing orchestrated, and the recitatives arranged, by some local musician. The resultant work was known as a pasticcio, or pie, from its miscellaneous nature, and the practice survived into the early nineteenth century. 78 Thus the problem of strict identification is often difficult, if not impossible, as a work may represent the efforts of an author, one or two revisers, a sheaf of composers, and an arranger, and none of these identified, as the libretto (or the dedication) might be signed by the manager as often as by the librettist or composer. Between the summer of 1717 and the spring of 1720, there hanged in 1718 for the murder of his servant. This story is recounted in two contemporary pamphlets, The Lije, Actions, and Amours of Ferdinando, Marquis of Paleotti, lately executed at Tyburn, for the murder of his servant (London, 1718), and A particular account of the life... of the Marquis Palliotti... by an Italian gentleman (London, 1718). These were called to my attention by Mr. John Alden of the Boston Public Library, where a copy of the latter may be found in the Trent Collection. 77 Burney, II, pp. 651-849, passim, and Nicoli, op. cit., II, pp. 387-400, 449. 78 Grout, op. cit., p. 187-188. He suggests that "hash" might be a more colloquial translation.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

77

were no performances of Italian opera in London. During this time, however, plans were being laid to put the opera on a permanent and self-supporting basis through the establishment of a Royal Academy of Music. This institution would have an endowment of some ¿ 10,000, subscribed by interested members of the nobility and gentry, which would serve as a "backlog" to get the Academy started and to tide it over difficult periods, the financing to suffice for fourteen years. The subscribers, who would enjoy a permanent ticket for a guarantee of ¿ 2 0 0 , would choose from their number a governor, a deputy governor, and twenty directors to set the policies, while the Academy would be managed by John Jacob Heidegger, commonly known as "the Swiss Count", and Handel. The Lord Chamberlain was automatically elected governor, by arrangement with the court. The plan was very much in line with the entire concept of "projects" so much a part of the time, with the most notable model, of course, in the famous South Sea Company. As it was, the bursting of the "South Sea Bubble" seems to have come close to stalling the Academy by impoverishing many of its supporters. T h e Academy itself finally came to an end in 1728, the subscription having been exhausted in nine seasons, rather than the fourteen hoped for, although the original span of the Academy's charter was twenty-one years.79 Nevertheless, it staged some 487 performances, with 245 evenings of Handel, 108 of Bononcini, fifty-five of Ariosti, while 79 were by other composers or pasticcios.80 But this is to view the Academy only from its close. In 1719 hopes were soaring, and sixty-two subscribers had signed by May for a total of ¿ 15,600, the Dukes of Newcastle and Chandos and the Earl of Burlington guaranteeing ¿ 1 0 0 0 apiece, the Duke of Portland ¿ 6 0 0 , and Viscount Castlemayne ¿ 4 0 0 , while others joined later. Heidegger was named manager, Paoli Rolli was appointed Italian secretary, and one Roberto Clerci as decorator and Machinist.81 Handel was the director, of course, with Giovanni Bononcini and later Attilio 79 80

Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 89-90, 224. Ibid., p. 224. The figures are Chrysander's. Ibid., pp. 91, 97.

78

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Ariosti named as resident composers to assist him. The leading singers, including the soprano Margarita Durastanti (who had sung the title role in Handel's Agrippina in Venice in 1709), and the great alto Francesco Bernardi, known as Senesino, who later became a principal source of contention, were signed by Handel in Dresden, then a flourishing opera center. 82 The board of directors for the first season was given in the libretto for the first opera presented by the Academy, Numitore (2 April 1720), by Giovanni Porta, to a libretto by Rolli. It was dedicated T o those most noble gentlemen, the directors of the Royal Academy of Music. Their Excellencies the Duke of Newcastle, Governor. The Duke of Manchester, Deputy Governor. The Duke of Grafton, the Duke of Montague, the Duke of Kent, the Duke of Portland, the Earl of Burlington, the Earl of Halifax, Lord Bingley, Lord Percifal. The Illustrious gentlemen Dr. Arbuthnot, Col. John Blaithwaite, James Bruce, Thomas Coke of Norfolk, Bryan Fairfax, George Harrison, John-James Heidegger, Benjamin Mildmay, William Pulteney, Thomas Smith, Sir John Vanbrugh, Francis Whitworth. The dedication was signed by Paolo Rolli, who also contributed a dedicatory sonnet to the king. The Governor and Directors for the 1720-1721 season were the Duke of Newcastle, Governor; Lord Bingley, Deputy Governor; the Dukes of Portland and Queensbury, the Earls of Burlington, Stair, and Waidengrave, Lords Chetwynd and Stanhope, James Bruce, Colonel John Blaithwaite, Thomas Coke of Norfolk, Conyers D'Arcy, Brigadier General Dormer, Bryan Fairfax, Colonel O'Hara, George Harrison, Brigadier General Hunter, William Pulteney, Sir John Vanbrugh, Major General Wade, and Francis Whitworth. 83 It is interesting to speculate on Ibid., pp. 93, 104. Ibid., p. 123. An interesting comment on Col. Blaithwaite is found in Hawkins, op. cit., II, 860 η: "This gentleman, an officer in the army, had when a child been a pupil of Alessandro Scarlatti: His proficiency on the harpsichord at twelve years of age astonished everyone." Even if not all amateurs were as well-trained as this former prodigy, Hawkins' story does suggest an interesting link between the London opera and Alessandro, the very font of the Neapolitan style, which might repay investigation. 88 83

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

79

why there was so large a turnover after such a short period. If the South Sea fiasco had something to do with it, there is still no explanation for the apparent contests between the Dukes of Manchester and Queensbury, or why among the directors only the Duke of Portland and the Earl of Burlington were retained from the original eight lords, while eight of the twelve gentlemen were re-elected. Among those not re-elected, it will be noted, was Dr. Arbuthnot, who seems to have been as musical as his friends Pope and Swift were unmusical. Heidegger does not reappear, but this may well have been a result of his official position. Pulteney, later Earl of Bath, was to be among those closely associated with The Craftsman, of which more will be said, and probably became a supporter of Bonincini, if the stand of that journal reflected his opinions. If many of the directors seem more notable as men of position and title than for outstanding aesthetic interests, this was not entirely true. Vanbrugh, who represented the theatrical world, had opened his Haymarket theatre with an opera, perhaps even in Italian. Thomas Coke, later Earl of Leicester, was a scholar and collector to whom Rolli was indebted, while the Earl of Stair was one of Rolli's earliest patrons, the Duke of Queensbury was Gay's close friend and patron, and Burlington certainly stands as a notable virtuoso in the neo-classic manner. In all, it is an impressive list. According to the terms of the charter, the Lord Chamberlain was to be Governor of the Academy, so the Duke of Grafton replaced the Duke of Newcastle as Governor in the spring of 17 24.84 The Duke of Manchester again became Deputy Governor in the fall of 1721, but after his death in 1722 the position seems to have fallen to the Duke of Queensbury, who was in turn replaced by the 2nd Duke of Manchester in 1724.85 The first major controversy around the opera arose out of the rivalry between Handel and Bononcini, whose first opera written for London was L'Astarto, to Rolli's alteration of a libretto by Zeno and Pariati (19 November 1720). This was the opening night of the Academy's second season, and marked the 84 86

Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 89-90, 160. Ibid., pp. 123, 129, 174.

80

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

debut of Senesino. The brief preceding season had been without a castrato, and Durastanti had sung the primo uomo in Handel's Radimisto (27 April), although she reverted to the prima donna role of Zenobia for the revival on 28 December. Giovanni Bononcini came from a noted musical family in Modena, the home of Muratori and Giuseppe Riva. His brother Antonio Maria, often called Marc' Antonio (1675-1726), was the composer of the popular Camilla (properly II Trionfo di Camilla, regina di Volsci), presented in Naples 26 December 1696, when he was only 21, and revived in London as late as 1728. Giovanni Bononcini — he is often called Giovanni Battista, to distinguish him from his father, Giovanni Maria — came to London from Rome, where he had been living for some years, and provided seven operas for the Royal Academy, in addition to two works which had been sung in London some years earlier, Almahide (1710) and Etearco (1711).89 As everything that London touched in those years, Midas-like, turned not golden, but political, so was it with the opera. When George I came out in support of his old retainer Handel, the Opposition took up the cause of Bononcini, led by the Duchess of Marlborough, although he was also patronized by the families of Queensbury and Rutland. This strong partisanship apparently came out most clearly in the subscription list for Bononcini's Cantate e duetti (1721), which is of unparalleled splendor. The work is dedicated, diplomatically, "alia sacra Maestà di Giorgo Re della Gran Bretagna".87 The opposition nobility, however, vied in securing names for the list, and themselves subscribed for as many twenty-five or fifty copies.88 It was also the style of these works which contributed to their — and his — success, for, like Bononcini's operas, the cantatas are simple and melodically 84

Grove V, s.v. "Bononcini". Burney, II, p. 636. Burney calls him "perhaps the most voluminous composer of cantatas next to Ales. Scarlatti, which Italy can boast". 88 According to Hawkins, "the duke and duchess of Queensbury subscribed each for twenty-five books; and the countess of Sunderland alone for fifty-five; and many others for ten and five; and it is computed that this work produced the author near a thousand guineas". Op. cit., II, p. 863. 87

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

81

flowing, rather than marked by Handel's energy or "science", and hence very much to the popular taste. One contribution — at once result and cause — to the growing rivalry was undoubtedly the strange collaborative opera Muzio Scevola (15 April 1721). Set to a libretto by Rolli, each act was by a different composer, and included an overture and a final "chorus" to make it a formal entity. The first act was assigned to Filippo Amadei (known as "Signor Pipo"), while Bononcini provided the second act, and Handel (as director) the third. It was an opportunity for partisan rivalry that was promptly seized, causing Gay to write "A Motto for the Opera of Mutius Scaevola": Who here blames words, or verses, songs or singers, Like Mutius Scaevola will burn his fingers.89 What would seem to have been the general consensus of contemporary opinion, however, and certainly the judgment of Burney and his successors, was given in a letter from one of the brothers de Fabrice (one was Hanoverian minister and the other Gentleman of the Bedchamber to the Prince of Wales) to Count Fleming, the Saxon prime minister, under the date of 21 April, along with another detail of interest to the premier: N o doubt you will know that the Princess of Wales was safely delivered of a son last Saturday (the 15th). The news was taken to the King by Lord Herbert [the Earl of Pembroke] during an opera called Mutius Scevola, where there was a particularly large audience on account of its being the first performance. Each act of the opera is by a different composer, — the first by a certain Pipo, the second by Bononcini, and the third by Hendell, who easily triumphed over the others.90 De Fabrice, of course, would be prejudiced in favour of the German-Hanoverian Handel, but there is little doubt that Handel's act is superior even to the very good one of his Italian rival. The split was evident within the company almost from the 89 Quoted in William Irving, John Gay: Favorite of the Wits (Durham, N.C., 1940), p. 188. 80 Translated in Deutsch, op. cit., p. 126.

82

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

beginning, and it took an unexpected form involving librettists. Rolli was the Italian secretary to the Academy, but Haym was brought in as well. During the seasons before the opening of the Academy, Haym had been employed frequently not only to arrange the music, but to write or revise the libretti. Thus he had worked with Handel as early as 1713. Rolli and Handel appear not to have agreed at all, and the disagreement must have become evident almost from the beginning, for during the short opening season, Rolli provided two libretti, but neither for Handel, while Haym wrote the text for his Radimisto. Rolli was undoubtedly the better librettist, and certainly much the better poet, but during his first stint with the Academy, until the spring of 1723, he provided only one libretto for Handel (Fiondante, 1721), while he wrote all of Bononcini's through the Erminia of March, 1723. Haym, however, was called upon for all of Handel's, except the one, until 1726, and then with only three exceptions until the end of the Academy in 1728. The split, then, was clearly upon national grounds, for Haym was considered déclassé by the Italian circle, and no proper man of letters. Therefore he was fit company for the German autocrat. 91 Rolli and Bononcini, however, came from the same 91

Because Haym was not a member of the Rolli-Riva circle, he is not treated in this book, but a brief sketch of his career is relevant. Born in Rome in 1679 and trained as a musician, he came to England about 1702. Until 1711 he was composer and cellist in the household of Wrothesley Russell, Duke of Bedford. He helped promote Clayton's Arsinoe and the next year adapted Bononcini's Camilla (1706) and played bass viol in the orchestra. In 1708 he composed an overture and eighteen numbers "which rank with the best in the work" for his adaptation of Scarlatti's Piro e Demetrio (Hawkins, op. cit., II, p. 819). He also seems to have arranged the music for Dorinda (1712) and Lucio Vero (1715). The first libretto he wrote for Handel was Teseo (1713). Some of his own music had already been published by Roger of Amsterdam, including the trio sonatas, op. 1 (1704) and the flute sonatas, op. 2, as well as his edition of Corelli. But his major contribution to music may well have been the libretti he arranged for the Royal Academy of Music, from Radamisto (1720) to Tolomeo (1728). Few of these were original, although no source is certain for Giulio Cesare in Egitto, one of the best. In addition to this, he published editions of Tasso's Gerusalemme liberata (Tonson and Watts, 2 vols., 1724) and Maffei's M er ope, coupled with G. B. Recanati's Demodice as Due tragedie (1721), and he compiled two books, Del tesoro britannico... overo il museo nummario (Tonson, 2 vols., 1719-1720), an

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

83

world, and shared an outlook which seems to have made them sympathetic collaborators. In this way, the split among the audience was matched by the split within the company, and the tensions within undoubtedly influenced those without. The popular Senesino threw his weight on the Italian side, against Handel, and it was soon evident that the proud singer and the proud composer would never get along well, and the castrato's open championing of Bononcini must have done little to close the breach. The open quarrel between singer and composer did not emerge for some seasons, however, as each needed the other; Handel as manager required the services of his most popular singer, while Senesino achieved some of his greatest successes in Handel's operas. Apparently there is something in musical rivalries that catches the imagination of the public, for some of the most famous and amusing cultural battles have been over musicians, especially over favorite singers or composers. Paris has often been the center of this kind of warfare, including the famous Guerre des Bouffons, over the respective merits of French and Italian music, with Rousseau writing and composing as a leader of the invaders, and an epic battle fought with chess-boards as weapons. Some twenty years later, with the Austrian Gluck rewriting his Italian operas Orfeo and Alceste to French texts, the same battle was fought out between the Gluckists and the Piccinists. But the immortal war has become that of the Handelians against the Bononcinites, for John Byrom crystallized it in a still familiar, and widely imitated, "Epigram": Some say, compar'd to Bononcini, That Mynheer Handel's but a Ninny; Others aver, that he to Handel unsuccessful attempt to catalogue and engrave all coins, statues and gems not before engraved in British collections, and Notizia di libri rari nella lìngua italiana (Tonson and Watts, 1726), in later editions known as Biblioteca italiana, which was revised and reprinted as late as 1803 and has remained a standard bibliographical work. He died in London, 11 August 1729. Haym remains one of the minor figures of his period who might best repay investigation. (Most of this information is from Alexander Chalmers, The General Biographical Dictionary, 32 vols., London, 18121817, XVII, pp. 267-268, and Grove V, "Haym".)

84

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Is Scarcely fit to hold a Candle. 7.11 this Difference should be Strange all 'Twixt Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee! 9 2 That this rivalry was not soon forgotten is demonstrated by Byrom's Epilogue to Samuel Johnson of Cheshire's Hurlothrumbo (1729), in which he harks back to his most famous lines — which were popular enough to be attributed to Pope and/or Swift until late in the next century. In the epilogue, after having driven the Critic off the stage, the Author ends with the lines, Something hangs on my prophetic Tongue: I'll give it Utterance, be it right or wrong: "Handel himself shall yield to Hurlothrumbo,

A n d Bononcini

t o o shall c r y 'Suecumbo'

"; —

That's, if the Ladies condescend to Smile: Their looks make Sense or Nonsense in our Isle.93 So great, indeed, was the furore in polite society that Gay wrote to Swift in Dublin, under the date of 3 February 1723, As for the reigning amusements of the town, it is entirely music; and real fiddles, base-viols, and hautboys, not poetical harps, lyres and reeds. There is nobody allowed to say, " I sing', but an eunuch, or an Italian woman. Everybody is grown now as great a judge of music, as they were in your time of poetry, and folks, that could not distinguish one tune from another, now daily dispute about the different styles of Handel, Bononcini, and Attilio. People have now forgot Homer, and Virgil, and Cesar, or at least, they have lost their ranks; for in London and Westminster, in all polite conversations, Senesino is daily voted to be the greatest man that ever lived.94 The attacks on the opera were not entirely in terms of personalities, nor were they all verbal. Among the most celebrated comments are those found in the pictures and engravings of Hogarth, which might best be examined at this point, even though they extend beyond the limits of the early 1720s. The first blow was struck by Hogarth in 1724 with "Masquerades and Operas, The Poems of John Byrom, ed. A. A. Ward (Manchester, 1894-1912). Ibid., I-i, p. 147. 94 The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift, D.D., ed. F. E. Ball (London, 1910-1914), III, pp. 154-5. 82 93

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

85

Burlington Gate", originally titled "The Taste of the Town". As the juxapositions on this plate are of particular interest, they should be described in some detail, for the engraving is a satire on those attempting to mislead — as Hogarth saw it — the public into foreign and false ways. T o the left of the plate is the Opera House in the Haymarket, with Heidegger calling the people in to the masquerades, and " M A S Q U E R A D E " is written over the doorway. One sign advertises "Faux's De[x]terity of Hand", one of the popular divertisements of the town. 95 The other sign is a banner, labeled "Opera", on which is a version of Vanderbank's satirical engraving of a scene from Flavio, showing Cuzzoni, Senesino, and Berenstadt in costume. In Hogarth's reworking of the scene, the Earl of Peterborough and two other gentlemen kneel before Cuzzoni, saying, "Please accept £ 8000". And while the prima donna looks disdainful, she is pulling in the money with a rake. The theatre across the street represents Lincoln's Inn Fields, for it is surmounted by a sign saying "Dr. Faustus is here", and a harlequin is haranguing the crowd. This refers to Rich's tremendously popular The Necromancer, or Harlequin Dr. Faustus (1723). Pantomime, masquerade, and opera represent the perversions of the public taste, and their success is clear from the crowds outside the two theatres. In the center of the street, a woman with a wheel-barrow calls "Waste paper for shops", her barrow being loaded with books labeled "Congreve" "Dryden", "Ben John[son]", and "Shakespere", with one that is illegible, but is probably "Addison".96 This, of course, represents the lack of public interest in the literary drama, which is being swamped by the taste for the "exotic" operas and pantomimes; the masquerades (or Ridottos) were considered the source of much immorality although (or because) they were extremely popular. 95

Harry R. Beard, "An Etched Caricature of a Handelian Opera", Burlington Magazine, XCII (1950), p. 266. 08 In the first impression, "Pasquín No. XCV" was given in place of "Jonson", apparently because of some anti-opera writings in that journal. Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum. Division 1. Political and Personal Satire (London, 1873-1954), II, p. 604. The various states of this print are discussed on pp. 603-606.

86

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

This much of Hogarth's satire is what might have been expected from the true-born Englishman so much admired by Fielding. What is less predictable, and therefore more interesting, is the scene in the background of the plate. The street leads past the great gateway of Burlington House, which is visible between the two theatres. This gateway is virtually the same in the version Hogarth drew for the later "The Man of Taste" (c. 1732), the pediment being surmounted by a statue of William Kent, Burlington's protégé and a pet hate of Hogarth. Reclining in awestruck positions on his right and left are figures of Michaelangelo and Raphael (so labeled) in poses which recall the Michaelangelo "Night" and "Day", satirically suggesting Kent's supremacy. Only the inscription has been changed between the two prints, in 1724 reading "Academy of Art", in 1732 reading "Taste". In the earlier version, three figures are seen before the gate, two of them identified by Nichols as Burlington and his architect Colin Campbell, while the third is presumably a friend or member of the household.97 In the more familiar later engraving, Burlington and Pope are seen whitewashing the gate, while the poet "besmatters" a ducal coach and a passerby, who is clearly the Duke of Chandos. This is obviously a reference to Pope's "Epistle to Burlington", originally published (December 1731) as "Of Taste", a word which Burlington had done much to popularize.98 The reason for the later performance is clear enough. Burlington, angered by the artist's attack, had caused Hogarth to lose the favor of the Queen," so that the "Man of Taste" is as much aimed at Burlington as at Pope. The earlier print, as Nichols suggests, "was thought to be invented and drawn at the instigation of Sir James Thornhill [Hogarth's father-in-law], out of revenge, because Lord Burlington had preferred Mr. Kent before him to paint for the king at his palace at Kensington".100 If this is the reason for attacking 87

John Nichols, Biographical Anecdotes of William Hogarth, with a Catalogue of his Works (London, 1785), pp. 128-129. 98 Epistles to Several Persons, ed. F. W . Bateson (London, 1952), p. viii, The Poems of Alexander Pope, op. cit., III. 99 Ibid., p. ix. 100 Nichols, op. cit., p. 130.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

87

Burlington, then, why was it done as part of the attack on the opera, ridotto, and pantomime? The answer would seem to lie in Burlington himself. Among the grande seigneurs of the age, Richard Boyle, 3rd Earl of Burlington and 4th Earl of Cork (1695-1753), ranks with the grandest. Although he dabbled in politics (as befitted his station), and was a patron of George Berkeley among others, his greatest fame has come from his devotion to the arts. The friend of Pope, Gay, and Swift, the patron of Handel, Rolli, and Kent, the builder of Chiswick House, the rebuilder of Burlington House, and "consultant" on Holkham, Burlington is the man most closely connected with the Palladian revival in England. And the architectural splendor praised by Pope in the "Epistle to Burlington" is the same as that pictured in the books that he inspired, Colin Campbell's Vitruvhis Britanniens (1725) and Kent's editions of The Designs of lnigo Jones and of Palladio's Fabbriche Antiche (1730). As a patron of music, he played host to Handel in 1712 and again in 1715-1717.101 He was a director of the Royal Academy of Music, but he seems to have eventually parted company with Handel, for his name also figures among the directors of the Opera of the Nobility in 1733.102 T o the typically English mind of Hogarth, it would seem that the opera and the Palladian were connected Italian innovations, and he must have felt that this juxtaposition would carry meaning to his audience before he would introduce Burlington into "Masquerades and Operas, Burlington Gate". If the Palladian and the operatic had no clear connection, there would be insufficient satiric point to justify bringing them together. While the opera can be grouped with the masquerades and pantomimes as exotic, hence unEnglish, the opera would also seem to serve as the link between the Palladian and these other exotics. By including Burlington in this satiric attack, Hogarth suggests the connection — or even identity — which he as the "typical Englishman" felt between the neo-classic in architecture, as manifested by the Palladianism of Burlington and Kent, 101 102

Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 49, 78. Ibid., pp. 91-94, 304.

88

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

and the Handelian opera. But whereas the Palladian style was destined to flourish in England, by 1724 the opera was already torn by the quarrels which were to doom it. The competition between Handel and Bononcini was brought to an end in 1724, when Bononcini accepted a pension of ¿500 from the eccentric Henrietta, Duchess of Marlborough, as reported in Mist's Weekly Journal for May 23. It would appear that she discouraged his writing for the theatre, for he wrote only one more opera for London, the Astianatte of 1727, although he remained in England until about 1733. But his best work had made a great and lasting impression. This was especially true of Griselda (22 February 1722), an aria from which, "Dolce sogno", is discussed in Steele's The Conscious Lovers (Act II, sc. ii) as part of a conversation between Indiana and Bevil Jr., who debate the relative merits and popularity of two recent Bononcini operas, Crispo (10 January 1722) and Griselda, as a sign of extreme sensibility. Anastasia Robinson apparently was particularly touching as the patient wife, and her husband was one of Senesino's most popular roles. Steele considered the display of virtue particularly edifying. Perhaps the greatest quarrel to upset the Academy, however, was the famous rivalry between the two leading sopranos, the most famous of their day, Francesca Cuzzoni and Faustina Bordoni. Cuzzoni (c. 1700-1770) was first on the scene, singing in Handel's Ottone on 12 January 1723, with the excellent supporting cast of Senesino, Berenstadt and Boschi, Durastanti, and Anastasia Robinson.103 She married the harpsichordist and composer Sandoni, long a member of the Italian opera circle, and for three years she sang the leading soprano roles, completely outfacing Durastanti, who left after the 1723-1724 season. When the popular English soprano Anastasia Robinson, later Countess of Peterborough, retired in 1724, Cuzzoni had no competition until the Venetian mezzo-soprano Faustina Bordoni sang her first London performance in the Handel-Rolli Alessandro on 5 May 1726, with Cuzzoni, Senesino, and Boschi.104 1M 104

Ibid., p. 149. Ibid., p. 195.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

89

T h e rivalry between the two ladies seems to have been immediate and immense, and as both were excellent singers in quite different styles, each attracted a large and vociferous faction. Indeed, the demand for Alessandro was so strong that fifteen performances were called for between 5 May and 7 June, an almost unheard-of run for an opera, even today. T h e occasion was a ticklish one, as the public doubtless sensed, and Handel seems to have called in Rolli as the one poet able to devise a setting for the temperamental ladies. T h e parts were to be of exactly the same length, of equal importance in the plot (although only one could get the hero), and this care extended even to the lay-out of the score: when the two ladies were singing together, the part with the higher notes was put beneath the other, and the higher passages were alternated with quite mathematical regularity. T h e 1726-1727 season was perhaps the worst for this rivalry, and certainly the most scandalous. T h e vehemence of the partisans considerably outclassed that of any of the later operatic quarrels, including such celebrated rivalries as those between the admirers of Grisi and Pasta in the 1830s, or of Callas and Tebaldi in the 1950s. T h e Cuzzonists seem to have been led by Lady Pembroke, for there exists an epigram "Upon Lady Pembroke's promoting the cat-calls of Faustina": Old poets sing that beasts did dance Whenever Orpheus play'd, So to Faustina's charming voice Wise Pembroke's asses bray'd. 105 T h e quarrel over the ladies seems to have lacked the political implications of the various Handelian quarrels, but to have been more a question of fashion and taste, although these too involved many whose pretensions to "a taste" in music were unfounded. As the rivalry mounted, it spread to the hitherto aloof ladies themselves, and came to a climax on the last night of the season, during the performance of Astianatte on 6 June. There may 105

Quoted in Julian Marshall and O. E. Deutsch, s.v. "Cuzzoni", in Grove V.

90

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

have been a preliminary skirmish during the spring, for Lady Pembroke, in an undated letter to Charlotte Clayton, Lady Sundon, speaks of unspecified events occurring at the opera in presence of Princess Amelia, for which Cuzzoni was so hisssed on the following Tuesday that her singing was inaudible, while her supporters treated Faustina in the same fashion. The pamphleteers had been making free with the situation for some months, of course, certain of these productions being barely decent.106 Crysander dates Lady Pembroke's letter April or May, 1727, but all that is certain is that it does not refer to the performance of 7 June, which was also on a Tuesday. The exact details of that famous evening are not clear, being hidden behind the great screen of legend, but it appears that the supporters of the rival singers began hissing and clapping, which soon developed into cat-calls and "other great Indecencies".107 Fighting broke out in the auditorium, and the remainder of the performance was totally disrupted when this passed from the audience to the stage, and despite the presence of the Princess of Wales in the theatre, the rival ladies themselves began a hairpulling session in full sight of the audience. This, of course, was the crowning touch, and the court was aghast, while the town was ecstatic. Of the many satires which followed this historic incident, the best are undoubtedly those fathered on Colley Cibber and Dr. Arbuthnot, although both attributions have been declared spurious. W h e n The Miscellaneous

Works of the late Dr.

Arbuthnot

(2 vols., Glasgow, 1750) was published, the doctor's son George declared the entire collection spurious,108 although certain of the pieces are known to be by Pope's friend and physician. Nevertheless, "The Devil to Pay at St. James's: or, A full and true Account of a most horrid and bloody Battle between Madam Faustina and Madam Cuzzoni..." (June-July 1727) must be listed as "anonymous", which is a pity, for the piece is great 106

Cf. the exchange of satirical letters "between" Senesino and Faustina, quoted in Crysander, op. cit. and discussed on p. 9Î. 107 The British Journal, 10 June 1727, quoted in Deutsch, op. cit., p. 210. 100 Lester M. Beattie, John Arbuthnot: Mathematician and Satirist (Cambridge, Mass., 1935), pp. 308-309.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

91

fun, including a demonstration that the opera quarrel is based in Popery and Jacobitism and relating it all to other scenes of contemporary London life: Two of a Trade seldom or ever agree: This we daily see verified in the many Skirmishes between the Ladies that sell Mackerell near London-Bridge, and the Nymphs that vend live Mutton about Fleet-Street and Covent-Garden·. But who would have thought the Infection should reach the Hay-Market, and inspire Two Singing Ladies to pull each other's coiffs, to the no small Disquiet of the Directors, who (God help them) have enough to do to keep Peace and Quietness between them. Which of the two is the Agressor, I dare not determine, lest I lose the Friendship of many Great Noble Personages, who espouse some the one, some the other Party, with such Warmth, that it is not now, as formerly, i.e. are you High Church or Low, Whig or Tory; are you for Court or Country; King George or the Pretender; but are you for Faustina or Cuzzoni, Handel or Bononcini, there's the Question. This engages all the Polite World in warm Disputes; and but for the soft Strains of the Opera, which have in some Measure qualified and allayed the native Ferocity of the English, Blood and Slaughter would consequently ensue. As I said before, I shall not determine who is the Agressor, but take the surer Side, and wisely pronounce them both in Fault; for it is certainly an apparent Shame that two such well bred Ladies should call Bitch and Whore, should scold and fight like any Billingsgates. We have had Singers, nay, Italian singers, here before now, but never such Doings: witness Madam Margaritta and Madam Tofts; who, though they owned each other a Spight, and had both pretty high Spirits, yet they never came to Handycuffs. Nay, I am very credibly inform'd, tho' they mortally hated each other, they had the Good-Manners to kiss and cry at Parting. This was as it should be; this was fashionable, this was handsome, and indeed commendable. Then we had Madame Pilotti and Madam Isabella [Giradeau]; they were as loving as Bull's Pigs, as mild as Turtles; they visited and drank Tea, and there was no such Hurricane between them. It was much the same with Madam Durastanti and Madam Robinson. What therefore can be the Meaning, that these two Ladies, and only them, should make such a Rout is beyond my Comprehension... In the mean Time, I humbly propose, that since these Ladies are not to be reconciled by any other gentle Means, 'tis best that they fight it out at Figg's or Stokes Amphitheatre, and that a

92

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Subscription be open'd for that Purpose, and that the best Woman have the Whole House. For the further Diversion of the Company, I would have Boschi and Palmieri [both basses] be their seconds, and Senesino and Baldi [a counter-tenor] should divert the Spectators with a Bout or two at Blunts for a Hat and Feather before the Mistresses mount the Stage. . . . If this Method succeeds, the Opera-Composers may compose their Differences this way, and fight it out fairly for the Satisfaction of the Publick. 109 Whoever wrote the pamphlet, it might be noted, demonstrates a fair knowledge of operatic gossip for some years back, which makes the attribution to Arbuthnot quite possible, although the remainder of the piece wanders to other topics, and is much less amusing. On the whole, however, it is not so improbable as to be included among "Irresponsible Attributions", where it is relegated by Mr. Beattie, the doctor's latest biographer.110 In July of 1727 came the satirical farce, apparently unper-

formed, The Contre Temps or, Rival Queans: A Small Farce. As it was lately Acted, with Great Applause, at H—d—r's private Th—re, near the H— M-. This was reprinted in the 1777 edition

of The Dramatic Works of Colley Cibber, Esq.,111 although there is no evidence of his authorship. Enough of the nature of this amusing piece can be gained from the Dramatis Personae and the opening stage directions to render more extensive quotation unnecessary, but it is not unworthy of Cibber, and enjoys some fine strokes: F—s—na, Queen of Bologna. [Faustina] C—z—ni, Princess of Modern. [Cuzzoni] H—d—r, High-Priest to the Academy of Discord. [Heidegger] H—d—1, Professor of Harmony to the Academy. [Handel] S—s—no, Chief of the Choir. [Senesino] _ r Violino Primo to the Queen of Bologna, to keep her —u—o, jMajesty's Body in tune. [Monroe] j . JBasso Continuo, and Treasurer to the Princess b - a - m , j o f M o d e n a [Sandoni] A Chorus of P—rs and Tupees, with Cat-Calls. 10»

The Miscellaneous Works of the late Dr. Arbuthnot I, pp. 213-216. 110 Beattie, op. cit., p. 310. 111 IV, pp. 371-381.

(Glasgow, 1751),

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

93

SCENE the Temple of Discord, near the Η-Y M-T. Time equal to the Representation. SCENE opens and discovers the Temple of Discord: An Altar with Crowns, Globes, Scepters and other Ensigns of Royalty. The Queen and Princess on either Side the Altar. The HighPriest in his Pontificabilus. The great Officers in their proper Stations. The Chorus of D—k—s, L—ds and Tupees rang'd on each Side the Stage, according to their Factions; Cat-calls in their Hands, and Whistles, with Bells about their Necks, officiating as UnderPriests. After a short Symphony, and some small Ceremonies, the High-Priest comes forward. "Tupees" are Beaux, sparks (properly Toupee, or wig, according to NED), while the chorus of Peers is divided into Dukes and Lords. Deutsch identifies M—u—o (in the play "M—ro") as one Monroe, apparently in charge of Faustina's claque. No more intimate relationship is anywhere suggested between them, but Sandoni, of course, was Cuzzoni's husband, while the references to Heidegger and Handel are clear. Bologna and Modena are obviously references to Italian operatic centers, the one the gathering-place for out-of-work singers, the other the home of composers from Monteverdi to Bononcini (the sopranos actually came from Venice and Parma). The ladies' titles refer to the elevated roles they played in Alessandro, while opera was always performed at the Haymarket theatre. It is probably not fanciful, further, to find in the reference to the Time an allusion to the unity of time generally observed in the operas, as a part of its neo-classic inheritance. Similar to this jeu d'esprit were the slightly earlier satirical broadsides, published as the letters of one singer to another, of which the most interesting is probably the ribald SenesinoFaustina "correspondence". This began on 8 March 1727, when J. Roberts published a six-penny pamphlet, "An Epistle from S—r S—o [Signor Senesino] to S—a F—a [Signora Faustina]." It was followed by "F—a's Answer to S—o's Epistle" on 17 March. The best comment is probably that of the British Journal for 25 March: "We have been desired by some of our readers to insert Senesino's Epistle to Faustina, said to have been written

94

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

by Mr. P—e [Pope], as also the Answers by different hands. We cannot publish the Epistle without disobliging a gentleman we value; and for the Answers, one is so dull, and the other so lewd, we shall publish neither." Nothing more has been heard about Pope's proposed authorship of this work, so that the most famous allusion to the ladies' rivalry comes as one of the many operatic allusions in the most important parody of the age, Gay's Beggar's Opera, which was produced on 29 January 1728, about seven months after the fracas at the Opera House in the Haymarket. As Bertrand Bronson has demonstrated in his brief, but suggestive treatment of the work, this is but one of a series of running allusions throughout the work,112 which makes good-natured fun of certain conventions of the opera, of particular operas, and of events in the operatic world. The operatic allusions, which culminate in the Polly-Lucy/Faustina-Cuzzoni scenes, run from beginning to end. For example, the Beggar in the "Introduction" points out that I have introduc'd the Similies that are in all your celebrated Operas: The Swallow, the Moth, the Bee, the Ship, the Flower, &c. Besides I have a Prison Scene, which the Ladies always reckon charmingly pathetick. As to the Parts, I have observ'd such a nice Impartiality to our Ladies, that it is impossible for either of them to take Offense. I hope I may be forgiven, that I have not made my Opera throughout unnatural, like those in vogue; for I have no Recitative: Excepting this, as I have consented to have neither Prologue nor Epilogue, it must be allow'd an Opera in all its forms. And at the end, the Player insists that "The catastrophe is manifestly wrong, for an Opera must end happily",113 and the Beggar agrees, for "in this kind of Drama, 'tis no matter how absurdly things are brought about". The usual features of the opera, then, are listed and ironically applied to the work at hand, and a sufficient point is made about the relation of Polly and Lucy in the present work to Faustina and Cuzzoni in Alessandro na "The Beggar's Opera", in Studies in the Comic, University of California Publications in English, VIII, No. 2 (Berkley, 1941), pp. 197-231. "» The Plays of John Gay (London, n.d.), I, pp. 135-136, 223.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

95

and Riccardo I (11 November 1727). The endless "simile arias", whose point too often depends upon the most tenuous metaphorical connection, while the composer goes off on flights of musical illustration (as the hero's lovely "Va tacito e nascondo" in Giulio Cesare, with its hunting-horn accompaniment) are hit, and are frequently used in the "opera". These include the similes suggested by the Beggar, the Swallow (Polly's "Thus when the Swallow", Air XXXIV), the Moth (Mrs. Peacham's "If Love the Virgin's Heart invade", Air IV), the Bee (Macheath's "My Heart was so free", Air XV), the Ship (this most familiar of Petrarchan lyric images has a neatly paired example, Polly's "I, like a Ship in Storms, was tost", Air X, and Lucy's "I'm like a Skiff on the Ocean tost", Air XL VII, a suspicious symmetry), and the Flower (Polly's "Virgins are like the Fair Flower in its Lustre", Air VI). Parodies of this fashion include Macheath's simile of the Miser and the Shilling (Air XVIII), contrasted with Polly's Boy and his Sparrow in the second stanza, and Lucy's "Thus when a good Huswife sees a Rat" (Air XXVII). Hawkins suggested that the "pathetick" prison scene was modeled after that in Ariosti and Haym's Coriolano, while Bronson suggests others in Handel's Radamisto (1720), Fiondante (1720), and Rodelinda (1725), as well as in Alessandro itself. Finally, if there is no secco recitative, Macheath has a full-fledged scena in the last act (scene xiii, "The Condemn'd Hold"), in which he sings bits and snatches to contrasting strains, chronicling the stages of a last binge, in what is a fair imitation of accompanied recitative, leading to an aria to the tune of "Green Sleeves" (Airs LVIIILX VII). The happy ending is self-evident, and enough has been said of that convention, surely. Of the Lucy-Polly scenes, Ill.vii is undoubtedly the best, with its poison ("I have the Rats-bane ready — I run no Risque; for I can lay her Death upon the Ginn, and so many dye of that naturally that I shall never be call'd in Question"), its alternating duet (Air XLIX) in the operatic style; and it even opens with a Vengeance aria for Lucy (Air XL VII), after a long recitative-like introduction. Bronson points out how the Macheath-Polly-Lucy grouping tends to follow the Alessandro-Lisaura-Roxana (Senesino-Cuzzoni-Faustina) triangle,

96

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

and it also calls to mind the same singers in the Handel-Rolli Riccardo I of the preceeding November. The wits of the day, of course, observed high holiday over this native success, and praised Lavinia Fenton over the Italian prime donne. One of the best of these effusions was Henry Carey's "Polly Peacham", of particular interest for the way it lists the Italians, and makes a vulgar Italian pun on Cuzzoni's name. Carey was later to write a notable operatic satire himself in The Dragon of Wantley (1737). The first two stanzas of the ode to Polly are the relevant ones: Of all the Toasts, that Britain boasts, The Gim, the Gent, the Jolly, The Brown, the Fair, the Debonnair, There's none cry'd up like POLLY; She fir'd the Town, has quite cut down The Opera of Rolli Go where you will, the Subject still, Is pretty, pretty, POLLY. There's Madam Faustina, Catso! And eke Madame Catsoni·, Likewise Signior Senesino, Are tutti Abbandoni·. Ha, ha, ha, ha; Do, re, mi, fa Are now but Farce and Folly, We're ravish'd all, with Toll, loll, loll, And pretty! pretty POLLY. 114 According to NED, catso, from the vulgar Italian for membrum virile, was used in English as early as 1602 (Every Man out of His Humour), and gave rise to the variant form "gadso" by false analogy. "Polly Peacham" was published in the third edition of Carey's Poems on Several Occasions (1729), when among the subscribers were Mr. George Frederick Handel, Mr. Nicolini Haym, and Alexander Pope, Esq. Contrary to the reports of too many theatrical historians, The Beggar's Opera did not kill the Italian variety in London. It did help, though, to bankrupt the Royal Academy of Music before 114 Poems on Several Occasions. By H. Carey. The Third Enlarged. (London, 1729.)

Edition,

much

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

97

its time had expired, but this was as much an accident of bad times as the result of theatrical rivalry. It is certainly true that the London audience was seldom large enough to support crowded houses at two theatres, so that a big hit at one theatre meant lean days for the others. Pantomime, tragedy, opera, ballad opera, comedy, and farce were all vying for the same audience, and it was a fickle one. The opera may have come upon a bad season, but when the subscription was exhausted, two such astute businessmen as Handel and Heidegger went into opera management with their own money, and were backed eventually by John Rich himself — the very Lun who had let The Beggar's Opera be forced upon him —when he built the first theatre at Covent Garden with his profits from this success. Gay was not out to ruin anybody. He and Handel had collaborated about 1719 on the masque Acis and Galatea, presented privately at Chandos, with probable assistance from Pope — the song "Not showers to larks".115 About the same time, Handel presented his masque Hainan and Mordecai (1720?) there, with a libretto probably by Arbuthnot and Pope. On 26 March 1731, Acis and Galatea was performed at Lincoln's Inn-Fields, "For the benefit of Mr. Rochetti" — its first public performance, although it had been in print since 1722 — perhaps with the consent of Handel,119 and under the supervision of Gay himself.117 This does not suggest a severe break between the two, such as would have been inevitable if The Beggar's Opera had been maliciously intended or taken. Further, Gay's patroness, the Duchess of Queensbury, who guaranteed Rich the expenses of the work in order to insure production, 118 was a strong supporter of Bononcini, and would be unlikely to encourage a savage attack on the 115

Irving, op. cit., p. 284. Deutsch, op. cit., p. 272. Handel revived and revised the work the following year (1732), as a result of an unauthorized revival by Thomas Arne, with his sister Susanna — the future Mrs. Cibber — as Galatea. Also see Winton Dean, Handel's Dramatic Oratorios and Masques (London, 1959), pp. 171-172, and Philip Lord, "The English-Italian Opera Companies, 1732-3", Music and Letters, XLV (1964), pp. 239-251, especially pp. 244-245. 117 Irving, op. cit., p. 283. 118 Ibid., pp. 240-241. 118

98

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

opera; he was, after all, the composer of the unfortunate

Astianatte. In its operatic satire, The Beggar's Opera is comic, not vicious, the points well made, and the result good fun. Indeed, the best modern analogy might be the Marx Brothers' A Night at the Opera, with its incredible performance of II Trovatore, delightfully comic, but never bitter. But whatever the reason, the final season of the Academy of Music closed on 1 June 1728, and the days of Senesino-Faustina-Cuzzoni performances were over. If Handel's close friend Mrs. Pendarves began to sound melancholy in her letters at this time, it was only because no one could predict the fabulous days to come in the next few years. The Beggar's Opera, the eccentricities of the leading singers, and the fickleness of the public may have combined to stun the opera temporarily, but it was not yet dead. A part of the difficulty was that the split within the opera world was of such proportions that it made the eventual division of the company as inevitable as it was undesirable. On one side, Rolli, Senesino, Bononcini, and their friends and supporters schemed against the management in all too story-book "Italian" fashion, backed by the admirers of the rival sopranos, while, on the other side, Handel stormed autocratically, hiring and dismissing with a free hand. T o suggest that the conflict was between those who felt the interpreter — here the singer — to be supreme in music, and those who felt the composer to be supreme, is perhaps to place the situation in too Romantic a light and to suggest parallels with Gluck, Rossini, and Wagner that may be misleading; it is not, however, far from the truth. Bononcini, for one, was a product of the old Italian school, where the virtuoso reigned supreme, and the various "reforms" in Italy did little to change this; rather, the increasing simplicity in the music emphasized the part of the performer. Perhaps the best apologia for the extemporizing virtuoso came at the very end: Stendhal's, in his Vie de Rossini, at the time of Velluti, the last of the great castrati, and the legendary Giudita Pasta. What fascinated Stendhal about these few exponents of the dying art of extemporization was the magical moment of creation by the performer as an integral part of the performance, the singer

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

99

suiting his fioritura to the nature of the music and the quality of his voice. It was this, clearly, that Rolli and Bononcini, like Porpora and Hasse to come, felt to be the essential basis of the musical pleasure to be derived from singing, and it was in this that Senesino and Farinelli, Faustina and Cuzzoni were notable; beautiful voices, trained to sing with the greatest agility, combined with a high degree of taste in the appropriateness of the ornaments introduced. 119 In an age that admired the extempore, in poetry as well as in music, some of the greatest musicians achieved much of their fame through their ability to improvise — one recalls the famous contest between Handel and Domenico Scarlatti in 1706, or the even more famous visit of J. S. Bach to the court of Frederick the Great, and his improvisation on the "royal theme" later developed into the "Musical Offering". This was also the great age of the improvvisatore (an account of whom is given in the next chapter), with Rolli and Metastasio among the most famous. But Handel seems to have preferred more tractable material than the great virtuosi, as is shown in his preference for the relatively unknown Anna Strada del Pò over Cuzzoni, or Bernacchi over Senesino, on the grounds of greater taste, if less beautiful voices. The stories of his stubbornness with singers are legion and legendary, and usually involve his defense of the music as he conceived it, against sheer display. Handel was not a musical pioneer, forging a new style or sensibility, but rather was engaged in a kind of "summing up" of the baroque style, working within its limitations and conventions. He achieved a greater architectural quality than any of his contemporaries save Bach, and a greater dramatic unity, but these were the results of his innate sense of drama, and not of preconceived theory. As it was, he seems to have preferred a dramatist whom he could dominate, like Haym, rather than an independent man of letters like Rolli (although one cannot but wonder what might have 119

Perhaps the best modern analogy would be the extemporization by jazz musicians, who treat the basic melody with even greater freedom than an eighteenth century performer, while the arabesques of a Teddy Wilson recall the vocal roulades (or "divisions") set down by those who heard Bernacchi or Farinelli.

100

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

happened had he ever worked with a Calzabigi or da Ponte), and it was this which set him apart from the Italian cabel. His pride was not of the same order as theirs, nor his stubbornness of the same nature. Lacking Hasse's easy-going temperament, he could not fit into the every-day bickerings that have characterized Italian opera from the time of Monteverdi, but remained stubbornly, Germanically apart, at the end an Achilles in his tent. In the Royal Academy of Music, Handel and the Italians tried to work together for the benefit of all, but were temperamentally unable to agree. In the next four years (1729-1733), an uneasy balance was maintained, but only as long as Handel and Senesino found it necessary to work together. Eventually the opposition became formalized, Handel running one opera company at Covent Garden, the Italians the other at the Haymarket; only bankruptcy on both sides would force them together again. That the London public would not yet accept the Italian opera without Senesino became apparent soon after Handel and Heidegger opened their first independent season as the New Academy of Music (1729-1733), and he replaced Handel's new singer, Antonio Maria Bernacchi, in the fall of 1730. This was, of course, a success for the Italians, who had supported Senesino throughout his quarrels with il Uomo, as Rolli usually called Handel. Bononcini, however, was still living at the Duchess of Marlborough's, and available, but was not even considered for the new Academy, as the famous rivalry was not forgotten, especially by the lesser wits of the town. By the time of the triumph of the Italians with the Opera of the Nobility, unfortunately, Bononcini was in disgrace and disrepute for having deceitfully plagiarized a madrigal by Lotti at the concerts of the Academy of Ancient Music (1732), upon which he quarreled with his patrons, and quit the country the next year. At this same time, Handel was branching out from the opera, into the novel field of oratorio, presenting Esther, his first true English oratorio, on 2 May 1732, followed by a revised, bi-lingual Acis and Galatea on 10 June, and Deborah on 17 March 1733. It is amusing to note that in all three of these, the leading roles were sung by the principal singers of the opera, Senesino, Strada, and

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

101

Montagnana, and the resulting linguistic mish-mash can well be imagined.120 It was the premiere of Deborah, however, that broke the storms over Handel's head again, mixing music, politics, and the Italians' resentment, Walpole, Handel, Rolli, and Bolingbroke, in one olla podrida. The Craftsman, Bolingbroke and Pulteney's journal in opposition to Walpole, was entirely political, with none of the general cultural tendency to be found in a Spectator, Mist's, or even a Grub Street Journal. Written under the persona of Caleb D'Anvers, of Grey's Inn, Esq., it was run by Nicholas Amherst, and written principally by Amherst, Bolingbroke, and William Pulteney, apparently aided at times by Swift, Pope, Daniel Pulteney, and others. According to Thomas Newton, at one time Chaplain to the Earl of Bath, Pulteney's papers were signed "C" or "CA" (with Amherst), while "Lord Bolingbroke's were distinguished by the letter O". 121 The principal aim of the journal being to attack Walpole, it is of particular interest when one of the papers takes up a matter dealing with the opera world. The first to do so, No. 319, for 2 August 1732, signed with Bolingbroke's "O", is a satirical attack on those who read treason and sedition everywhere, taking as text an extraordinary notice which had appeared in the Daily Post the preceding 9 June. Aurelio del Pò, Strada's husband, published a statement on that date, that his wife had refused to sing in an intended performance of a serenata (or "pastoral entertainment") to be given by Bononcini on 24 June, "for reasons best known to the said Aurelio del Po and his Wife; and therefore the said Aurelio del Po flatters himself that the Nobility and Gentry will esteem this a sufficient Cause for his Noncompliance with Signor BononAn amusing account of the Esther performance is quoted in Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 300-301. Mrs. Thrale reported fifty years later that "Millico the Italian Singer was set to sing these English Words — I come my Queen to chaste Delights —We sung and pronounced them thus. 1 comb my Queen to catch [«c for "chase"] the Lice." She adds, however, that "the Story is so very good & comical that I must doubt the Truth of it". Thraliana, ed. Katherine G. Balderston (Oxford, 1942), I, p. 533. 121 The Works of the Right Reverend Thomas Newton, Ό.Ό With Some Account of His Life and Anecdotes of His Friends, Written by Himself (London, 1782), I, pp. 71-72. 120

102

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

cini's Desire; and likewise judge it to be a proper Answer to whatever the Enemies of the said Aurelio del Po may object against him or his Wife upon this Occasion".122 In the Craftsman piece, a corespondent — an admirer of Bononcini who regrets the weakness of the performance — is taken aback to find del Pò's letter misinterpreted as a political document by a "fat elderly Gentleman", an illustration of "political pedantry". The name Aurelio del Pò is taken to stand for the Opposition (P for Pulteney), Popery (Po for the Pope), or even Jacobitism (Aurelio for Marcus Aurelius, who is "the famous Statue on Horseback", or Chevalier referring to the equestrian statue on the Capitoline once thought to represent Marcus Aurelius, although now taken to be Hadrian — hence, the Chevalier de St. George, the Pretender) .The paper is amusing,with reminiscences of Sir Politick Wouldbe, and suggests that the Handel-Bononcini rivalry was not forgotten, and that the latter was still a favorite of the Opposition, if only because Handel had the backing of the court and the favour of the Royal family. If the musical-political background of this particular paper is a little vague, there is nothing vague about the letter printed eight months later, in No. 353, for 7 April 1733, also over Bolingbroke's "O". It was published at the peak of the controversy over the Excise Bill, and was the last issue of the Craftsman before Walpole informed the king (9 April) and Parliament (11 April) of his withdrawal of the bill, amid public rejoicing. The wisdom of the bill itself and the reasons why Bolingbroke and Pulteney attacked it are irrelevant here, but it should be remembered that this was perhaps the most controversial issue in Walpole's career; it came close to causing civil war, and certainly would have required enforcement by arms. The Excise was not the only topic of conversation at the moment, however, for Handel was also in a controversy over the first night of his oratorio Deborah (17 March). For the occasion, he had doubled the price of tickets, to a guinea, and the gallery to 10/6d. The public refused to attend, especially as the performance was declared outside the regular subscription, a practice which later 122

Q u o t e d in Deutsch, op. cit., p. 294.

THF. ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

103

became standard for the first night of an oratorio. The details were recounted in a letter from Lady A. Irwin to Lord Carlisle: Last week we had an Oratorio, composed by Hendel out of the story of Barak and Deborah, the latter of which name it bears. Hendel thought, encouraged by the Princess Royal, it had merit enough to deserve a guinea, and the first time it was performed at that price, exclusive of subscribers' tickets, there was but a 120 people in the House. The subscribers being refused unless they would pay a guinea, they, insisting upon the right of their silver tickets, forced into the House, and carried their point. This gave occasion to the eight lines I send you, in which they have done Hendel the honour to join him in a dialogue with Sir Robert Walpole. 123 The prospect of the enraged subscribers forcing their way into the theatre is a delightful one, but the outcome of the evening, and the scandal, must have been distressing to Handel and to his friend and pupil, Princess Anne. The epigram referred to by Lady Irwin is the same "Dialogue between two Projectors" quoted in The Craftsman, below. Three weeks after the first performance of Deborah, which had coincided almost exactly with the introduction of the Excise Bill in Parliament (14 March), the following letter appeared in The Craftsman, as the second part of a paper attacking the Excise by analogy: To C A L E B D ' A N V E R S , Esq; SIR, I am always rejoiced, when I see a Spirit of Liberty exert itself among any Set, [sect] or Denomination of my Countrymen. I please myself with the Hopes that it will grow more diffusive; some Time or other become fashionable; and at last useful to the Publick. As I know your Zeal for Liberty, I thought I could not address better than to you the following exact Account of the noble Stand, lately made by the polite Part of the World, in Defense of their Liberties and Properties, against the open Attacks, and bold Attempts of Mr. H—l upon both. I shall singly relate the Fact, and leave you, who are better able than I am, to make what Inferences, or Applications may be proper. The Rise and Progress of Mr. H—Ps Power and Fortune are 123

Ibid., pp.

309-310.

104

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

too well known for Me now to relate. Let it suffice to say that He was grown so insolent upon the sudden and undeserved Increase of both, that He thought nothing ought to oppose his imperious and extravagant Will. He had, for some Time, govern'd the Opera's, and modell'd the Orchestre, without the least Controul. No Voices, no Instruments were admitted, but such as flatter'd his Ears, though They shock'd those of the Audience. Wretched Scrapers were put above the best Hands in the Orchestre. No Musick but his own was to be allow'd, though every Body was weary of it; and He had the Impudence to assert, that there was no Composer in England but Himself. Even Kings and Queens were to be content with whatever low Characters He was pleased to assign Them, as is evident in the Case of Seignor Montagnana; who, though a King, is always obliged to act (except an angry, rumbling Song, or two) the most insignificant Part of the whole Drama. This Excess and Abuse of Power soon disgusted the Town; his Government grew odious; and his Opera's grew empty. However this Degree of Unpopularity and general Hatred, instead of humbling Him, only made Him more furious and desperate. He resolved to make one last Effort to establish his Power and Fortune by Force, since He found it now impossible to hope for it from the good Will of Mankind. In order to do This, He form'd a Plan, without consulting any of his Friends, (if He has any) and declared that at a proper Season He would communicate it to the Publick; assuring us, at the same Time, that it would be very much for the Advantage of the Publick in general, and of Opera's in particular. Some People suspect that He had settled it previously with Seignora Strada del Po, who is much in his Favour; but all, that I can advance with Certainty, is, that He had concerted it with a Brother of his own, in whom he places a most undeserved Confidence. In this Brother of his, Heat and Dulness are miraculously united. The former prompts Him to any Thing new and violent; while the latter hinders Him from seeing any of the Inconveniencies of it. As Mr. H—l's Brother, He thought it was necessary He should be a Musician too; but all He could arrive at, after a very laborious Application for many Years, was a moderate Performance upon the Jew's Trump. He had, for some Time, play'd a Parte buffa abroad, and had entangled his Brother in several troublesome and dangerous Engagements, in the Commissions He had given Him to contract with foreign Performers; and from which (by the Way) Mr. H—l did not disengage Himself with much Honour. Notwithstanding all these and many more Objections, Mr. H—l, by and with the Advice of this Brother, at last pro-

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

105

duces his Project·, resolves to cram it down the Throats of the Town; prostitutes great and aweful Names, as the Patrons of it; and even does not scruple to insinuate that They are to be Sharers of the Profit. His Scheme set forth in Substance, that the late Decay of Opera's was owing to their Cheapness, and to the great Frauds committed by the Door-keepers·, that the annual Subscribers were a Parcel of Rogues, and made an ill Use of their Tickets, by often running two into the Gallery; that to obviate these Abuses He had contrived a Thing, that was better than an Opera, call'd an Oratorio·, to which none should be admitted, but by printed Permits, or Tickets of one Guinea each, which should be distributed out of Warehouses of his own, and by Officers of his own naming·, which Officers could not so reasonably be supposed to cheat in the Collection of Guineas, as the Door-keepers in the Collection of half Guineas·, and lastly, that as the very Being of Opera's depended upon Him singly, it was just that the Profit arising from hence should be for his own Benefit. He added, indeed, one Condition, to varnish the whole a little; which was, that if any Person should think himself aggrieved, and that the Oratorio was not worth the Price of the Permit, he should be at Liberty to appeal to three Judges of Mustek, who should be obliged, within the Space of seven Years at farthest, finally to determine the same; provided always that the said Judges should be of his Nomination, and known to like no other Musick but his. The Absurdity, Extravagency, and Oppression of this Scheme disgusted the whole Town. Many of the most constant Attenders of the Opera's resolved absolutely to renounce them, rather than go to them under such Extortion and Vexation. They exclaim'd against the insolent and rapacious Projector of this Plan. The King's old and sworn Servants, of the two Theatres of DruryLane and Covent-Garden, reap'd the Benefit of this general Discontent, and were resorted to in Crowds, by way of Opposition to the Oratorio. Even the fairest Breasts were fired with Indignation against this new Imposition. Assemblies, Cards, Tea, Coffee, and all other Female Batteries were vigorously employ'd to defeat the Project, and destroy the Projector. These joint Endeavours of all Ranks and Sexes succeeded so well, that the Projector had the Mortification to see but a very thin Audience at has Oratorio·, and of about two hundred and sixty odd, that it consisted of, it is notorious that not tenpaid for their Permits, but, on the contrary, had them given Them, and Money into Bargain, for coming to keep Him in Countenance. This Accident, They say, has thrown Him into a deep Me-

106

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

lancholy, interrupted sometimes by raving Fits; in which He fancies He sees ten thousand Opera Devils coming to tear Him to Pieces; then He breaks out into frantick, incoherent Speeches; muttering sturdy Beggars, Assassination, &c. In these delirious Moments, He discovers a particular Adversión to the City. He calls Them all a Parcel of Rogues, and asserts that the honestest Trader among them deserves to be hang'd. — It is much quest i o n i whether He will recover; at least, if He does, it is not doubted but He will seek for a Retreat in his own Country from the general Resentment of the Town. I am, SIR Your very humble Servant, O. P - L O R—LI. P.S. Having seen a little Epigram, lately handed about Town, which seems to allude to the same Subject, I believe it will not be unwelcome to your Readers. EPIGRAM QUoth W—e to H—l, shall W e Two agree, And excise the whole Nation? H. si, Caro, si. Of What Use are Sheep, if the Shepherd can't shear them? At the Hay-Market I, you at Westminster — W . Hear Him! Call'd to Order, their Seconds appear in their Place; One fam'd for his Morals, and one for his Face. In half They succeeded, in half They were crost. The EXCISE was obtain'd, but poor DEBORAH lost.124 O. It will be noticed that in the Epigram, as in the letter proper, the key terms — those which carry the allusions — are italicised. In the Epigram, the two "seconds" are, of course, Lord Hervey (morals) and Heidegger (face). It is clear that this is an attack on Walpole much more than on Handel, and that the form and persona were chosen because of Handel's temporary unpopularity, along with his reputation as a stubborn fighter and businessman (as in the Bonincini affair), and because of certain resemblances between the two men that worked on this occasion. More important, Handel was firmly The Craftsman, by Caleb D'Anvers, of Gray's-Inn, Esq; (London, 1731-1757), X, pp. 206-210. This letter is also quoted in Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 310-313. 124

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

107

attached to the Hanoverian dynasty, and was patronized particularly by the King and the Princesses, thus cementing the connection with the King's chief minister. In the key to the satire, Handel means Walpole; the Opera equals the state; Montagnana, George II; his songs, a threatening proclamation and Parliamentary speech; Strada, the Queen; Handel's brother, undoubtedly meaning Heidegger, Horace Walpole, the ambassador to Paris — here the analogy must be understood for the comment to be meaningful; Performers, foreign powers; the late decay of operas, Customs; door-keepers, tax-collectors; the annual subscribers as a "Parcel of Rogues", the London merchants in Walpole's unfortunate "sturdy beggars" phrase; the oratorio and the collection of admission, the Excise; the constant attenders at the opera, the government's supporters; the small attendance at the oratorio, the very small government majority; "his own Country", Handel's Germany and Walpole's Norfolk; and so on. A most interesting question, however, is who actually wrote the letter. It is signed, clearly, by Paolo Rolli, while the paper itself is signed twice with Bolingbroke's " O " . Deutsch decides against Rolli: Although it seems incredible that the signature "P—lo R—li" could have been used without Paolo Rolli's consent, its veil was too thin to hide him if he wished to conceal his authorship; and although he was very critical of Handel, Rolli never opposed him in public. The signature, therefore, may have been a fake, used to stress the opposition to Handel, even on the part of his former associates. At the beginning and at the end, there are indications that the writer was a born Englishman, and rather nationalistic.125 This is undoubtedly the best case that can be brought against Rolli's authorship, and this is the reasoning that has usually been accepted. What Deutsch and other writers seem to have missed, however, is the letter "Al Sigr. Calebi d'Anversa", among the Senesino papers in the Biblioteca Comunale in Siena, and also a version in Italian of the Epigram, although not a part of the Deutsch, op. cit., p. 313. The key is largely that of Schoelcher and Chrysander. 125

108

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

same manuscript. Since the letter is the most important evidence for Rolli's authorship, it is worth reproducing in full: Al Sig.r Calebi d'Anversa Gentilhuomo Io mi rallegro sempre, quando vedo un spirito di libertà agitarsi da se stesso fra qualunque grado di persone, che sono miei paesani. Mi lusingo ancora che sempre più si aumenterà e una volta o l'altra diventerà alla moda, e finalmente molto servizievole al Pubblico. Come io conosco il di lei zelo per la libertà ho pensato ch'io non poteva meglio dirigere, che a lei la susseguente esatta relazione della opposizione nobile fatta ultimamente dalle >ersone le più gentili del mondo in difesa della loro proprietà e ibertà contro gl'aperti attacchi, e arditi sforzi del S.r Handell. L'elevazione, e il progresso del potere del S.r Handell e la di lui fortuna sono cose abastanza da me conosciute, perche io ne dia un ragguaglio. Basta solo dire ch'era divenuto così insolente sopra T ' i m p r o v i s a e immeritevole aumentazione dell'una e dell'altra, che credeva niente potesse opporsi al suo imperio e stravagante volere. Aveva lui per qualche tempo senza alcuno controlo governato l'Opera, e diretta l'Orchestra: non voleva ammettere in quella nè cantanti nè sonatori, ma solamente quelli che lusinfavano le sue orecchie, ancorché inasprissero quelle di tutta 'Udienza: li più ignoranti erano preferiti agl'huomini più capaci. Non voleva permettere altra musica che la sua, ancorché ogn uno fosse annoiato di quella; ed era così sfacciato che ardiva dire che non si trovava altro compositore che lui in Inghilterra. Li Rè, e le Regine erano constretti a contentarsi di qualunque basso carattere che compiacevasi darli; come si vede chiaramente nel caso del Sig.r Montagnana; il quale, ancor'che Rè, è obbligato sempre di rapresentare (fuor che una o due arrabbiate canzoni) la parte la più insignificante di tutt'il dramma. Questo eccesso, e questo abbuso del suo potere disgustò ben presto tutta la Città. Diventò il suo governo odioso, et il suo Teatro vuoto. Tuttavia questo grado d'impopolarità, et odio universale invece d'umiliarlo, lo rese più furioso e più disperato. Risolse fare l'ultimo sforzo, e di stabilire il suo potere, e la sua fortuna per via della forza; poiché vedeva impossibile d'ottenerla dalla volontà degl'huomini: per riuscire m questo, formò un progietto, senza consigliare nissuno dei suoi Amici (se pure uno ne può trovare) e dichiarò ch'ai suo proprio, che l'averebbe comunicato al Pubblico; assicurandosi nel medesimo tempo, che questo progietto sarebbe stato molto avantaggioso al Pubblico e giovevole, et imparticolare all'Opera. Vi sono di quelli, che sospettano che havesse avanti concertato tutto questo con la S.ra Strada del Pò, la quale

f

f

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

109

è molto sua favorita. Tuttavia è che lui cabalò questo con confida benche senza merito. Odio, e stupidezza miracolosamente si congiungano in questo suo Fretto [Fratello]. L'Odio lo sprona ad ogni cosa nuova e violenta, quando la sua stupidezza gl'impedisce discernere qualunque inconvenienza, che ne nasce da quella. Come Fretto [Fratello] del S.r Handell credeva necessario, che ancor Lui fosse Musico. Ma tutto quello, che lui era capace d'eseguire dopo una faticosa applicazione per molti anni era di suonare sopra lo scacciapensieri. Haveva questo per qualche tempo rapresentato ne paesi forestieri una parte buffa; ed aveva intrigato il suo Fratello in diversi fastidiosi e pericolosi impegni nella commissione, che gl'aveva dato di contrattar con altri Forestieri; dai quali impegni (sia detto leggiermente) il Sig.r Handell non si distrigò con molto suo honore. Nonostante questo e molti più grandi ostacoli il S.r Handell con il consiglio, e per mezzo di questo suo fretto [fratello] produce alla fine il suo progietto. Risolve di sforzare li Cittadini ad inghiottirlo. Prostituisce Nomi grandi e da rispettarsi come Protettori di questo; e di più non si fa scrupolo d'insinuare che questi devono essere compagni nel profitto. Insustanza il suo progetto dichiara, che la caduta ultimamente dell'Opera deriva dal suo prezzo troppo inferiore, e dalle fraudi, che sono comesse dalli portinai). Che li Sottoscriventi annuali sono una Manica di Furbi, che nell'uso de' loro Bollettini cagionano un grande detrimento, perche spesse volte introducano nella galleria due persone, che per evitar questi abusi aveva inventata una cosa, che era meglio che l'Opera la quale si chiama un'Oratorio, e che nissuno fusse ammesso in questo senza una permissione in stampa, o vero senza Bullettini al prezzo d'una ghinea ciascheduno, Π quali Bullettini dovessero essere distribuiti fuori de' suoi propri magazzini; e per mano ancora d'uffiziali scielti da lui; li quali non potevano ragionevolmente esser sospettati d'inganno nella raccolta di queste ghinee. E finalmente come l'essere stesso dell'Opera dipende singolarmente da Lui, era giusto che il profitto che derivava da questo fosse stato appropiato per il suo avantaggio. Aggiunse in vero un'altra condizione per mascherare il tutto; la quale era, che se qualcheduno si fosse lamentato, credendo che l'Oratorio non valesse il prezzo dell'entrata, havesse la libertà d'appellarsi a' tre Giudici di Musica, li quali fossero obbligati nel spazio di sett'anni al più di decidere per sempre questa diferenza, intendendosi però che questi giudici fossero sempre nominati da Lui, e che a questi non piacesse altra musica che la sua. — L'assordita, la stravaganza, e l'oppressione di questo progietto disgustò intieramente la Città;

110

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

moltissimi di quelli, che frequentavano continuamente l'Opera risolsero assolutamente di rigettare queste proposizioni; piutoso ch'essere spettatori con dispiacere di queste estorsioni, esclamavano contro l'insolenza, e contro il rapace autore di questo sordido sistema. Li Domestici vecchi del Rè, e quelli delli due Teatri di Drury Lane, e di Convent Garden ne ricavarono grande avantaggio da questo dispiacere generale, e risolsero tutti andare in folla in opposizione all'Oratorio. Le Dame ancora erano animate con indignazione contro questa nuova imposizione. Tutte le compagnie del gioco, del bevere il Thè, il Caffé, e di tutte le altre batterie delle Donne si erano impegnate per distruggere questo progietto, e l'autore ancora. Questa risoluzione unanima di qualunque persona di qualsisia condizione ebbe sì buono effetto che il Progettore fu talmente mortificato in vedere una sì tenue udienza al suo Oratorio; che di due cento e settanta e più persone che si ritrovavano nel Teatro, è manifesto che scarsamente dieci pagorono per l'ingresso; ma alcontrario sono stati li Bollettini distribuiti per niente e più si sa che furono sborzati ancora denari per riempire il Teatro. Si dice che per questo accidente si è gettato in una profonda malinconia, e qualche volta viene agitato da qualche accidente di pazzia, nella quale s'immagina vedere dieci mila Diavoli, che appartengano al Teatro che corrono contro di lui per lacerarlo e allora esclama con discorsi furibondi, e inconsistenti barbottando fra se stesso questi accenti: Mercanti storditi assassini. In questi momenti delinosi fa conoscere ch'à una avversione particolare contro la Città; grida che sono uno stuolo di furlanti ed asserisce che il più onesto negoziante fra loro merita d'essere impiccato. Si dubita molto se lui si ricupererà; ma se ciò arriva è certo che procurerà ritirarsi nel suo paese per essere distante dal risentimento universale di questo Popolo. Pa:o R.li As is clear, the letter is the same in Italian as in English, with a few verbal discrepancies and the absence of the end of the first paragraph. "Handell" is written out and in the penultimate paragraph " T h e fairest Breasts" is merely "le dame"; in the last paragraph "ten thousand Opera Devils" become "diece mille diavoli, che appartengone al Teatro", and at the end "of the T o w n " is "di questo Popolo". In the phrase "Heat and Dullness" in the second paragraph, "Odio", hatred, replaces "Heat", although this establishes no clear precedence for either version. T h e Italian is oddly awkward, which might be the effect of

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

111

translation or of many revisions to fill out the attack. One oddity is that the accents are invariably, and incorrectly, omitted on "più", "perchè", and "anchorchè" (also "ancor'chè"), which was not Rolli's custom elsewhere. There is no complementary close, but the initials used as signature are the same, "P—lo R—li". It is difficult to tell from what is clearly a fair copy, but the letter could be in Rolli's hand. In the Siena Senesino collection, the epigram is placed with a letter from Rolli dated 1729, but is not a part of it. Since the Siena file, Filza XXVI, No. 4, is entirely Rolli-Senesino material, and since another item is dated less than a year after the Craftsman letter ("ii Febe 1734"), there is little doubt that Senesino obtained the copy from Rolli, and one possible reason for it would be that Senesino's English was probably not good enough for him to savour the letter in English, so that Rolli gave him the Italian original. The epigram is merely a paraphrase of the original English (with a certain confusion of speakers in line 5), as if prepared for one who knew little English. As would be expected, the "Si, caro si" is quoted exactly, although only this, as it is probably a musical allusion to the opera. Arias opening with this line are to be found in Rinaldo (Act III) and Admeto (Act III), the latter having been produced in 1727, while the former had been revived successfully in 1731, both with Senesino. A further question arises concerning style, for the letter is highly colloquial in English. An examination of Rolli's later contributions to the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society,126 either translated by him, or originally written in his not quite perfect English (which he himself speaks of elsewhere), 127 suggests that the letter was originally written by Rolli in Italian, and then translated into English, perhaps by 128

XLIII, for 1744-1745 (1746), pp. 447-465. "I have been now twelve Years in England, and having apply'd me self to the understanding of so opulent a Language; wherefore I thought myself obliged to answer M. V. in the very Language he has writ his Essay; but I do own I have been corrected by my Learned Friends; and tho' corrected, I am sensible that my Reader will immediately find me out for a Foreigner." Remarks upon M. Voltaire's Essay on the Epick Poetry of the European Nations (London, 1728), p. 24. 127

112

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Bolingbroke with Rolli's assistance. This would also explain the differences between the two versions, for the Italian is always shorter. T h e additions are such as would arise in the process of translating into English, while shortening the letter would be pointless if the translation went the other way, into Italian. That the paper is printed over Bolingbroke's identifying initial suggests his hand, but the existence and nature of the Siena version, and the wide range of familiarity with the operatic as well as the political spheres, suggest that the letter itself is undoubtedly the work of Rolli. W h y would Rolli undertake to attack Handel in this fashion when, as Deutsch says, he "never opposed him in public"? This is easily understood in the context of the opera problems of 1733. T h e dominant Whig party, under Walpole and the King, supported Handel, so that he was identified with the court interest. The anti-Walpole Whigs and the Tories, who tended to be less mercantile and more literary (they included most of the major writers of the time), generally backed Bononcini and the singers — especially Senesino — against the proud German. Rolli, supported by his friends, colleagues, and countrymen, disagreed with Handel frequently, and could work with him only occasionally. In order to guarantee themselves the operas they liked, sung by their favorite singers (Senesino and Cuzzoni), early in 1733 an influential group of noblemen met under the leadership of the Prince of Wales, and formed a subscription for a new opera company, known as the Opera of the Nobility. T h e directors at the beginning were the Dukes of Bedford and Rutland, the Earls of Burlington, Delawarr, and Stair, the Earl Cowper, Lords Bathurst, Cadogan, Limerick, and Lovel, Sir John Buckworthy, Sir Michael Newton, and Henry Furness, Esq. 128 Perhaps the most significant name for Rolli was that of James Dalrymple, Earl of Stair, one of his earliest English patrons, and a leader against the Excise, and it suggests the close ties that bound Rolli to the anti-Walpole faction, while Burlington in particular must have approved of Rolli's Italian background and firm neo-classic standards. The attack on Handel in im Deutsch, op. cit., p. 304.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

113

April of 1733, then, became a part of the initial propaganda for the new opera company, at the same time that it served as a blind for a far more serious attack on Walpole, which is why it is found in a leading political journal. The affair of the Opera of the Nobility was the last of the great operatic scandals at the London opera, and one of the truly strange episodes in music history. Between 1 January 1734 and 11 June 1737, some of the finest musicians in Europe were marshalled against Handel, in a successful effort to drive him bankrupt; at the same time, they unwittingly succeeded in driving him into oratorio, where he recouped the fortune that he had lost over the opera. The plan for the new opera was to combine the best that London could offer (i.e., Senesino, Montagnana, Rolli, and the returning Cuzzoni), with the best and newest that Italy could offer, and in particular the composer Porpora and his legendary pupil, the soprano Carlo Broschi, called Farinelli. The first season, however, opened without the prima donna, and Farinelli did not appear until the second season. The first opera was Porpora's Arianna, with a text by Rolli, and it seems to have been premiered 1 January 1734 at Lincoln's Inn Fields.128 Handel had already opened his season at the Haymarket on 30 October 1733, with a pasticcio, Metastasio's Semiramide Riconosciuta, the music probably selected from Vivaldi,180 and did not produce his own new opera until 26 January, when Arianna in Creta appeared. Interestingly enough, this was set to a libretto by Pariati (perhaps revised by Francis Colman) first set by Porpora in 1714,131 dealing with an earlier episode in the story of Ariadne than that chosen by Rolli for Porpora. The Opera of the Nobility was known generally during this first season as "Senesino's opera" for two reasons, both of which reflected the prevailing atmosphere. The first was, of course, that the SenesinoHandel quarrels had in large part precipitated the break, which 129

Alan Yorke-Long, "The Opera of the Nobility". A Dissertation, presented for the Osgood Memorial Prize, 1951. (Oxford, unpublished.) no William C. Smith, Concerning Handel (London, 1948), p. 178. 131 Yorke-Long, "Opera of the Nobility", op. cit., p. 115.

114

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

had come when Senesino was "fired" in June of 1733, although he seems to have been in communication with the new direction for some months before this. Not only, then, was Senesino the star, but the lease for Lincoln's Inn Fields, where the company performed its first season, was taken in Senesino's name, thus making him a "front" for the directorate, and taking advantage of his great popularity to build support for the new company. This support was soon forthcoming, for Handel's autocratic manner had infuriated not only the proud castrato, but had offended a great many of his aristocratic patrons as well, and Handel had played right into their hands by his actions in the Deborah affair, which undoubtedly drove many more into the camp of the Nobility, and diminished his support at the very beginning of the struggle. There was one further involvement in the matter which makes it the more interesting, and demonstrates again the way in which politics filled all of the corners of life, for this time the opera became involved in the long drawn-out struggle between George II and his son, Frederick, Prince of Wales. This conflict seems to have been a classic pattern in the Hanoverian dynasty, and was essentially the same in the case of George II and his father. The Prince, apparently an amiable, musical man, was infuriated because his father kept him on an allowance, rather than obtaining for him a Civil List, and because of the delay in arranging a marriage for him, while his sister, the Princess Royal, received both. As with his father before him, this dissatisfaction made him a natural rallying point (or tool, perhaps) of the political opposition. If his father was a rabid Handelian, along with his mother and sisters, then one way to embarrass the King would be to support the musical opposition, and so his influence was lent to the Opera of the Nobility. Indeed, as the Daily Post reported for Christmas day of 1733, "there was a rehearsal of a new Opera at the Prince of Wales' House in the Royal Gardens in Pail-Mall, where there was present a great Concourse of the Nobility and Quality of both Sexes. Some of the choicest Voices and Hands assisted in the Performance." 132 This was the full 132

Ibid., quoted on p. 38.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

115

rehearsal of Arianna, immediately before the opening, the first performance by the new company. The most complete contemporary view is that found in Lord Hervey's Some Materials toward Memoirs of the Reign of King George II. Concerning the ill-feeling between the Prince and the Princess Royal (who married the Prince of Orange in 1734), Hervey wrote, Another judicious subject of his enmity was her supporting Handel, a German musician and composer (who had been her singing master, and was now undertaker of one of the operas) against several of the nobility who had a pique to Handel, and had set up another person to ruin him; or, to speak more properly and exactly, the Prince, in the beginning of his enmity to his sister, set himself at the head of the other opera to irritate her, whose pride and passions were as strong as her brother's (though his understanding was so much weaker), and could brook contradiction, where she dared to resent it, as little as her father. What I have related may seem a trifle, but though the cause was indeed such, the effects of it were no trifles. The King and Queen were as much in earnest upon this subject as their son and daughter, though they had the prudence to disguise it, or to endeavour to disguise it, a little more. They were both Handelists, and sat freezing constantly at his empty Haymarket Opera, whilst the Prince with all the chief of the nobility went as constantly to that of Lincoln's Inn Fields. The affair grew as serious as that of the Greens and the Blues under Justinian at Constantinople. An anti-Handelist was looked upon as an anticourtier, and voting against the Court in Parliament was hardly a less remissible or more venial sin than speaking against Handel or going to the Lincoln's Inn Fields Opera. The Princess Royal said she expected in a little while to see half the House of Lords playing in the orchestra in their robes and coronets; and the King (although he declared he took no other part in this affair than subscribing £ 1,000 a year to Handel) often added at the same time that he did not think setting oneself at the head of a faction of fiddlers a very honourable occupation for people of quality; or the ruin of one poor fellow so generous or so goodnatured a scheme as to do much honour to the undertakers, whether they succeeded or not; but the better they succeeded in it, the more he thought they would have reason to be ashamed of it. The Princess Royal quarrelled with the Lord Chamberlain [the Duke of Grafton] for affecting his usual neutrality on this

116

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

occasion, and spoke of Lord Delaware, who was one of the chief managers against Handel, with as much spleen as if he had been at the head of the Dutch faction who opposed the making her husband Stadtholder.133 When later the same year the Princess of Orange departed for Holland (21 October 1734), Hervey reported that while he [Hervey] led her to her coach, she insisted on his writing to her constantly to give her an account how all those hours passed in which she used to have her share. She had Handel and his operas so much at heart that even in these distressing moments she spoke as much upon his chapter as any other, and begged Lord Hervey to assist him with the utmost attention.134 Recent biographers have attempted to rehabilitate the reputation of Prince Frederick, and Mr. Alan Yorke-Long has argued most persuasively against his active participation in the affairs of the Opera of the Nobility. Hervey's statement, however, is too definite to be refuted merely by an appeal to his thorough detestation of the Prince, and Hervey was sufficiently indifferent to music, and to opera in particular, that he would hardly have chosen this ground for attack without some further cause. Again, the holding of the rehearsal of Arianna in the Prince's apartments can hardly be explained away simply on the grounds of Frederick's great fondness for music (he was a competent amateur 'cellist, according to report, and is depicted with that instrument in Philip Mercier's 1733 painting of the royal children.135 Another point against him is his patronage of Farinelli in 1734-1735, as reported at the time of Farinelli's fabulous benefit in 1735: 133

Ed. Romney Sedgwick (London, 1931), I, pp. 273-274. The queen's fondness for Handel's music is suggested by Hervey's report that when they talked of bringing Mme. Walmoden, the King's mistress, from Hanover —a plan the queen and Hervey favored —"she would begin to sing or repeat these words: 'Se mai più sarò gelosa me punisca il sacro nume,' etc., which was the beginning of a song in one of Handel's operas called Porus: And always spoke of these conjugal infedelities as things about which only girls and fools ever made themselves uneasy ..." (1726), II, p. 600. 134 Ibid., II, pp. 370-371. 135 Reproduced in Deutsch, op. cit., facing p. 3S3.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

117

His royal highness the Prince hath been pleased to make a present of a fine wrought gold snuff-box, richly set with diamonds and rubies, in which was enclosed a pair of brilliant diamond kneebuckles, as also a purse of 100 guineas, to the famous Signior Farinello, who hath constantly attended all his royal highness' concerts of vocal and instrumental music, since he came from Italy.136 The leading singer's assiduous attendance on the Prince makes all the more likely Frederick's patronage of the new opera at its beginning. By 1736, however, the Prince seems to have become reconciled with Handel, and his bounty given to the two opera companies jointly — ¿250 apiece. The king's subsidy of ¿1000, however, went to the management of the King's Theatre in the Haymarket, as the Royal Opera, regardless of the company, Handel's or the Nobility, but the king continued to make occasional smaller grants to Handel at Covent Garden.137 The music must have been worth nearly any subsidy whatever, for these were the great days of opera in London. Although it was not unusual for two leading castrati to appear in a single city, or even on the same stage, to have three in competition, along with a couple of leading sopranos, was international news. During the first season of the competition, the Opera of the Nobility had Senesino and Cuzzoni, along with the fine bass Montagnana, while Handel had Carestini as his primo uomo, Strada del Pò, and the returned Margherita Durastanti as seconda dama. In the second season, there were the same men, Cuzzoni, Strada, and Handel's new attraction, the French dancer Marie Sallé, with Porpora and Handel as composers, the latter occupying the newly completed Covent Garden. Then the Nobility, at the Haymarket, introduced the soprano Farinelli, perhaps the most famous singer of all time, on 29 October 1734, in Metastasio's Artaserse, with music by Hasse, and additional music by Farinelli's brother, Riccardo Broschi. At that moment, although no one could have guessed it, iae

The Grub-Street Journal, 10 April 173S. Quoted in Yorke-Long, "The Opera of the Nobility", op. cit., p. 57. He reports (p. 103) that the value of the snuff-box was ¿46, while the buckles were valued at ¿47. 137 Ibid., p. 104.

118

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

Farinelli was beginning his last public engagement. A student of Porpora, and of gentle birth, he had made his debut in Metastasio's first work, a serenata Angelica e Medoro (Naples, 1720), and soon became famous throughout Italy, singing in Rome, Bologna, and Venice, as well as in Naples and Vienna. After three years in London (where his salary, although estimated as high as ,£2500 a year, was probably £1501, the extra pound indicating supremacy), he went to Spain on what was intended to be a brief visit, and stayed for more than twenty years (17371759) as virtual prime minister of Spain and favorite of two monarchs. On the death of Ferdinand VI, he retired to Bologna, where he entertained Burney in 1770, and where he died in 17 8 2.138 The rage in London for Farinelli was such that at one of the early performances of Artaserse a lady of quality (Lady Pembroke perhaps?) was widely reported to have cried out, "One God, one Farinelli!"139 At the first rehearsal of the opera, he reduced the orchestra to a state of gaping, wondering silence, while on the first night, Senesino, playing the role of a tyrant, wept and embraced him after his pathetic singing in a prison scene. The report of his benefit (15 April 1735) was carried in The Political State for April: On the 15th of last Month the famous Signor Farinelli, the Singer, had his Benefit Night at the Opera-House in the HayMarket, when there was a most numerous Audience; for the Pit and Galleries were full by four o'clock, and the Stage being done up without any Scenes, as at a Ridotto, and curiously adorned with gilt Leather, there were several hundreds of People in the Seats erected there; so that it is reckoned that he had a most extraordinary Benefit; for besides the usual Price of Tickets, his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales gave him 200 Guineas, the Spanish Ambassador 100, the Emperor's 50, his Grace the Duke of Leeds 50, the Countess of Portmore 50, the Lord Burlington 50, his Grace the Duke of Richmond 50, the Hon. Col. Paget 30, the Lady Rich 20, and most of the other Nobiliyt 50, 30, or 20 each; In the whole, it is computed he made by his Benefit 20001. and as he has besides a Salary of 1500 1. for each Season, and has got several other Presents upon extraordinary Occasions, it may 138 138

H e r i o t , op. cit., pp. 95-110. Ibid., p. 99.

THF. I T A L I A N OPERA IN ENGLAND

119

be reckoned he has got at least 4 or 5000 I. for this season in England, which will be a lasting Monument to the Politeness and Generosity of the Persons of Quality and Distinction of this A g e . . .14° From this last ironic comment, the unknown author goes on to suggest that such Persons could also pay a heavy tax to reduce the burdens on the poor. Because of his enormous success, Farinelli became the principal target for innumerable attacks on the opera. He was reviled by The Prompter (March 1735), and scorned by The Grub-Street Journal (a letter by "Staunch Old Briton" in No. 312, and a poem in No. 284) ; he was mocked by Fielding in Pasquín (1736, as Faribelly, the strange man-woman, Act II, sc. i) and in The Historical Register for the Year 1736 (1737, Act II, sc. i), and teased by Henry Carey in The Honest Yorkshire-Man (1735); he passes through The Female Rake (1736) and Joseph Peterson's The Raree-Shoiv (1739), while he was made the subject of The Queen of Spain, or Farinelli at Madrid (Dublin, 1740, with the supposed author, James Wasdale, as the queen). In Robert Baker's A Rehearsal of a new Ballad-Opera Burlesqui, CaWd The Mad House (1737), a song is mentioned called "Farinelli pos'd; or the Bagpipes Triumphant, Set to the Tune of, He pull'd out his Farra-diddle".141 Perhaps the most famous reference to Farinelli, however, comes not in literature, but in the visual arts, in Hogarth's The Rake's Progress. In the second picture of the series, "Surrounded by Artists and Professors", Rakewell is seen with his various masters and associates: a fencing-master, Figg the prize-fighter, a jockey, the landscapegardener Charles Bridgeman, a music-master, and others. To the engraved version, Hogarth has added a significant detail on the back of the musician's chair: a long scroll listing the presents given at Farinelli's benefit; the last item is "A gold-snuff-box, chased with the story of Orpheus charming the Brutes, from 140 The Political State of Great Britain (London, 1735), pp. 365-366. For the Princc of Wales' gift, see note 136. 141 Edmund McAdoo Gagey, Ballad Opera (New York, 1937), pp. 160161

120

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

T. Rakewell, Esq." On the floor next to it is the engraved frontispiece to a poem dedicated to the Rake, showing Farinelli being adored by the ladies of fashion, with the legend "One God, One Farinelli!"142 The real service that the Opera of the Nobility performed was the introduction into England of the new style in opera which is associated with Porpora and Hasse. It once again put England into the front line of European musical styles, and gave Handel an opportunity to learn from the generation succeeding his own. The simplicity of the new style was its most important quality, and it is interesting to contemplate how it might have further modified Handel's style if he had gone on in opera, and not turned to the more massive form of the oratorio. In the oratorio, Handel's essentially polyphonic style is superbly suited to the handling of choral masses, and to the big contrasts in which the drama is found, with much less reliance on sheer vocal display. In the operas of Hasse, for example, the simple, but skillfully managed homophy is admirably suited to putting a voice through its paces, showing it in slow or brilliant, pathetic or heroic moments, and all to the best effect, with opportunities for the fantastic embellishment for which the castrati in particular were famous. The years of the Opera of the Nobility were numbered, however, and when the collapse came it was complete. In their first season they apparently lost some £ 19,000, which was largely recouped the next season through the Farinelli furor. 143 But it soon became evident that the audience was being pulled in too many directions. On 2 November 1734, Lord Hervey wrote to Henry Fox: By way of public spectacles this winter, there are no less than two Italian Operas, one French play house, and three English ones. Heidegger has computed the expenses of these shows, and 142

Peter Quennell, Hogarth's Progress (London, 19SS), pp. 128-129. The Works of William Hogarth in a Series of Engravings. With Descriptions and a Comment on their Moral Tendencies by the Rev. John Truster (London, 1833), p. 13. 143 Giovenale Sacchi, "Vita del D o n Carlo Broschi", Raccolta Ferrarese di Opusctdi Scientifici e Letterare, X V (1884), p. 12.

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

121

proves in black & white that the undertakers must receive seventy-six thousand odd hundred pounds to bear their charges, before they begin to become gainers.144 At the end of the third season, Porpora, Cuzzoni, Senesino, and most of the comprimario singers left, and the same year Handel gave only the briefest season (just over a month), with Gizziello and Strada as his stars, to celebrate the marriage of the Prince of Wales. The financial drain had betome too great, and both the Opera of the Nobility at the Haymarket and Handel at Covent Garden went bankrupt at the end of the 1736-1737 season. The Nobility still had Farinelli, but his popularity had leveled off, as his novelty wore thin. As early as April 1736, Mrs. Pendarves wrote to Swift, "When I went out of town last autumn, the reigning madness was Farinelli; I find it now turned on Pasquín, a dramatic satire on the times."145 Of the following season, Cibber wrote, "we have seen... even Farinelli singing to an Audience of five and thirty Pounds",148 referring to the final performances of the Opera of the Nobility, Rolli's Sabrina. On 11 June 1737 the season ended abruptly, while Handel's season ended two weeks later, with a command performance of Alexander's Feast (25 June). Handel had lost £ 10,000, and the Opera of the Nobility £ 12,000.147 Although performances of opera were given in 1738, 1739, 1740, and 1741 under the management of Heidegger, with operas by Handel, Pescetti, and Veracini, the operatic structure had collapsed. As early as the fall of 1741, the young Earl of Middlesex and Francesco Vanneschi148 began a new company, which T h e Earl of Ilchester, Lord Hervey and His Friends, 1726-1738 (London, 19S0), p. 211. 145 The Autobiography and Correspondence of Mary Granville, Mrs. Delany, ed. Lady Llanover (London, 1861-1862), I, p. 554. 146 Cibber, Apology, op. cit., II, p. 88. 147 Yorke-Long, "Ópera of the Nobility", op. cit., passim. 148 Horace Walpole's comment on l'abate Vanneschi was " W h a t a coxcomb!" Horace Walpole's Correspondence with Sir Horace Mann, ed. W . S. Lewis, Warren H. Smith, George L. Lam (New Haven, 1954), I, p. 141, letter of 11 September 1741. All Walpole citations are from The Yale Edition of Horace Walpole's Correspondence, of which this is vol. XVII. 144

122

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

restored something of the old standard. But Handel had retired into oratorio, and wrote no operas after Serse (1738), Imeneo (1740), and Deidamia (1741, a last collaboration with Rolli); Senesino had retired to Italy, and from 1737 Farinelli was resident in Spain, and never sang in public. In 1744 Rolli returned to Italy; the last ties with the old opera were broken, and the last member of the Italian circle returned to his native land. Galuppi and Gluck led the new procession, but they were part of a new world. The days of Senesino, Faustina, and Cuzzoni singing in a new opera by Handel were gone, and the close of the great era may be dated from the departure of Farinelli. Those had been days of creation, of magnificent music created to suit incredible voices, and when composers, singers, and poets vanished, the glow was gone. English opera has never recaptured it. In March 1740, wrote Horace Walpole to Richard West from Re di Coffano, en route from Siena to Rome, "Coming down a steep hill with two miserable hackneys, one fell under the chaise; and while we were disengaging him, a chaise came by with a person in a red cloak, a white handkerchief on its head, and a black hat: we thought it a fat old woman; but it spoke in a shrill little pipe, and proved itself to be Senesino."149 Perhaps the last word on the Opera should be left to the poets, not to the fussing of Fielding, Addison, or Carey. In the magnificent fourth book of The Dunciad (1742), the final session is opened with the appropriate courtly splendor of an opera, a set-piece which was prophesied in Book III: Already Opera prepares the way, The sure fore-runner of her gentle sway. (III.301-302) There is a pun on the word "Division", technically musical ornaments, especially cadenzas, but here used in its more usual sense as well. The nature of the robe is explained in a note with a reference to pasticcios, "the practice of patching up these 149

Horace Walpole's Correspondence with Thomas Gray, Richard West, and Thomas Ashton, ed. W . S. Lewis, George L. Lam, and Charles H. Bennett (New Haven, 1948), I, p. 205; letter to Richard West, 22 March 1740. (The Yale Walpole, XIII).

THE ITALIAN OPERA IN ENGLAND

123

Operas with favourite Songs, incoherently put together"; the "singing Peers" assisting Opera past the fallen muses by "either hand" is clearly a reference to the noble supporters of the two opera companies, especially that of the Nobility. When lo! a Harlot form soft sliding by, With mincing step, small voice, and languid eye; Foreign her air, her robe's discordant pride In patch-work flutt'ring, and her head aside. By singing Peers up-held on either hand, She tripp'd and laugh'd, too pretty much to stand; Cast on the prostrate Nine a scornful look, Then thus in quaint Recitativo spoke. " O Cara! Cara! silence all that train: J o y to great Chaos! let Division reign: Chromatic tortures soon shall drive them hence, Break all their nerves, and fritter all their sense: One trill shall harmonize joy, grief, and rage, Wake the dull Church, and lull the ranting Stage; T o the same notes, thy sons shall hum, or snore, And to thy yawning daughters cry, encore. Another Phoebus, thy own Phoebus, reigns, Joys in my jiggs, and dances in my chains. But soon, ah soon Rebellion will commence, If Music meantly borrows aid from Sense: Strong in new Arms, lo! Giant Handel stands, Like bold Briareus, with a hundred Hands; T o stir, to rouze, to shake the Soul he comes, And Jove's own Thunders follow Mars's Drums. Arrest him, Empress: or you sleep no more" — She heard, and drove him to th'Hibernian shore.150 (IV.45-70)

All quotations from The Dunciad are from James Sutherland's edition (London, 1952), The Poems of Alexander Pope, op. cit., V.

ls0

III T H E LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

I Pope's Dunciad is a highly topical work, which draws its matter primarily from the events and personalities of London during the years of its conception and completion. Of the five foreigners who grace its pages, two are foreign controversialists, opponents of Pope; Heidegger is damned as master of the Ridottos, while Handel is praised. One might raise the number to six by including Maffei, but he is mentioned only in a footnote. The only foreigner included as a litterateur in Pope's London and the only Italian to be named in the text, is Paolo Rolli. Although Rolli would seem to have been on friendly terms with Bolingbroke and Burlington, among important figures of Pope's circle, the English poet may have disliked the Italian because of his connection with the Bononcini-Italian opposition to Handel, who was particularly admired by Pope's musical friend, Dr. Arbuthnot. It may have stemmed from some of Rolli's other connections among the nobility, or from his scholarly efforts, which made him a pedagogue, a sycophant, and a pedant — all by definition — and hence obnoxious to a Scriblerian. Whatever the reason — and any, all, or none of these may have been operative — Rolli makes his appearance from the first version of the second book of The Dunciad (1728), tickling the ear of a patron in search of support, and offering the tribute of the dedication of a libretto for the Royal Academy of Music: He [the patron] chinks his purse, and takes his seat in state: With ready quills the Dedicators wait; Now at his head the dextrous task commence,

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLL!

125

And, instant, fancy feels th' imparted sense; Now gentle touches wanton o'er his face, He struts Adonis, and affects grimace: Rolli the feather to his ear conveys, Then his nice taste directs our Operas: (11.197-204) Pope's jibe at the attribution of "taste" to a patron (or learning, beauty, talent, or whatver) is justified, of course, by virtually any dedication, even to the present day, and too few artists have taken account of the true gifts of any patron with wealth or influence. Pope's remark, then, although not inexact, leaves untouched the question of the identity of Paolo Antonio Rolli. W h o was he, and what did he do? It is perhaps surprising that such questions need be asked, for Rolli's fame in his own age was considerable. Now he is known largely by a few anthology pieces, or else to the occasional devotes of baroque opera, but in the eighteenth century his Rime went through ten editions in England and Italy, and selections were frequently republished into the next century, and his fame even earned him a patent of nobility from his mother's birthplace, Todi. The odes, epigrams, and translations were familiar to Italian readers to the end of the settecento, and the songs maintained a well-deserved reputation even outside Italy. In one of the most interesting tributes to Rolli, Goethe writes of his childhood in the Autobiography, that his mother often played the clavichord, and accompanied a "cheerful old Italian teacher, named Giovanizzi... [who] did not sing b a d l y . . . so that I soon got to know and learned by heart 'Solitario bosco ombroso' before I understood it". 1 Although Goethe's most recent translator credits Metastasio with this lovely lyric, it actually comes from Rolli's Di Canzonette e di Cantate of 1727. Here, as usual, Rolli takes second place to Metastasio, but this only raises again the question of the identity of Paolo Rolli. 2 Goethe, Aus Meinen Leben: Dichtung und Wahrheit, in Goethes Werke (Hamburg, 1955), IX, p. 14. 2 Goethe's Autobiography: Poetry and Truth from my own Life, tr. R. O. Moon (Washington, D.C., 1949), p. 5. This subject is also treated in in George E. Dorris, "Goethe, Rolli, and 'Solitario Bosco Ombroso' ", Journal of the Rutgers Library, X X V I (1963), pp. 33-35. 1

126

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Concerning his biography, many of the details have vanished. There are two principal sources from which his career can be reconstructed, although even so, not without gaps. The first source is his correspondence, especially the letters to Riva, now preserved in the archives of the Biblioteca Estense in Modena, and the few letters to the singer Senesino to be found in the Biblioteca Communale in Siena. This source is supplemented by the record of his published work, and the occasional personal references to be found in prefaces or controversial pamphlets. The second principal source is the memoir of the poet prefaced to the posthumous Marziale in Albion (1776), eleven years after Rolli's death, by the abate Giambatista Tondini. These, then, are the materials which must be utilized by all subsequent biographers. The letters especially, written in poor ink, on bad paper, in an execrable hand,3 provide a glimpse into some few scenes of Rolli's life, especially in relation to Handel. Although it is often more sure (and convenient) to utilize the research of Carlo Calcaterra (Rolli's most recent editor), Tarquinio Valiese (his most recent biographer), the pioneering Ida Luisi, and Sesto Fassini,4 than to decipher unaided illegible reproductions of the documents themselves, whenever possible the originals have been checked against the critics. The results of this endeavor will become clear. Further, Fassini apparently had access to the Rolli papers in the possession of the Rieti family of Todi, the descendants of Claude Wright, Rolli's English servant. Over the past forty years, however, these papers seem to have disappeared, for there is no record of them in Todi. Rolli was born in 1687 in Rome, not in Todi, his mother's birthplace. According to Tondini, his father, Filippo Rolli, a native of Burgundy, was an architect. 5 His first teacher appears to have been a Dominican, probably from the church of Santa 3

Cf. Streatfield, op. cit., p. 428. Paolo Rolli, Liriche, con un saggio su la Melica Italiana della seconda metà del cinquecento al Rolli e al Metastasio, ed. Carlo Calcaterra (Torino, 1926). 5 Marziale in Albion... premesseve le memorie della vita dell'autore compilate dall'1 ab. Giambatista Tondini... (Firenze, 1776), p. 1. Hereafter this memoir is cited merely as "Tondini". 4

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

127

Maria sopra Minerva, and he later studied humanities at the Collegio Romano. 8 Whether or not he was originally destined for the church, a few references to him as "l'abate Rolli" suggest that he took at least minor orders, sufficient to qualify him for ecclesiastical preferment in a state where orders of some sort were necessary for any civil position, at least the orders below the subdeaconate. Metastasio was also such a secular abate, as Franz Liszt became in the next century. Rolli's studies were completed, not at the ecclesiastical Collegio, but under Gianvincenza Gravina, then at the height of his fame and influence. Rolli was not the only famous pupil of Gravina, of course, and it is possible, perhaps, to fill in something of the gaps in the details of Rolli's education by looking at the early career of Gravina's most important student and his adopted son, Bonaventura Trapassi, whose name was early Hellenized by his foster father into the more respectable Pietro Metastasio. It is not necessary here to recount the familiar tale of how the great scholar found the child Metastasio improvising verses on a street-corner, but it is relevant to realize that Gravina directed the boy's education from around 1710 until his own death in 1718, when Metastasio was twenty. As a man of immense erudition in jurisprudence, Gravina raised his pupil to follow his own profession, the law, which — with his antiquarian leanings and his immersion in Roman civil law — implied a virtually complete familiarity with Latin, both legal and literary, and with the Roman way of life. As his own tragedies were based strictly upon the Greek model, 7 his pupil was firmly grounded in the Greek authors, so that Metastasio's first tragedy, Giustino, written at fourteen, is "conformable to the rigour of all the rules of the ancient Greek dramatic writers, with which his Ibid., p. 2n. "Eppure per consolazione di che si compiace della cose piccole me conviene notare, essere stato suo primo maestro un Domenicano della Minerva, ed avere studiata l'Umanità nel Collegio R o m a n o . " 7 It should be observed, however, that in his treatise Della Tragedia libro uno (Naples, 1715) Gravina argues against a too strict interpretation of Aristotle's Poetics as incomplete, being based on the example of a single playwright and play, to the exclusion of Aeschylus and Euripides. Robertson, Studies in the Genesis of Romantic Theory, op. cit., p. 46. 8

128

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

learned precepter had supplied him".8 At this time, his favorite authors were Homer and Ariosto, showing at once his future taste for classical subjects and the reverence for the Italian "classics" which strongly influenced his style in its linguistic purity, although it is free from the richness of Ariosto or Tasso, in the direction of an antique simplicity. In a letter to Calzabigi of 9 March 1754, quoted by Dr. Burney in his life of the poet, Metastasio speaks of this as a time "when the authority of my illustrious master did not suffer me to move a step from the most religious imitation of the G r e e k s . . . those m i n e s . . . of which he then began to display to me the treasures".9 It is probable that Rolli's education under Gravina was similar to Metastasio's, although there is no firm evidence for the legal background given the younger man. A firm basis in Latin and Greek, with special emphasis on the Latin elegaic and satiric poets and on the Greek tragedians was tempered by a thorough training in the Italian writers of the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, from Petrarch and Boccaccio to Ariosto and Tasso. The aim of this education was not to produce mere erudition, although both Rolli and Metastasio proved capable scholars when the necessity arose, but a thorough grounding in the principles, history, and exempla of their art, through which they could formulate the neo-classic ideal as it is found in the dramas of Metastasio and the hendecasyllabics of Rolli, which he was the first to introduce into Italian.10 In Rolli, as in Metastasio, there is a synthesis of these various elements, the classic, the Italian Renaissance, the Arcadian; and Gravina, with his forceful, strict mind, provides the "clue" to the mixture. From the classic comes the subject matter of many of Rolli's dramas and of his poetry, an influence which can be felt particularly when one considers his translations and imitations of the Greek and Roman poets, especially Anacreon, Virgil, and Martial: the odes of Anacreon, which he both translated and imitated in his own odes; the Virgilian pastorals, always a model 8

• 10

Burney, Metastasio, op. cit., I, p. 6. Ibid., I, p. 7. V e r n o n Lee, op. cit., p. 42.

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

129

for the Arcadian reform, which he turned into Italian verse; the satires of Martial, models for his own satirical expression, as found in his Marziale in Albion ("Martial in England"), published posthumously and only in Italy, for whatever reason. These were the influences that formed Paolo Rolli as a poet, a world first seen through the strict eyes of Italian pedagogues, especially the stern Gravina. The lessons of economy and purity thus learned were to influence not only Rolli's verse — or Metastasio's for that matter —but, as important, his theatre as well. Following Apostolo Zeno, both Rolli and Metastasio became part of the reform of the Italian musical drama in the first half of the eighteenth century, strongly influenced by the tragedies of the ancients, by the tragedies of Racine, and perhaps in part by the French opera writers, especially the great Quinault. All of this led to a purification of the opera as drama, throwing out the comic interludes and sub-plot, heightening the decorum of the language, and concentrating the action on classical lines. There is one further resemblance between Rolli and the young Metastasio. They both excelled in the now almost forgotten art of the improvvisatore (an art of which there is no true English equivalent) which may result, in part, in their —to a modern taste — almost fatal facility and smoothness. The best account of this in English is the only slightly later one of Spence, noted on one of his Italian tours, which is worth quoting at length, for it shows the background against which Rolli and Metastasio gained skill and ease in the practice of poetry, both of which would be of particular value to the theatre poet as to the occasional poet, who are all too often required to work under the greatest pressure of time. The first time I heard these Improvvisatori, I thought it quite impossible for them to go on so readily as they did, without having agreed things before hand. It was at Florence, at our Resident's, (Mr. Coleman's) and when that gentleman asked me what I thought of it? I told him that I could not conceive how they could go on so promptly and so evenly without some collusion between them. He said that it amazed every body at first; but that he had no doubt of its being all fair: and desired me to be satisfied of it, to give them some subject myself, as much out

130

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

of the way as I could think of. — As he insisted upon my doing so, I offered a subject which must have been new to them, ana on which they could not be well prepared. It was but a day or two before, that a band of musicians and actors set out from Florence, to introduce operas for the first time at the Empress of Russia's court. This advance of music and that sort of dramatic poetry, (which the Italians esteem the most capital parts of virtù), so much farther north, than ever they have been, under the auspices of the then great duke, was the subject I proposed to them. — They shook their heads a little, and said it was a very difficult one: however in two or three minutes time, one of them began with his octave upon it, another answered him immediately: and they went on for five or six stanzas alternately, without any pause; except that very short one, which is allowed them by the going off of the tune on the guitar, at the end of each stanza. They always improvise to music, (at least all that I ever heard), and the time is somewhat slow: but when they are thoroughly warmed, they will sometimes call out for quicker time. — If two of these (Suonatori) guitarrers meet in the summer nights, in the very streets of Florence, they will challenge one another, and improvviso sometimes as rapidly as those in set companies. Their most common subjects are the commendation of their several mistresses; the dispute of two shepherds; or a debate which is the best poet. They often remind one of Virgil's third, fifth, or seventh eclogues; and what he calls, the contentions of his shepherds, in alternate verse: and, by the way, Virgil's shepherds seem sometimes to be tied down by the thought in the preceding stanza; as these extempore poets are, by the preceding rhyme.... The Cavalier Perfetti of Sienna, is the best improvvisatore at present in Italy. He was crowned in the capítol about five years ago, [c. 1728] by order of the Pope; at the desire of the Princess Violante, widow to Ferdinand Prince of Tuscany. He has laid in a heap of different sorts of learning {una grande infarinatura di tutte le scienze), and has an extraordinary fluency of language: but is rather a versifier than a poet.11 Concerning Rolli and the improvvisatore, Metastasio wrote in a letter of 1751 to Algarotti, It is your wish to have specimens of the verses which I made extempore, during my childhood; but how can I possibly gratify 11 Joseph Spence, Anecdotes, Observations and Characters, of Books and Men, Collected from the Conversation of Mr. Pope, and other Eminent Persons of His Time, ed. Singer (London, 1820), pp. 116-120.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

131

this wish? I do not deny that a natural talent for harmony and the muses, was discovered in me, that was thought somewhat uncommon, and more early than usual, that is, at ten or eleven years old; that this phenomenon so dazzled my great master Gravina, that he was partial to it, and cherished me as a soil worthy of his cultivation; and that so late as the year 1716, he exhibited me to speak verses, God knows how, for the benefit of Giorgio Lorentino, upon all kinds of subjects, at which time I had for competitors the Illustrous Rolli, Vanini, and the Cavalier Perfetti, men who were then arrived at full maturity, and veterans in Pindaric battles.12 The account continues: At a large literary gathering that he had at his house, he himself [Gravina] proposed to Rolli, Vanini, and me as material for our war of poetic improvisation, the three various aspects of Rome, the Pastoral, the Military, and the Ecclesiastical. Rolli selected the Military, the Ecclesiastical was taken by Vanini, and the Pastoral was left for me.13 Although this session could not have taken place in 1716, for Rolli was already in England then, it probably dates from the preceding year, a natural enough error after the lapse of thirtyfive years; but it gives, with Crescembini's account of the Arcadian Olympic Games already quoted, and with Riva's letter to Muratori (quoted below) the only glimpses of Rolli's fame as an improvvisatore, as well as of Gravina's interest in the art — or faculty — and of the youthful Metastasio, capable of performing in such celebrated company, apparently with honor. At the time of his arrival in England, Rolli already had a considerable reputation in Italy, especially among the academies, not only as one of the leading improvvisatori, but also as a poet in the more conventional veins. This is demonstrated by his published work before 1715. His first appearance in print, it would seem, was as editor of an Arcadian collection, published in 1711, the Componimenti poetici di diversi pastori arcadi... raccolti da Paolo Antonio Rolli, fra gli arcadi Eulibio Brentia12

Quoted in Burney, Metastasio, op. cit., I, p. 9. Burney erroneously dates the letter 1757. 15 Tutte le Opere di Pietro Metastasio, ed. Bruno Bruneiii (Verona, 1953), III, pp. 657-658.

132

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

tico.u Unfortunately I have not been able to examine this first work, but the fact that Rolli did not republish the presumed selection of his own work included in this anthology in any later edition of his works, and does not seem to have reprinted his early poems mixed among later things, suggests at once the probable conventionality of this youthful work, and the mature attitude of the poet toward it. Neither did he see fit to reclaim his next two published works (1714), both of an occasional nature: the serenata Sacrificio a Venere,15 written for the celebration honoring the birthday of the Empress Elizabeth and sponsored by the Imperial Ambassador in Rome, and an Ode for the saint's day of the Emperor Charles VI, 18 to whom he later wrote a sonnet included among his collected works. 17 It may be noted that the Gravina-Crescembeni quarrel came between the publication of Rolli's first two works, for while the first was published under the banner of the Arcadia, the Serenata lists Rolli as Accademico Quirino. Indeed, as late as the Verona Rime of 1733, Rolli gave on the title page, as his full honors, "Compagno della Reale Società in Londra, L'Acclamato nell'Academia degli'Intronati in Siena, Accademia Quirino e Pastor Arcade in Rome." Nothing further is known about the Sienese honor, although letters preserved in the Bibliotecca Communale there indicate friends in Siena, other than Senesino. With 1715 came the end of the first period in Rolli's life, the Roman years. During this time Rolli had grown to manhood, but he had also undergone his artistic apprenticeship. At twentyeight he had not only completed his education, but he had begun to establish himself in Italian literary circles, he had made his name as an improvvisatore, and he had published his first work, 14

Cf. Liriche, op. cit., "Note Bibliografica", pp. 311-326, esp. p. 311. Ibid., "Sacrificio a Venere, Serenata, Fatta cantare nel felicissimo giorno Natalizio della S.C.R.C.M. dell' Augustissima imperatrice Elisabetta Cristina Dall' illustriss. ed. Eccellentiss. Sig. Il Sig. Conte Gio. Vinceslao di Gallasso Ambasciador Cesareo, e Cattolico in Roma. Poesia del Sig. Paolo Antonio Rolli, Accademico Quirino" (Naples, 1714). 18 Ibid., "Nel giorno festivo del nome della S.C.R.M. di Carlo VI, Oda del Sig. Paolo Rolli" (Napoli, 1714). 17 Ibid., p. 198. 15

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

133

both as poet and as editor. Gravina's training had prepared him as scholar and as poet, familiar with classical literature as well as that of modern Italy, and his training had also — less happily, perhaps — prepared him for the endless literary bickering of the age. In 1715 when the opportunity for going to London arrived, Rolli was prepared to make the most of it. Among these [Gravina and the learned] the one who became best acquainted with his merit was Mylord Steers Sembuck, a learned English traveler. This lord wished to take back to London with him some learned Italian who was fully equipped to encourage the Tuscan tongue in that island where it already flourished, as every type of learning has unceasingly flourished there,... his eye fell on Rolli, whom he selected after taking into consideration his spirit, his good manner, and his breeding, qualities which made him a universal favorite in Rome.18 In this fashion Tondini begins his account of Rolli's journey to England under the patronage of an English lord. But he has also added an element of confusion, for he has quite altered the name, and hence the identity of Rolli's patron, with all the thoroughness of an Italian faced with a foreign tongue — and Tondini even calls the Italian Frugoni "Dragoni", among other such errors.19 The identity, then, of "Steers Sembuck" is open to considerable question, as no such English gentleman or nobleman is known to have ever existed. The solution proposed by Salza,20 seconded by Valiese, and generally accepted since, is that Sembuck is actually Thomas Herbert, eight Earl of Pembroke. A noted virtuoso, who filled his ancestral home, Wilton House, with a large collection, then much admired, of classical sculpture, 18 T r a quelli che più degli altri seppero conoscere il di lui merito, fu Mylord Steers Sembuck, erudito Viaggiatore Inglese. Questi volendo nel suo ritorno a Londra condurvi qualche dotto Italiano, il quale promulgasse in quell' Isola, in cui allora fioriva, come tutora non ha di fiorir cessato ogni genere di scienza, la Lingua Toscana con maestria,... pose l'occhio sul nostro Rolli; alla quale scelta molto conferirono il suo spirito ancora, la sua buona maniera, e la gentilezza sua, doti che lo rendevano caro a tutta Roma. (Tondini, p. 4.) 19 Ibid., p. 7. 20 A. Salza, "Note biografiche e bibliografiche intorno a Paolo Rolli", Bolletino della Real Deputazione di Storia Patria per l'Umbria, X I X (1915), Fase. I, n. 47, p. 103.

134

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

and who gathered the notable library at Wilton, Pembroke was not unlikely to bring a household poet and Italian master back with him from Rome. Also, Rolli dedicated a sonnet, "A Maria How Herbert, contessa di Pembroke",21 to the wife of the eighth earl, and — more important — dedicated the Di Canzonette e di cantate (1727) to her, with a fulsome four-page tribute, which lacks (unfortunately, but typically) any personal details. In support of the identification of "Sembuck" with Pembroke, Salza failed to note the brief memoir given Tondini by Rolli's friend Dr. Ludovico Coltellini,22 and printed among the addenda to Tondini's Vita.23 In this memoir of 1765, the year of the poet's death, the statement is made, "He went from Rome to England with Lord Pembroche [«V], and remained there many years, with the remains of the English guineas."24 The identification of Rolli's patron with Pembroke is here clearly made by a friend and contemporary. Concerning the dedication to Lady Pembroke, however, Mary Howe (sister to Scroop, Viscount Howe) had been a Maid of Honor to Caroline of Ansbach when Princess of Wales, and is among the ladies mentioned by Rolli in a letter to Riva from the summer of 1719 (undated), so that the dedication to her could come from obligations more to the Countess than to the Earl himself.25 Both Salza and Valiese further neglect to consider a letter of Riva to Muratori, of 31 January 1716, announcing the arrival of Rolli in London: There has just joined us from Rome, with the brother of Lord Stair, the abate Rolli, a fine poet and marvellous improvisator, Liriche, op. cit., p. 202. Tondini, pp. xvii, 46. 23 ¡bid., pp. 57-60. "Appendice alla memorie della vita di Paolo Rolli. Novelle Letterarie di Firenze dell' anno 1765. N. 24, col. 372. Cortona. Articolo trasmessemi dal Sig. Dott. Ludovico Coltellini." 24 Passò da Roma in Inghilterra con Mylord Pembroche, e vi soggiornò molti anni con gli avanzi delle Ghinee Inglesi... Ibid., p. 59. 25 Collins' Peerage of England (London, 1779), III, p. 127. After the Earl's death, Lady Pembroke married the brother of the Earl of Peterborough, the husband of Anastasia Robinson. The libretto for Rolli's oratorio Davide e Bersabea (Porpora, 1734) is dedicated to the Countess of Pem21

22

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

135

whom I knew well in Rome, and whom we are both very happy to find here.28 Here Rolli is definitely said to have arrived "with the brother of Lord Stair". James Dalrymple, second Earl of Stair, was at this time the British minister (later ambassador) at Versailles. Of his two living brothers, Thomas and George, it is clear that the reference must be to the younger, George (1680-1745). A Baron of the Exchequer in Scotland, the younger Dalrymple is known to have been living with his brother in Paris in April 1715 and again in 17 2 7.27 Further, among the odes in the first volume of poetry which Rolli published in London, the Rime of 1717, the ninth ode is addressed "Al nobiluomo Giorgio Dalrymple, uno de' cinque Baroni di Scozia", while Rolli's first London publication, the Satire e Rime dell'Ariosto (1716), published only a few months after Rolli's arrival in England, is dedicated to "Lord Giovanni Dalrymple", the Earl of Stair. Calcaterra notes, "It will be remembered also that in 1715, in Paris, Rolli was the guest of the Earl of Dalrymple, ambassador of George I to France, who had known him in Rome." 2 8 Calcaterra, who confuses the two brothers (and the Earl's title), gives no source for this information, but it comes from the Dedication to the Ariosto, which has been overlooked, inexplicably, by Rolli's biographers, for the poet here suggests the identity of his patron: I, who had already long known by reputation the noble endowments of your Excellency's Nature, had the fortunate opportunity of becoming myself acquainted with them last year, when you generously welcomed me in Paris, where I arrived on a journey from Italy with that most illustrious gentleman, Baron George Dalrymple, your worthy brother. 2 " broke. Also see p. 91 supra. 29 È qui giunto da Roma, col fratello di L o r d Stair, l'abate Rolli, bravo poeta e meraviglioso improvvisatore, ch'io conoscevo molto bene a Roma, onde ambedue siamo stati ben contenti di qui ritrovarci. Valiese, Paolo Rolli in Inghilterra (Milano, 1938), p. 7. 27 Annals and Correspondence of the Viscount and the First and Second Earls of Stair, ed. John Murray Graham (Edinburgh, 1875), I, 290 n., II, p. 2. 28 Liriche, op. cit., p. 180. 2e Io che già per fama da lungo conoscevo le nobilissime Doti Dell' Anima di V . Eccellenza, ebbi fortunata occasione d'ammirarle da vicino

136

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

It then remains to point out that Tondini's "Steers" is undoubtedly a phonetic corruption of "Stair", the family title adhering to the younger Dalrymple. It is possible, of course, that both Dalrymple and Pembroke were in Rome at the same time, and were joint patrons of Rolli, which could account for Tondini's grotesque creation, from Stair and Pembroke. Vallese's statement that Rolli was the guest of Pembroke 30 seems to be based upon Tondini's "In London he was put up for several months, with all the courtesy and all the splendor of Myl o r d . . .", 31 and would thus turn upon the identification of Sembuck with Pembroke; it is perhaps likelier that Rolli would be the London guest of Pembroke than of the Scottish Dalrymple or the absent Stair, if Coltellini's statement has any validity. At this distance, then, it is impossible to identify Rolli's first English patron for certain; but it is probable that "Mylord Steers Sembuck", when all the evidence is gathered, is a combination of the Dairymples with Pembroke, although in what exact combination must remain conjecture. The notion of an Italian resident in the household was not unusual in the London of the times. As Italian was considered one of the polite, hence ornamental, languages, and as Italian music became increasingly fashionable, a domestic guide to these graces was considered desirable. For one who already spoke the language, a resident Italian provided a means of keeping in practice, and he would also serve to instruct those who had not yet learned the language. Further, the conversation of a man of learning can be edifying as well as delightful, and, finally, the pleasure of patronizing the arts has always contained an element of prestige from being praised by the artist, which has always been an important part of patronage. Rolli was able to meet all of these conditions, including the frequent celebration of his l'anno scorso, quand' Ella generosamente m'accolse in Parigi, venendov'io dal viaggio dell' Italia con l'Illustrissimo signor Barone Giorgio Dalrymple suo degno Fratello. Dalle Satire e Rime di M. Ludovico Ariosto Libri Due, Londra, Per Giovanni Pickard, MDCCXVI. The dedication is "All' Eccelenza di my Lord Conte di Stair Viceconte Dalrymple . . . " 30 Valiese, op. cit., p. 6. 31 Tondini, op. cit., p. 6.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

137

patrons in dedications or poems, while his interest in science as well as in the fine arts seems to have made him from the beginning a familiar figure in the artistic and intellectual life of London, and hence an ornament to the noble household of a patron. Similarly, for some years Nicolino Haym lived with the family of the second Duke of Bedford, in the capacity of teacher, companion, and musician as well, and later was under the patronage of the Earl of Burlington, while Antonio Cocchi came to England with the Earl of Huntingdon, who objected, however, to the too great, hence time-consuming, social success of his protégé. Rolli himself has given a suggestion of the compatriots he found on his arrival, in a poem, "Capitole di Paolo Rolli romano, da Londra 1716".32 The most important of those celebrated in this attractive occasional piece (which is too long to quote) are the savant Antonio Conti, Riva (here called "l'abate Riva"), and Giuseppe Greco, for a short time the minister and agent of Francesco Maria Pico, last Duke of Mirandola. The poem is addressed to another poet, the French-born Giampietro Cavazzoni Zanotti (1674-1765). Among the others he found on his arrival in London, Haym and Giacomo Rossi proved rival teachers and librettists, rather than friends,33 while the musicians included Nicolino and Antonio Maria Bernachi (1685-1756), Marguerita de l'Épine, and the composer-violinist Francesco Geminiani (1674-1762), who later spent some years in Ireland, where he died. Something of the nature of this group and of their connection with the important figures of English letters may be seen in another letter from Riva to Muratori, dated 26 May 1716. Our charming Rolli has asked me to send you the enclosed canzone, and, sending his respects, requests your esteemed opinion on them. The work was born in my room one day after dinner, a quasi-improvisation. He calls it a Chisciottata... Every32

Ed. Carlo Calcaterra, Giornale Storico della Letteratura Italiana, LXXXVII (1926), pp. 100-110. 33 Burney, II, p. 986. Haym and Rossi are among Rolli's targets in the satiric Marziale in Albion epigrams.

138

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

one here is particularly pleased with certain Greek and Latin images, whicn in particular are from Mr. Addison, author of the tragedy Cato, which has made so much noise, both here and abroad.34 The view given here of the sociability of the group — the afternoon gathering in Riva's rooms, and the occasion being taken for the yet recently arrived Rolli to demonstrate his improvisatory talents — is quite charming. The influence of Addison on one so recently arrived suggests that his influence was not only pervasive, but that it would also have some effect on Rolli's work. Indeed, it appears that Rolli's attention was turned to Milton largely through the famous series of Spectator articles on Paradise Lost. One would also like to know whether or not Addison ever saw Rolli's verses inspired by Cato. Unfortunately, they seem to have been lost. In his early London years, then, Rolli was far from being alone. On his arrival he found the Italian group just described, so that his friendship with Riva (for one) was renewed at the beginning of his London career. This is important, for Riva became his closest friend, as is attested by their voluminous correspondence whenever they were parted. After 1720 there was his friendship with Bononcini and Senesino, which did much to make the Italian coterie around the opera strong. Handel, as director of the opera, had much to overcome when poet, composer, and star lined up against him. From the record of his unpublished diary, it would appear that Antonio Cocchi became a part of this group during his London years, and that the circle was under the informal sponsorship of the Duchess of Shrewsbury. At the same time there were Rolli's various patrons, for Rolli 34

II nostro garbato Rolli manda a V.S. IIIa. per mio mezzo rinchiusa canzone e, ricordandole il suo respetto, La prega del di Lei autorevole giudizio sopra di essa. Il parto è nato nella mia stanza un dopo pranzo e quasi improvvisamente. Egli chiama questa canzone una Chisciottata... Qui è stata piaciuta infinitamente per certe imagini greche e latine che vi sono particolarmente da Mr. Addison autore della Tragedia il Catone che lia fatto tanto strepito in questo paese e fuori. From the Riva-Muratori correspondence, Sola, op. cit., p. 314.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

139

seems to have had many. Besides Lord Stair, Baron Dalrymple, and the Earl of Pembroke, it is evident that Rolli became a friend of the Earl of Burlington, and may have been influential in the Earl's withdrawal of patronage from the Handel company in favor of the Opera of the Nobility. 35 In the dedication to Burlington of Bononcini's first London opera, UAstarto (19 November 1720), Rolli suggests that he had known the Earl in Rome, writing, "This is the very opera that your Excellency, on his first trip to Italy, honoured by his presence at the rehearsals, and which I directed at the Teatro Capranica." 36 Although nothing else is known of Rolli's connection with the opera in Rome, the connection between Rolli and Burlington would seem to have been of long standing, as Burlington had been in Rome in 1715, and had first met William Kent there. Also recalling this Roman friendship is a fine alcaic ode, published as the tenth of the "Ode in Serio Stile", and dated 1715 by Calcaterra. 37 Burlington, then, was already a friend when Rolli arrived in London, and probably was among those who made Rolli's initial years there as easy as possible. A charming sonnet (No. XIII) is also dedicated as a birthday tribute "Alla Contessa di Burlington Dorotea Savil nel suo natalizio giorno"; Faustina's patron, the Countess was well known for her love of music, and sang herself.38 The Earl of Burlington and his Countess, then, provide one of the clearest links which bind Rolli to neoclassicism in other fields than his chosen domain of music and poetry. Rolli's poems also suggest other of his early friends and patrons in London, beginning with Allen, Lord Bathurst, to whom is dedicated the first of his original English publications, the Rime of 1717, and also the first poem in the book, "Endecasillabi I", imitated from Catullus.39 A friend of Pope, Swift, Congreve, Prior, and later of Sterne, Bathurst was one of the 35

Letters to Riva. Relevant excerpts are translated in Deutsch, op. cit., pp. I l l , 120. Deutsch suggests that Rolli taught Italian to the Earl. 36 Fassini, op. cit., p. 53, n. 1. 37 Liriche, op. cit., pp. 181-183. 38 Ibid., p. 205. 3 » Ibid., p. 5.

140

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

original subscribers to the Royal Academy of Music, and later was on the first board of governors for the Opera of the Nobility.40 The Earl of Burlington had also figured on these lists, of course, which suggests yet another tie between Rolli and the Burlington circle. Poems in Rolli's first English volume were also dedicated to John and Richard Molesworth, sons of Robert, first Viscount Molesworth (1656-1725), the friend of Locke and Shaftsbury,41 and to whom Swift wrote the sixth of the Drapier''s Letters. John, the second viscount (1679-1726), was envoy to the Duke of Tuscany in 1710, and later ambassador to Sardinia (1725), and the dedication of the sonnet to him recalls the former honor. His daughter, Mary Monck (d. 1715) was also a poet, and he published a posthumous volume of her work, Mirinda (1716).42 For the future third viscount, Richard (1680-1758), Rolli wrote one of the "Endecasillabi" (XII), "All' illustrissimo Signor Colonello Molesworth", which contrasts his warlike profession with his amorous gentleness. At the time of Rolli's poem, Molesworth was in the House of Commons, after having served with great distinction under Marlborough, attaining the rank of Colonel. He later became attached to the Irish government, where he served as member of the Privy Council (1733), as commander-in-chief (1751), and was raised to the rank of FieldMarshall the year before his death. Another ode in the 1717 volume suggests Rolli's indebtedness to David Mitchell, nephew and heir of Admiral Sir David Mitchell (Ode XI), while later sonnets are dedicated to Queen Caroline (VI) and the King (VII), both in 1727, the year of their coronation, to the Pembrokes (VIII and IX), the Seymour family (two sonnets on the birth of an heir, X X X I and XXXII), and to his pupil the Countess of Hertford (XXX). From his earliest years in England, then, Rolli would seem to have been well supplied with patrons, and his talents appreciated by people of the highest rank and intelligence. In a sense he even joined them, for in 1735 the municipality 40 41 42

Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 91, 304. DNB, XIII, pp. 568-569. Ibid., pp. 569-570, 608.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

141

of Todi, his mother's birthplace, presented him with a patent of nobility, 43 permitting him to sign himself proudly "patrizio tudertino", as he delighted to do. His pleasure in this is felt in a letter to Riva, which also suggests that it was not unmixed with a knowledge of the value of such honors: "Yes, indeed, sir, I am an aristocrat. N o t only for Homer have cities disputed the honour [of being his birthplace]." 4 4 While enjoying his successes in London, Rolli did not neglect his family in Rome, supporting them on his English earnings. 45 One of his brothers, Giovanni, seems to have lived with him in London until 1732, but then returned to Italy because of illhealth, retiring to Todi as a musician and perhaps priest. T h e date of his return, 1732, may well be an error, for in 1733 a set of six cantatas and six harpsichord lessons by him was published in London, while a nuptial cantata by him was printed in T o d i in 1735.46 T h e other brother, Domenico (1685P-1751), although blind f r o m childhood, was a poet of some note, and was enrolled in the Arcadian Academy in 1711 under the name "Tiresia Timosteniano". 47 In 1731 he published in Rome a tragedy, II Porsenna, dedicated to Pope Clement XII. H e seems to have been well thought of by the age, and his more famous brother said of him that "he brought honour to our family". 48 Among Paolo Rolli's most moving poems is the ode " O Tiresia german", to his brother, which was not published until 1777, although Domenico had died sixteen years before his brother, and Calcaterra dates the ode some thirty-five years earlier than that, c. 1715.49 It was as the result of a quarrel over the Epitaph which Paolo Rolli wrote for Domenico that Rolli ceased to use the patent of 43

The form, dated 30 July 1735, is given in Tondini, p. 25, n. 1. Sissignore sono un patrizio. N o n pel solo Omero le città se ne disputaron l'onore. 45 G. Carducci, "Della Poesia Melica Italiana e di alcuni poeti italiani del secolo XVIII", Opere (Bologna, 1936), XV, p. 83. 48 Yorke-Long, "The Opera of the Nobility", op. cit., p. 19; Tondini, p. 9, η. 1. 47 Crescembeni, op. cit., p. 375. 48 Liriche, op. cit., p. 48, η. 1. 48 Ibid. 44

142

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

nobility conferred on him by Todi, although he had gloried in it, because the aristocracy of Todi claimed that it was not to be extended to his family. The offending line in the Epitaph had described Domenico as "patrizio tudertino", 50 and Rolli never again graced a title-page with the offending phrase. This was, indeed, a suggestion of family unity, as well as of pride. Throughout his career in England, Rolli would seem to have been active in a number of different fields, other than his original and basic function as a poet. This is not to suggest that he neglected that essential part of his life, but rather that the poetic function often became allied to other endeavors, translations and work for the theatre especially. Five volumes of his original non-dramatic poetry were published in London during his years there, from the Rime of 1717, parts of which may have been written before his arrival in London the preceding year, to the "ode amorose", published with his translation Delle ode d'Anacreonte Teio (1739), while the Rime, containing various selections of his work, had three separate editions in Italy between 1733 and 1744.51 During the years 1720-1744, Rolli was also engaged as a librettist, first by the Royal Academy of Music under Handel, and later by the Opera of the Nobility. During this time, he probably wrote twenty-seven original libretti and prepared five adaptations, 52 but it is often difficult to distinguish between the two, for an "original" work could be almost completely formula, while an adaptation was often so completely re-worked as to be barely recognizable. Rolli's libretti range from the first opera performed by the Royal Academy, and his first such attempt (in London, at least), Porta's Numitore, to Handel's last opera, Deidamia (1741). This function, like several others, was divided initially with Haym, 33 which accounts for some of the rivalry between the two, as suggested in the Riva letter to Muratori quoted in Chapter II.54 Throughout the early years of the Royal Academy of Music, as the lines of rivalry 50 51 52 53 54

ibid., pp. 36, 39. Liriche, op. cit., pp. 311-316. Ibid., pp. 321-322. See Chapter II, note 3, supra. Quoted in Chapter II, p. 41.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

143

formed, Rolli and Bononcini tended to work together, and Haym with Handel, another example of the coherence of the Italian group, from which Haym was excluded, for reasons that are not entirely clear. Perhaps it was because he had allied himself with the English operatic-theatrical forces, supported by Steele, which were in opposition to the Italian opera in its early days; even then the opera had provided much of the consistency of the Italian circle. Another point at which Haym and Rolli overlapped was in teaching Italian to the English nobility and to the royal family. Rolli was a man of undoubted charm, as Tondini constantly emphasizes, although he has also been described, with some justice, as "a born troublemaker" 5 5 — qualities not necessarily mutually exclusive — and this charm must have been a considerable element in his pedagogic success. His aim would seem to have been the development of interest in what is purest and of the highest artistic importance in Italian literature, an aim to bring out only what he considered the best, rather than merely that which is fashionable or delightful. T h e nature of his teaching and the measure of his success in developing an interest in Italian language and literary may be seen in a letter from the Countess of Hertford (later the Duchess of Somerset), to her friend Mrs. Knight (1742): I have grown very fond of reading Italian, Lady Pomfret having discovered to me (what Rolli never informed us of) that there are many extremely pretty books in that language besides what he calls the four famous historians, and p o e t r y . . . I think them [Adriani and Cinthio] prettily wrote, and there are some very entertaining stories; but some of them, according to the custom of the Italian writers, are very indecent. I am at present going to begin Muratori, della Filosofia Moral.™ 55

Heriot, op. cit., p. 92 n. Quoted in Helen S. Hughes, The Gentle Hertford, Her Life and Letters (London, 1940), pp. 155-156. Cinthio is G. B. Giraldi (1504-1573), author of nine tragedies, an epic, and a collection of tales, the Hecatommithi (1565), which served as the indirect source for Measure for Measure, Othello, and Beaumont and Fletcher's Custom of the Country. Adriani is probably G. B. Adriani (1513-1579), a Florentine historian, and author of Istoria di suoi tempi (1583). T h e "four famous historians" undoubtedly included Machiavelli as well. Sonnet X X X (Liriche, p. 215) is dedicated "A 58

144

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Something of the severe, or "pure", basis of Rolli's teaching, of his devotion to what was most central in the Italian literary tradition, may be seen in these remarks, with their emphasis on essential literature, especially poetry. The classical Italian historians, Machiavelli in particular, would give a stylistic basis in prose, as well as giving the student a firm intellectual grasp of Italian history and culture, all of which would serve as the basis for a reading of the Italian epics (perhaps excluding Dante at this date, although Rolli is known to have admired the great Florentine), especially Ariosto and Tasso, as well as lyric poetry from Petrarch on, the pastoral literature which culminated in the Arcadians, and perhaps the satires of Ariosto, Berni, della Casa, Mauro, Dolce, Aretino, and others, especially those edited by Rolli in his volumes of 1717, 1721, and 1724. The "sweetmeats" of Italian literature, the Renaissance prose tales, then, were left for Rolli's ladies to discover for themselves, and the ability to read Cinthio and Adriani with pleasure speaks well for his instruction in the language — and perhaps for his cleverness in leaving these for his pupils to discover for themselves. Even more interesting is Lady Hertford's final statement, for Murat o r i ' s La filosofia

morale

e sposata

e proposta

ai giovani

(1735),

which as Robertson points out, was written against Locke's doctrines,57 was then a recent and undoubtedly controversial work, and not what might have been the expected reading of a lady of rank and fashion, even the patroness of Thomson. Rolli must have taught well to interest his noble scholars in the work of his erudite correspondent Muratori. A token of Rolli's position among the Italians (and teachers of Italian) in London is his long connection with the royal family. From his earliest days in England he had been teaching the gentry, and his letters from the fashionable summer retreat of Richmond, to which he always retired, are scattered with the names of the fashionable. When Riva was on a mission to the Hague in the summer of 1719, he received one letter (no date) Sua Eccelenza Francesca Thyne, Contessa d'Hertford", and Sonnet XXXI (p. 216) is on the birth of her son. 67 Robertson, op. cit., p. 65.

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

145

mentioning the Countess of Darlington, Lady Mary Howe (later Countess of Pembroke), and an anonymous Lady Caroline, while Lady Rochester, Lady Essex, and a certain Lady Cathy crop up in another, "il non so quanti d'Agosto". Later there came the "soave e amabilissima Siga. Caterina Edwin" (letter to Riva, 29 January 1735), often mentioned, who was reputed to have been the mistress of Frederick, Prince of Wales, and to whom Rolli dedicated the libretto of Orfeo (1736). Although he had apparently been instructor in Italian to Caroline of Ansbach for some time earlier,58 in 1729 Rolli was appointed "preceptor to the princesses in Italian". 59 These were the Princesses Amelia and Caroline (born 1711 and 1713), Frederick's younger sisters. As a further token of his position, in 1734 he was reappointed Italian master to the princesses when their Establishment was prepared, although at that time he was patronized principally by Frederick and members of the political opposition — tribute indeed to his place in Anglo-Italian letters, and to his abilities as a teacher. At the same time Handel, who was attached to the Walpole majority, was appointed music master to the princesses. At this moment of greatest tension in operatic circles, this token of royal patronage is even rather surprising, since the royal children, except for the Prince of Wales, were all strong Handelians.60 Further, Rolli's close relation to the Prince is emphasized by Maffei's remark, quoted by Tondini, concerning Frederick's Italian: "One can easily see that a fine poet teaches him our language", with Maffei's note, "that is to say, Paolo Rolli, who possesses great talent, and who has a rare mind".®1 Ida Luisi, "Un Poeta-editore del Settecento", in Miscellanea di Studi Critici pubblicati in onore di Guido Mazzoni (Firenze, 1907), II, p. 252. 59 Quoted from The Flying Post; or Weekly Medley for 11 January 1729, in The Dunciad, op. cit., p. 453. Royal children were expected to have considerable training in languages; the admittedly precocious Maria Antonia, Electress of Saxony, wrote in French and Latin when eleven, and conversed with her elder brother "in purest Tuscan" at thirteen. See Yorke-Long, Music at Court, op. cit., p. 74. 60 Hervey, op. cit., I, pp. 273-274; II, pp. 370-371. 61 Ben si ravvisa come da un bravo Poeta la lingua nostra apprese — cioè dal Sig. Paolo Rolli Romano, Soggetto di gran talento e di raro ingegno. Tondini, p. 7. 49

146

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

The Royal Warrant, from the Calendar of Treasury Papers for 1735-1738, reads: Royal Warrant by the Queen, as Guardian of the Kingdom, counter-signed by three Lords of the Treasury, establishing a yearly payment of 2001. to George Frederick Handel as music master, and 73 1. 10 s. to Paolo Antonio Rolli as Italian master to the Princesses Amelia and Caroline, same to date from 1734, Lady day, the date from which the salaries payable under the establishment of 1734, July 2, for the said Princesses commenced; the above two sums having been omitted to be inserted in said establishment. Dated at the Court at Kensington. 62 The date is 27 September 1736. Concerning Rolli's method of teaching Italian to foreigners, there is the testimony of one small book, the D'Awerbj, preposizioni e di frasi avverbiali, libretto ...

Londra, 1741,88 which

is now extremely rare. Valiese speaks of it as a "modestissimo testo", but this elaborate word-list — for that is the essential nature — seems to have been surprisingly popular. In addition to the original edition, the British Museum also possesses a copy of the third edition, dated 1773, which suggests that the work was found useful by the English more than forty years after it was first published.84 There is also the testimony of a letter written to the Genoese poet Carlo Innocenzo Frugoni 85 by Rolli in 1749, after his return to Umbria, concerning his method of teaching Italian to the English: As to my method of teaching our language to that famous royal family, you must realize that in a short time I became master of the beautiful language of that island, and that by comparing the one and the other [English and Italian], both in vocabulary and grammar, I created a Method [una Manudizione] as simple as it 62

Calendar of Treasury Books and Papers, 1739-1741, ed. William A. Shaw (London, 1901), p. 188 (No. 96). es Valiese, op. cit., p. 136. 64 The Italian Adverbs, Particles, Prepositions and Adverbial Phrases, explained... Third edition (London, 1773), 85 Frugoni (1692-1768) was among the more important of the second generation of Arcadians, an advocate of verso sciolto (blank verse), and a polemic opponent of Baretti. After 1724 he lived in Parma, where he was the literary member of the triumverate devoted to the reform of the opera, with Du Tillot and Traetta. See Yorke-Long, Music at Court, op. cit., pp. 14-38.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

147

was concise, so much so that in a short time the reader became competent in understanding, and attained perfection in pronunciation—so much so that the pupil, delighted at overcoming these first obstacles, proceeds with the greatest pleasure (if he has made good use of my assistance), so that he avoids entirely the nuisance of searching for the meaning of words in the Vocabulary, thus not being stopped in his avid perusal of our best books, which until then was little known or unknown in that country; and doing this, I taught not only our language, but also other aspects of our literature. I was paid £ 100 a year, but as this wasn't enough in that most expensive of marketplaces, I was also permitted to teach some of the nobility.ββ The details, other than these, of Rolli's "Manuduzione" are lost, but such a method of bringing the student to literature as rapidly and painlessly as possible has a modern look, and generally serves as the way most likely to create an interest in the literature and in the language. This emphasizes, once again, Rolli's position as a virtual cultural ambassador, an apostle of things Italian to the English, and one recalls the high literary and linguistic standards implied by Lady Hertford's letter, and the apparent success of Rolli's method of teaching his beloved language. Rolli's was not the first Italian grammar published in England, for there had been efforts in that direction for over a century, while the teaching of Italian was a part of Milton's scheme of comprehensive education. In the eighteenth century alone, the M

In quanto al mio metodo d' insegnar la nostra lingua a quella consaputa Real Famiglia, sappiate, che in breve tempo m' internai nel possesso di quell' Isolano bellissimo Idioma, e per via delle correlazioni dell' una, e dell' altro, tanto nelle voci, quanto nella sintassi, vennemi fatta una Manuduzione altrettanto chiara, che compendiosa, per la quale in corto spazio di tempo si diveniva abile all' intelligenza della lettura, e alla perfezione della pronunzia: talmente che il discepolo dilettato nell' agevole superare le asprezze dell' imprendimento, proseguía con fervorosa compiacenza, e si faceva più lungo uso dell' assistenza mia, per evitare solamente l'incommodo di cercare il senso delle dizioni ne' Vocabulari, e per non arrestarsi nell' avida lettura de' nostri migliori libri, poco, o nulla cogniti fino allora in quella Regione: il che facevo non solamente di nostra lingua, ma insinuando altre letterarie cognizioni. Mi furono assegnati cento scudi annuali, e perchè questi non erano sufficienti in quel dispendiosissimo Emporio, mi fu permesso l'insegnare a Nobili Famiglie. Tondini, p. 73. The date should be corrected to "11 Ottobre" in accordance with the manuscript. In a foot-note (pp. 9-10, n. 3) Tondini mistakenly gives "quattro cento scudi" for "cento scudi".

148

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

title of A new Method of teaching the Italian Tongue to Ladies and Gentlemen (1713), dedicated to Lord Shelbourne, suggests an already growing list of such titles, while fifteen years later, in 1728, at least three such grammars were published: the second edition of The Italian Master: or the easiest and best Method for attaining that Language, Revised, corrected, and enlarged by Signor Veroni, Italian Secretary to the late French King. Done into English by Mr. Uvedale; A new Grammar, Italian-English, and English-Italian, by Ferdinando Altieri, author of a Dizionario Italiano ed Inglese ÇInglese ed Italiano), published in 1726-1727 in two volumes in London; 87 and the amusingly titled An Italian Grammar, on one side of a Sheet of Paper; much plainer, more accurate and comprehensive than Mr. Altieri''s, in 249 Pages. By Solomon Lowe. The rivalries in the field suggested by the subtitle to Lowe's book were carried even further in the same year, when Lowe also published The Occasional Critique; on Education. Proposing a new scheme of grammar and method of instruction .. .To which is added a letter to Mr. Boy er concerning his French Grammar, A Hint to Mr. Altieri for the advantage of his Italian Grammar. A challenge to Dr. Freind concerning the Westminster Grammar, etc.68 Against this background of scuffling and petty rivalry among the teachers of Italian, the position of Rolli stands out the more clearly, for his name never appears in these minor struggles; his position was clear and outstanding, and it was perhaps to avoid such bickering and abuse that he chose not to publish his "Manudizione". The two other most important parts of Rolli's literary work in England were the preparation of his editions and his translations. The former were of various Italian works which were otherwise unavailable — his first publication in England was the 1716 edition of the Satire e rime of Ariosto, dedicated to Lord Stair — and included several classic Italian translations from the Latin and Greek. His own translations included versions from English into Italian of Steele's The Conscious Lovers (1724), 87

British Museum Catalogue of Printed Books. Ibid. Freind is Boyle and Swift's friend, Robert Freind, headmaster of Westminster School. 68

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

149

Paradise Lost (1729-1735), and after his return to Italy, Newton's controversial Chronology (Venezia, 1757), while from the Latin he translated the Odes of Anacreon (1739) and Virgil's Pastorals (1742) into Italian verse. Both the editions and translations served a pedagogic as well as literary function, for they made available a series of Italian texts which were either original with Rolli, or which were difficult to obtain in their older, Italian editions." This was undoubtedly the particular intention of the series of ten volumes which Rolli edited, of which the most important were the Marchetti translation of Lucretius (1717), now regarded as the classic Italian translation — it had never before been printed, having been banned in Marchetti's native Florence, and was not to be printed in Italy for over sixty years — and the edition of the Decameron (1725), which became the subject of an interesting exchange between Rolli and Giuseppe Buonamici, which will be discussed later. Ariosto seems to have been the principal subject of Rolli's editorial labors, if not the most important, for in addition to the early Satire e rime, Rolli's last editorial efforts were editions of three Ariosto plays (1737-1739). Of the translations undertaken by Rolli, by far the most important is the Milton, the first complete translation of Paradise Lost into Italian, on which he worked for eighteen years, between 1717 and 1735. This task had been undertaken first by the erudite Lorenzo Magalotti (1637-1712), and was taken up later by Antonio Conti, who translated excerpts in 1715-1716, just before Rolli began his own version of the poem. The importance of this great work, which was dedicated to the Prince of Wales, was recognized at once, and it soon gained a European reputation. Maffei published the first six books in Verona in 1730, the year after their English publication, while the completed work was published in a number of editions after it was issued in 1735, of which the most important are those of Paris, 1740, and Paris-Verona, 1742. T h e translation is also notable for Rolli's life of Milton and his use of Addison's observations on the poem as the basis for the critical remarks which make this a pioneer work in Italian criticism of Milton. 69

Dedication to Ariosto Satire e Rime (1716).

150

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

The dedication to the Prince is of particular interest, for 1735 was the time of the bitterest quarrel between Frederick and his father, and also when the rivalry between the two opera companies was approaching its height. It shows again the close ties which bound Rolli and the Opera of the Nobility to the Prince, who was still its unofficial patron. His interest in Rolli's translation is considerably to the credit of the often-maligned Frederick, and his part of it is seen in a letter to Riva, "Londra a 9 di 9bre 1734", written as Rolli was finally seeing his work through the press. The Prince, he reported — "Questo Clementissimi Prince di Vallia", with whom he was just then reading Ariosto's Orlando furioso — was taking great interest in the problems of his Italian master. Rolli did not wish to have his work published by subscription, which he describes as a form of begging, but he was able to publish the poem himself, as he gratefully explains to Riva, only because of a gift of £ 100 by the Prince, to whom the finished work was to be dedicated. The edition, the letter makes clear, was nearly completed by November; this involved not only the printing of the last six books, but the reprinting of many pages from the first part, where he found it desirable to change or polish ("o cangiar o perfezzionare alcune cose"). At the same time, he was preparing his new dedication, in Italian blank verse, to Frederick. The interest in Rolli's translation of Milton was more than local, and its importance was recognized over all of the Italianspeaking world. That Muratori took particular interest in the project is clear from his many references to the long-expected work. As early as 1726 he was writing to Riva, "Be assured that I am getting more and more anxious to read our gallant Rolli's translation of the Paradise. He has captivated the English greatly, but the Italians no less."70 Two years later he wrote of Rolli's two works-in-progress (2 September 1728): Encourage our signor Rolli to bring out his Italian Apology against the insolence of Voltaire. But when will he get along 70 Certo che sempre più cresce in me l'ansietà di leggere la traduzione del Paradiso fatta dal nostro valoroso signor Rolli. Egli si cattiverà molto gli inglesi, ma non meno gl'italiani. Epistolario, op. cit., V, 2599, Letter of S December 1726.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

151

with his Paradise Lost? I desire these two works exceedingly, for the honor of Italy. I beg you to give my respects and my esteem to this happiest genius at the earliest opportunity. 71 Maffei's interest in Rolli's project is evident from the publication in Verona of the first six books in 1730, and it is interesting to note that the reply to Voltaire of which Muratori speaks was included in the volume in Rolli's own Italian version, and dedicated to Maffei. From the other side of Europe, another of Riva's correspondents expressed the same kind of interest. When copies of the completed edition were presumably en route (Rolli to Riva, 3 June 1735), Metastasio was writing to Riva (26 June) : "This blessed Paradise of Rolli's is our purgatory. It is always coming and never arrives. I believe he counts his weeks after the fashion of Daniel." 72 Perhaps the best evidence of the quality of the translation, however, is not the eagerness with which it was awaited, but the frequency of republication, even as late as the end of the century (Venice, 1794), in the same year that Mariottini published the first books of his translation — also in London, interestingly enough. The comment on Rolli's translation by Allodoli clearly sums up its best qualities: "Rolli does not appear here as the elegant and smooth versifier, which he demonstrates in his other works; but it is necessary to remember that these defects result from the brevity and constraint which were imposed on Rolli if he were to achieve, as he wished, the utmost exactness." 73 Like virtually every important (and minor) literary figure of the age, Rolli was frequently engaged in polemic and controversy. His position in the Handel-Bononcini quarrel, in which he must have taken a principal part as a close friend and supporter of the Italian composer, is seen only dimly now — largely 71

Animo a nostro signor Rolli a dar fuori l'Apologia Italica contro le insolenze del Voltaire. Ma e quando ci ha egli da condurre al suo Paradiso? L'una e l'altra opera è da me sommamente desiderata per onore dell' Italia. Prego V.S. di ricordare in prima occasione il mio rispetto e la mia stima a cotesto felicissimo genio. Ibid., VII, 2792. 72 Questo, benedetto Paradiso del Rolli è il nostro purgatorio. Sempre viene, e non giunge mai. Credo eh' egli conti le sue settimane all' uso di Daniele. Opere, op. cit., III, p. 129. Daniel's week equalled seven years. 73 Ettore Allodoli, Giovanni Milton e l'Italia (Prato, 1907), p. 143.

152

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

through his correspondence, where his dislike of Handel is given full vent — because it failed to fan literary fires beyond the spark which set Byrom to compose his celebrated verse on the subject. There are, however, three controversies in which Rolli engaged, which were, in greater or lesser degree, literary, and which require examination in some detail. The first two, which occupied Rolli almost simultaneously, were primarily literary in nature, the one concerning his edition of the Decameron, and the other over Voltaire's Essay on the Epick Poetry of the European Nations from Homer down to Milton (London, 1727), opposing the Frenchman's treatment of Milton, Ariosto, and Tasso. The final polemic encounter was concerned with Handel again, and may well have been a partial aftermath of the Handel-Bononcini rivalry and of the German composer's long-standing quarrel with Senesino, another of Rolli's close friends and a member of the tight inner-clique of the Italian circle. This was the "Harmony in an Uproar" controversy, already discussed, begun by the letter published in The Craftsman over the signature "P—lo R—li", and taken up a year later in a pamphlet defending Handel, published in February 1734 over the pseudonym "Harlothrumbo Johnson, Esq.", entitled Harmony in an Uproar·, the attribution of this to Dr. Arbuthnot was denied by his son, along with "The Devil to Pay at St. James's". The Rolli letter has already been considered, of course, and the purely literary encounters will be covered more fully in the second part of the present chapter. If these encounters show Rolli in his least pleasant light, it should be recalled that his position in England was not an easy one. At all times he remained a foreigner in a strange land, an alien in both religion and language. The despair which at times gripped him makes the proud Rolli seem more human, and perhaps serves as a key to his character. There are only a few moments when the man Paolo Rolli can be seen breaking through the facade of the public character, whose mask is reproduced in the anonymous engraving prefixed to the elaborate folio of Del Faradiso perduto. At the moment of the completion of this monumental work, on which he had been laboring for

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

153

nearly twenty years, Rolli gave vent to his despair. On sending copies of the folio to Riva in Vienna for distribution among his friends there, he wrote on 3 June 1735: Therefore, however it may be, caro il mio Caro, do me the favor of delivering the book [to Monsignior Passionei] in my name: I have always loved and esteemed him, and he has also loved me; thus I should like to keep him, as much as one can keep as friend a priest who is going to be a Cardinal just when I hope to go back and retire near Rome; because I am appallingly tired of this mud, smoke, and blasted eternal fog; where it is not easy for an honest and able foreigner to make even a modest living, and where it is necessary to spend enormous sums to live even decently and not get into debt, and to be obliged to play the politician for one's own safety, and as a result to cut a miserable figure. What a difficult Enigma! You don't know what it is like, for if you did, you would also know that a poor figure I cut on all sides.74 More movingly, Rolli wrote in 1736 (undated) asking Riva to use whatever influence he could to get him appointed as Zeno's successor at the Emperor's court, or failing that, to some post with the Duke of Modena, Riva's patron. Metastasio, however, was long since settled upon as Zeno's successor, no other opening came, and Rolli was forced to remain a forestiero among a nation of strangers. But it is at such few moments of self-revelation — rare even in the letters to Riva — that one begins to understand something of the force, even bitterness, that lay behind the polemics, or the ferocity with which he clung to all that was Italian in literature and music. Although he knew the English poets — especially Milton — and defended them, his heart Communque però sia, caro il mio Caro, fatemi il favore di fargli consegnare il Libro a mio nome: Io Pò sempre amato e stimato, e sicome egli amava me; cosi vorrei conservarmelo almen quanto posso conservarsi amico un Prete, che sarà Cardinale appunto quando io spero tornarmene a riposar presso a Roma; perchè sono stanchissimo di questo Fango, e fumo, e umidaccio eterni, dove non è facile ad onesto et abile Forestiero far fortuna neppur mediocrissima, e bisogna spendere molto per vivere non da bestia, per non far debiti & essere obbligato a far poi ü Ministro per proprio scampo; e in consequenza, misera Figura. Che astruso Enigma! voi non l'intendete certamente; perchè si l'intendeste; intendereste ancora che la povera figura si fa da due Lati. 74

154

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

was ever with Ariosto and the Arcadians, the same spirit that lay behind the music of Bononcini and Porpora. As a poet, of course, he was particularly sensitive to the kind of linguistic problems which would be raised through the daily use of a language not his own, and which could only serve to increase his sense of estrangement. As he wrote concerning Voltaire's pride in having written the Essay on Epic Poetry in English after only a brief stay in England, " I have been now twelve years in England and . . . I am sensible. T h a t my Reader will immediately find me out for a Foreigner." 7 5 This is, surprisingly, the statement of a modest man, and a lonely one, and suggests an unexpected side to the usually proud and reserved Rolli. Although his level of productivity remained high, these last years of Rolli's life in England seem to have found him tired and discouraged, as is suggested by the letter to Riva just quoted. This is the more apparent when that passage is compared with a more hopeful letter to Cocchi only a year and a half earlier, dated "l'ultimo di 1733", where he speaks of the opening of the "Opera of the Nobility with one of my works called Arianna in Naxo: I hope that this will be the beginning of better days for me." 7 « O f his close friends, Cocchi had returned to Italy in 1726, Riva had been promoted to Vienna in 1729, his own brother had returned home in 1732, and in 1734 Bononcini left in disgrace. Perhaps the last close ties were broken in the spring of 1736, when Senesino, Porpora, and Cuzzoni departed. 77 T h e Opera of the Nobility was still alive, but even that now relied almost entirely on Farinelli and Rolli. T h e last great entertainment on the old lines had been the serenata in honor of the marriage of Rolli's patron, the Prince of Wales, to the Princess of Saxe-Gotha, an occasion for which Handel produced one of his finest operas, Atalanta. On 4 May 1736, the Opera of the Nobility produced the Festa d'Imeneo, which boasted a dazzling Rolli, op. cit., p. 24; also see Florence Donnell White, Voltaire's Essay on Epic Poetry: A Study and an Edition (Albany, N.Y., 1915), p. 25, n. 3. 78 Cocchi archive, Filza 1, No. 219. This archive is described in Chapter IV, n. 107, infra. " Yorke-Long, "Opera of the Nobility", op. cit., p. 80. 75

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

155

array of talent, with music by Porpora, libretto by Rolli, and designs by Burlington's own architect, William Kent, while the Dive were not only in the libretto, but on the stage as well: Farinelli sang Hymen, Senesino Apollo, Cuzzoni Venus, and Montagnana Neptune. 78 But Handel had triumphed, and even this great occasion came to naught. All of this makes it possible to understand why the fifty-yearold Rolli might have been discouraged. Despite his glittering patrons and his assured place in both the social and intellectual worlds, he was alone. And if he gave himself over to work, to writing, editing, and translating, there is none of the profusion of lyric poetry that he had polished off so gracefully earlier. After the Di Canzonette e di Cantate of 1727, the lyric flow became a trickle, and Rolli was not to write another "Solitario bosco ombroso". It is understandable that Rolli's thoughts should turn to Italy, then, and that he should desire to make as much money as possible to assure himself a comfortable retirement. Thus the translation of Overbeck's work on Roman antiquities was probably undertaken at least in part as hackwork, as well as in tribute to his native city. But the opera provided the best opportunity to enlarge his fortunes, especially when it was taken over by a group of amateurs under the young Earl of Middlesex, as is seen in a letter from Horace Walpole to Horace Mann (5 November 1741): I am quite uneasy about the o p e r a , . . . and I fear they will lose considerably... I will give you some instances; not to mention the improbability of eight young thoughtless gentlemen of fashion understanding economy; it is usual to allow the poet fifty guineas for composing the books — Vanneschi and Rolli are allowed three hundred.79 Although Rolli's usual fee was closer to £ 200 than to £ 50,80 the opera under Middlesex did present a final opportunity, and 78

Ibid., p. 188. Horace Walpole's Correspondence with Sir Horace Mann, op. cit., I, p. 191. The approximate dates for Rolli's English career given here, "ca. 1727-1747", are clearly wrong. 00 Letters to Riva, passim. 70

156

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

in 1744, some eight operas later, he returned to Italy after nearly thirty years in England. Before examining certain of Rolli's works in detail, some perspective on his career as a whole might well be suggested, for the chronological pattern of his life can also be instructive, and it can provide a backdrop against which the importance of the individual works can be seen more clearly. It is interesting to observe the symmetry with which one may divide into cohesive units the part of Rolli's life which is under consideration here, grouping periods of literary production and biographical events of a roughly similar nature. The nearly thirty-five years between Rolli's arrival at maturity, around 1710 (his first publication was 1711), and his return to Italy in 1744, may be divided generally into five periods, or subdividing these, into seven sections of approximately five years each. The first stage of his career, then, contains the Roman apprentice years, from around 1710 until his departure for England in 1715, while the second stage covers the first years in London, from 1716 until 1720, the years when Rolli was first starting to publish in England and to make himself known through his poetry, his teaching, and his editing. The following decade, 1720-1730, may be viewed as a whole, the years of first recognition, but it divides naturally into two equal parts, the first beginning with his appointment as poet to the Royal Academy of Music (for which he produced five libretti, 1720-1723), followed by his second group of editions of Italian classics, especially the Decameron of 1725, works designed (at least in part) to supplement his teaching. The last half of this decade is marked by his return to the lyric stage (three libretti, 1726-1727), by the Buonamici and Voltaire controversies (1728), and climaxed by the publication of the first part of his translation of Paradise Lost in 1729. The 1730's, the opening of the second half of his career in England, is the period of pre-eminence, when Rolli was recognized as the central figure in London's Italian literary and musical circles; again this decade may be divided in half, the first part of which — leading to the publication of the complete Milton translation and of the Rime of 1735 —saw him re-

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

157

appointed Italian Master to the princesses (1734) and poet to the Opera of the Nobility (nine libretti between 1733 and 1738). The second part of this decade was devoted largely to libretti and editing, for he produced the three editions of Ariosto comedies and the translations from Anacreon and Overbecke at this time, as well as preparing accounts and translations for the Royal Society, of which he had been elected a Fellow in 1729. The final years, 1740-1744, bring his English career to a close, with the production of ten libretti and the translation from Virgil (1742). The publication in Verona of the first (and only) volume of an intended complete works in 1744 symbolically marks the close of his active career. In this year Rolli retired to his mother's native region for the rest of his life, a period of tramonto (1744-1765), which yet were productive years. During this final period of his life, Rolli brought out numerous editions of the Rime, and his translations of Racine (Atalia, Roma, 1754) and Newton, last products of a phenomenally long career of half a century, between the Componimenti poetici which he edited in 1711, and the De poetici componimenti of 1761 (Venice), the

last volume of Rolli's poetry to be printed in his lifetime. It is of interest to note that Rolli's long sojourn in heretical lands, the classical (pagan) tone of much of his poetry, together with his publication of the Lucretius of Marchetti and his notable interest in the arch-heretic John Milton, may have given him a dangerous reputation in Papal Italy. His last volume, although issued in Venice, therefore is prefaced by an address by the printer. Bartolommeo Occhi: The Printer to the reader. The applause which the Republic of Letters has universally accorded the learned and delightful works of Mr. Paolo Rolli has encouraged me to bring them into the public eye. I am even more persuaded of the approval of learned readers, for the author has agreed to correct them himself, and to increase this edition by a great many of his other productions, which will please as much as the earlier work. Remembering, then, the profane nature of his language, drawn from the pagan world, the author himself has felt to preface the work with the following disclaimer:

158

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

By divine grace I was born in the Faith, and in the bosom of the Holy Catholic Church of Rome, and of this I have always made public profession. 81 It is unlikely that Rolli had given way to heretical persuasions at the notoriously Protestant Hanoverian court, not only because of his thorough and conscious Italianism, but also for the strictness one may assume from his background. N o t only is there some evidence for his being a secular abate, but one of his brothers was a priest, and two of his sisters were nuns in Todi. 82 Even though his translation of Paradise Lost had joined another of Milton's works on the Index in 1732, these details do not suggest that Rolli might stray easily, even during thirty years in England, although he may well have shared something of the deistic persuasions of the age. But it may have been all of these possibilities together that would justify the disclaimer quoted above. But what is more remarkable than the length of Rolli's career is the combination of diversity within his work with the continuity to be found in it, aristing from a devotion to his craft, and to the essentials of the literary reforms undertaken by Gravina and the Arcadians. Further, it should be noted that the various areas of his work — as poet, dramatist, translator, editor, and teacher — mingle and overlap. If the problems of teaching led to certain of the translations and editions, the works which he chose to translate or to edit were those which influenced him as a poet: the Virgilian pastorals, which served as an Arcadian 81

LO STAMPATORE A chi Legge. L'Applauso, con cui furono universalmente accolte nella Repubblica Letteraria l'erudite dilettevoli Opere del Signor Paolo Rolli, mi fa di stimolo onde nuovamente riprodurle alla Pubblica luce. Tanto più però mi sono lusingato dell' approvazione degli Eruditi Lettori, perchè si compiacque l'Autore di correggere lui stesso, e di accrescere questa Stampa di moltissimi altri suoi componimenti, e quali saranno egualmente, che i primi aggraditi. Riguardo poi all' espressioni profane, e tolte dal Gentilesimo, impone l'Autore medesimo, che preceda all' Opere sue la seguente Protesta. Per Divina grazia nacqui alla Fede, e nel grembo della Santa Cattolica, Romana Chiesa, e ne ho sempre, e da per tutto fatta pubblica Professione. Pp. A3 1 - 2 . 82 Luisi, op. cit., p. 258.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

159

ideal; the odes of Anacreon, which were the models for his own odes and hendecasyllabics; and the satires of Berni, Aretino, and Ariosto, among many others, which fed his own strong satiric vein, as evidenced by the Marziale in Albion or the letter to The Craftsman. The editions of Ariosto and Boccaccio undoubtedly reflected as well as influenced his interest in purity of style, as seen in the preface to the Decameron, again an Arcadian concern, as well as being examples of his lifelong devotion to his native literature, which also underlay his teaching. His edition of Marchetti's translation of Lucretius was issued in 1717, the year in which he began his translation of Milton, and it is reasonable to suggest that his decision to begin that formidable task was influenced by the success of Marchetti's translation. Further, Rolli's Interest in the drama is seen not only in his own libretti and adaptations, but in his translations of Steele and (later) Racine, and in his editions of Ariosto comedies, while his translations of Overbecke's Reliquae antique Urbis Romae83 and of Newton's Chronology84 suggest the scientific and antiquarian interests which he shared with Cocchi, Conti, and Maffei, and which led to his membership in the Royal Society and to his contribution to the Philosophical Transactions of the Society. These are a few of the many interconnections, the cross-currents which emphasize both the diversity and the unity of Rolli's work and of his interests. It was, in large part, this continuity which gave Rolli his dominant position in Italian society in London, not only the continuity of residence, of course, but more than that, a continuity of achievement, of quality maintained over a long period of time, built upon the ideal established by the first Arcadians, and a continuity in his devotion to Italy and its artistic achievement, especially in music and literature. It was Rolli who maintained the ties with contemporary Italian achievement and thought through his enormous correspondence with men like 83

Degli Avanzi dell' Antica Roma (London, 1739). Cronologia degli antichi Regni emendata, Opera postuma del Cavalier Isac Newton, tradotta dall' originale inglese in sua prima edizione fin dall' anno MDCCXXVUI dal Signor Paolo Rolli (Venezia, 1757). I have not seen this work; the title comes from Calcaterra's Liriche, op. cit., p. 321. 84

160

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Cocchi, Muratori, Maffei, Conti, and another "exile", Riva. Rolli, then, provided the permanent basis upon which an Italian circle could develop and work and influence, rather than remaining an assorted collection of passers-by, of aliens and travelers, lacking just that cohesiveness which makes the Italian circle both interesting and important. II Rolli's work falls generally into four categories: poetry (including libretti), translations, editions, and polemic writings. Of these the most important are certainly the first two, and his reputation would be but little altered if there were only the lyrics and the translation of Paradise Lost. These form the core of his work, especially for the modern critic. The other translations, like the editions, have been replaced, or were of works of too little interest to last. The polemics may raise questions of incidental interest to the critic or scholar, but they are concerned with issues of limited importance, which failed to outlive the age that produced them. Even in the poetry, too many of the sonnets and odes are graceful compliments to patrons and friends whose reputations have crumbled to dust with their persons. Rolli's reputation, then, must rest on one unread pioneering effort — the Milton — and on a handful of lyrics and epigrams. This is, of course, to take the pessimistic view, or even that of the general literary survey, which bounds from peak to peak, ignoring foothills, valleys, pleasant prospects, and ravines alike. A closer examination of the most important parts of Rolli's production should demonstrate something about the age as well as about the man. If one should always keep the "long view" in mind while studying a minor figure, as the best way to achieve critical detachment and proportion, the more immediate "close-up" can also be instructive. It is the examination of the typical which is necessary if one is to approach, even for a moment, an understanding of the illusive Zeitgeist. It is not just the examination of the giants, the men of genius, which will lead

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

161

to the understanding of an age, for the great are always to some degree "sports"; rather it must come through an examination of the good craftsmen, the men of solid achievement, who establish or develop the conventions of the age. And of such is Paolo Rolli. If I would seem to be too modest in this claim for Rolli, it is, for one thing, because he is a good, but not great, poet. But he was more than a poet, as the first part of this chapter has suggested; he stands at —or near —the center of a number of important connections between England and Italy. He stood, in his own age, as a representative of what was best in contemporary Italian letters, he helped to direct its critical currents, and he provided in London a rallying point for the last great moment of the baroque tradition, the neo-classicism of the Arcadians. This is to be found in his teaching, in his critical standards (which are seen in both the editions and the polemics), in his teaching, and in his contribution to the Italian opera in London, which became a focal point for the English reaction to all of the things for which Rolli stood. Therefore, after the preceding sketch of Rolli's career, some account should be offered of his work, in the hope that it may shed some light on the man and on the age. It need not be extended, for the present study is not the place to undertake a reexamination of Rolli's position as a poet —for that the reader may be referred to the work of Carlo Calcaterra, although it is unfortunate that he never devoted a monograph to the poet for whose rehabilitation he did so much. This part of Chapter III, then, is divided into five sections: (i) a brief discussion of Rolli's poetic and dramatic work; (ii) a short survey of the principal translations from English; (iii) the editions; (iv) the scientific writing — Rolli's contribution to the Philosophical Transactions·, and (v) the polemics. These are intended as part of the present effort to place Rolli's work in the context of his life and career, and of the age.

162

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

1. ROLLI AS POET

As a poet, Rolli is always ranked next only to Metastasio among the Italian lyric poets of the earlier eighteenth century. The comparison is a fair one, and an inevitable one, and it has become the invariable one. Even those who are most concerned to place or to defend Rolli begin with this comparison. But Metastasio is not so familiar to the English-speaking reader that one can create an impression of Rolli by taking his fellow-student as a known quantity. Therefore it may well serve the purpose of this study better if something is said first about the nature of Rolli's poetic achievement, the melodramma aside, for Rolli is the one who created and fixed the lyric note which he shares with Metastasio in the years when the younger poet was just reaching maturity, and had not yet written his first characteristic work, which came around 1725. In the last edition of his work to be published in his lifetime, the Venice Deì poetici componimenti, the division into three books suggests Rolli's own final division of his works, and also suggests a vague chronology of his work, so that it is useful in classifying Rolli's poetry. The first book begins with two sets of translations into Italian which suggest the sources of the RollianArcadian lyric. These are the Odes of Anacreon, first published in 1742, and the Eclogues of Virgil (1742). This first part also contains the Elegies, which were probably composed in Rome, including the eight to Egeria and the one to his blind brother, with Latin versions of three of them. The second book contains poems which were written before Rolli left Rome (including some of the odes), but most of them date from the English years, and especially the first decade. This section includes the two sets of odes, the serious and the amatory ("in Serio Stile" and "d'Argomento Amorevole"), the Hendecasyllabics, the Sonnets, the Cantatas, the Canzonettas, the anacreontic lyrics gathered under the title of "Le Meriboniane" (after "Mary-lebone"), and the Epigrams. These last do not include those later gathered under the title Marziale in Albion, which were only published posthumously. The third book contains poems and

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

163

pastorals written after Rolli's return to Italy, beginning with a set of occasional poems gathered under the title "Le Tudertine", after the region around Todi, a set of "Nuptial Hendecasyllabics", and three pastoral dramas. These are l'Eroe pastore, melodramma sacro, on the story of David and Saul, an Egloga dramatica for three characters, and Teti e Peleo, an attempt to unite the virtues of both the French and Italian styles, with a subject already treated by Quinault.85 The area of greatest interest in this division is the second part, the poems written just before or during Rolli's English years, and the point of greatest lyric concentration. As lyrics these are notable particularly for their grace, and the note of gentle melancholy which is expressed through the beautifully controlled fall of the verse, which is Rolli's particular contribution to Italian poetry. The situations are often familiar, laments or plaints in the Petrarchan tradition, but the note is Rolli's own. This is not all, for Rolli's verse has a firmer texture than that of most working in the Petrarchan tradition, which is the result of his classical background. If the very names are classical— Egeria coming from Tibullus, Lesbia suggesting Catullus — the convention was strong to tie them into the standard late-Petrarchan product. But Rolli's connection with the classical-pagan world is in many ways one of temperament, suggesting the lyric poets of the Silver Age in his mixture of sophistication and melancholy as well as in his technical control. The importance of this is suggested by one of his most representative forms, the hendecasyllabic, a form which Rolli introduced into Italian from the Latin of Catullus (in particular), Statius, and Martial, among his favorite models.86 If Vernon Lee over-emphasizes the paganness of Rolli's fine "Hymn to Venus",87 she is nevertheless right in finding a difference between these neo-classical lyrics and those of his contemporaries, who are, as she suggests, frigid or over-lush:

88 86 87

Prefazione, pp. 354-356. Liriche del Settecento, ed. Bruno Maier et al. (Milano, n.d.), p. 113 n. Op. cit., p. 42.

164

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Rolli never departs further from the models of his times than in the series of little poems addressed to his Egeria: she is certainly not the Cynthia of Propertius, still less the Delia of Tibullus, yet she is more closely related to them than to the colourless semi-nymphs, semi-nuns, of Rolli's contemporaries; he makes no attempt to substitute the conventional pseudo-classic details for modern o n e s . . . which brings him nearer to antiquity than his classical brethren.88 This graceful re-creation was expressed in verse so smooth and melodious that at the same time it cried out for music and seemed to disdain it. And it forms the principal quality of the Elegies, Odes, Sonnets, Cantatas, and Canzonettas which make up the most famous part of his work. But Catullus was not Rolli's only classical master, for two other genres, suggest two other models, Anacreon and Martial. The "Meriboniane", in particular, have their place, for Rolli not only translated Anacreon's Odes, but he imitated them in these delightful pieces. Speaking of the translation, L. A. Michaelangeli8» praises Rolli as the first to balance out the tendency of the seventeenth century to make Anacreon nothing more than a drunkard, and that of the eighteenth to make him a sentimental beau, for Rolli combines brio with rhythmic grace. The same is true of the English Anacreonitics, which dwell gracefully on conviviality, without either preciousness or coarseness. The scene is often a recognizable London, and Luisi plausibly suggests that the "Cariera" tavern is the Rainbow coffeehouse, frequented by Voltaire, Cocchi, and other foreigners.90 The "hero" of these songs is Rabelais' Perrin (described in the second as looking like an engraving by Callot), and certain of his adventures run through the songs. In all, they are lively, charming, and unlike anything else by Rolli. The epigrams after Martial published by Tondini in 1772 are of an entirely different order. In the Anacreontics, Rolli is charming and witty; here he is biting and witty, with no pretense and no sympathy. He attacks everything about England 88 89

Ibid., pp. 43-44. Ibid., pp. 43-44. Anacreonte e la sua fortuna nei secoli (Bologna, 1922), pp. 194-195.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

165

that displeases him, and his targets are many. Even though he employs classical names for most of his victims, their identity is thinly disguised. Thus in Epigram XXVIII he attacks Giacomo Rossi and Angelo Cori, rival librettists and teachers, as "Roscio and Ciro", but in the next one Cori becomes "C . . . " , and rhymes with "Signori"; Haym becomes "Cecco" in LVI. A slap at Pope may be intended in XXXIII, to Kneller, one of the few published in 1753, when the painter was disguised as "Nelerco", although he appears in propria persona in 1772. Even the London public is attacked in X for greed, one of his favorite themes. The general treatment may best be suggested by the prefatory verse, which sets the tone of the work: Proemio Soli, Ipocriti perversi, biasmerete questi versi pronunziando ognor sentenze voi direte: Son malizie. Siete avvezze, buone pezze a chiamar maldicenze le chiarissime Giustizie.®1 Put against the Elegies, the Canzonettas, and the Anacreontics, these epigrams suggest the range of Rolli's art. He was not a great epigrammatist — he lacked the conciseness for that — but these show the extension of a talent principally lyric into other areas than the elegiac or the pastoral. Rolli's art was not one which embraced all forms and moods, for there is nothing of the epic, and not enough of the dramatic. But within his range he could produce an individual lyric of great beauty, clear and melodic. He brought into the Arcadian world something of the world he knew and saw, the world of the Thames, Kensington, and the Rainbow coffee-house, a note at once classical and contemporary — classical because contemporary. Carducci quotes approvingly the remark of Bertòla on Rolli, which is one of the best of the many comparisons with Metastasio: He was a noble and moving lyric poet, and in his canzonettas he yields to Metastasio in neither grace nor truth, and he surpasses 81

P. 3.

166

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

him in elegance... It seems to me that the canzonettas of Rolli have the greater grace and emotion, and those of Metastasio greater skill and delicacy: for simplicity and naturalness, they are equal.92 Surely enough has been written in Chapter II about the nature of the reform-baroque libretto that it is unnecessary to go very deeply into Rolli's libretti here. The best are undoubtedly those which are Arcadian in nature, and those written for the composers with whom he was most in sympathy, Bononcini and Porpora. Thus the revision of Zeno's Griselda (1722) is a good example of his earlier work, and the Orfeo (1736) of his later work, for neither draws too heavily upon melodramatic events, which would tend to become rather frenzied because of the truncated recitative. It is, however, interesting to notice the way in which the libretti fall into chronological patterns, forming four well-defined groups. The first of these comes during the first years of the Royal Academy of Music, when he wrote five original libretti and made six adaptations (1720-1723). These include the early Bononcini works, one opera for Handel (Fiondante), and the joint Muzio Scevola. Then came the first Rolli-Handel split, which seems to have been patched-up briefly in 1726-1727, for Rolli returned to revise one libretto for Handel and to create two difficult original works for him, Alessandro (1726), which introduced Faustina, co-starred with Cuzzoni, and the opera in honor of the coronation of George II, Ricardo Primo. During these years Rolli had been particularly busy with his editions and at work on his translation of Milton, while in 1727 he published the Di Canzonette e di Cantate. The following years were devoted not only to controversy and Milton, but also to his increased burden of teaching, with his appointment to the royal family. Thus he did not return to opera until the foundation of the Opera of the Nobility, in which he seems to have been a prime mover through his noble connections. For this company he wrote seven libretti, from the opening Arianna (1734) to the closing Sabrina (1737), and probably arranged other libretti as "poet in residence". These are probably the years 82

Op.

cit., pp. 104-105.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

167

of his best operatic work, and suggest the best of which he was capable, which is not far inferior to Metastasio although less convincing dramatically. He seldom falls into the melodramatic excesses of such a work as Haym's Coriolano, however, and maintains a consistently high level of smooth versification, which has an innate musicality particularly apt for the flowing melodic homophony of a Porpora. At this same time he contributed two libretti to the brief Pescetti season of 1738. The last period, 1740-1744, is fittingly closed by the publication of a proposed collected works, of which one volume was issued in 1744, the Verona Componimenti poetici, containing libretti. Unfortunately the edition never got beyond this first volume, but it clearly marks the close of his English career. In the last five years he had written ten libretti for several companies, but of the last group the only one of interest is the unexpectedly amusing treatment of the Achilles-Ulysses-Deidamia story for Handel's last opera, the Deidamia of 1741. But during these last seasons, under the Earl of Middlesex, his fee for a libretto went up £ 100, to £ 300, at once a sign of his own reputation and of the extravagance of that management. Rolli's own opinion of his libretti, which he refered to as "Dramatic Skeletons",93 is suggested in the letters to Riva during the 1730s, but must be found more through his tone than in any single comment. They seem to him an interruption of his real work — poetic, pedagogic, or editorial— and of an inferior genre. They allow the poet too little scope for his real abilities, for poetry must always be second to the music. Therefore the poetry never is able to come fully alive. This is especially true in the foreshortened structure of the London libretti, which is one reason why they were never passed around the opera circuit, being reset by one composer after another. That it was not necessarily the case with the libretti of Metastasio, Rolli himself recognized, as when he wrote of the great pleasure he had received from reading La Clemenza di Tito, sent by Riva, the friend of both poets.04 This in itself would dispose of the tale of 93 84

Letter to Frugoni, Fassini, op. cit., p. 176. Letter of 29 January 1735.

168

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Rolli's overwhelming jealousy of Metastasio, although he undoubtedly envied his former colleague the position of Caesarian Poet. The position, wealth, and influence of Metastasio were never to be his, and this knowledge must have galled Rolli's proud nature. But Rolli might have been pleased to know that, in the excellent Nice edition of Metastasio's works (1786), his own translation of Anacreon was substituted for two lines quoted in Greek, instead of Metastasio's own (cancelled) reading of the lines — a small, final triumph. 95

2. ROLLI AS TRANSLATOR

Rolli's most important translation, and perhaps his most important single work, was the version of Milton's Paradise Lost (1729-1735). As has been seen, he worked on this monumental project on and off for over fifteen years, encouraged by his friends and patrons both in England and abroad. His intent was to produce a literal, but smooth, rendering, which would put into Italian not only the exact meaning of Milton's words, but also the poetry. As he wrote in the preface to the poem, congratulating himself upon his achievement, Concerning this translation of mine, I think it to be the most exact transposition from one language into another that has ever been read, as a result of the great correlation between the two languages, and especially in the Miltonic style; and therefore I claim to have translated not only the sense of Milton, but the poetry as well; thus I declare that I wish no part of my work excused as deficient in sublimity or poetic beauty on the grounds that I wished to be a literal translator. Just explaining the sense in another language is not enough for a good translation of such a work." •5 Metastasio, op. cit., IV, pp. 896, 819. " Di questa mia Traduzzione io penso ch'ella sia la più esatta Metafrasi che siasi mai letta, e ciò per l'estrema correlazione delle Sintassi nelle due Lingue e particolarmente nello Stil Miltoniano; e siccome io pretendo d'aver non solo litteralmente tradotto i sensi di MILTON, ma pur anche la Poesia; così dico non esser nell'Opra mia parte alcuna ch'io voglia scusare come deficiente di Sublimità e poetica Bellezza; per aver voluto

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

169

Although Rolli overestimated his degree of fidelity to the "poetry" of Milton —what he calls the "Sublimità e poetica Bellezza" — his translation is uncommonly faithful to the "word" of the poem, and he captures much of the spirit as well. The principal objection that can be raised is that Rolli sacrifices poetic effect to literalness where the two aims collide. It is, however, an open question as to whether a first translation should emphasize fidelity to the word or to the spirit. In choosing literalness, Rolli was not following the English school of poetic translation, of which Pope's Homer was the most recent example; indeed, his work is closer to the ideals of the Loeb Classics or Richmond Lattimore than to those of Dryden and Pope. As a part of his literalness, he has provided two line-numberings for the poem: in the left margin, Rolli's verses are numbered conventionally by tens; in the right margin, however, he gives the corresponding line number from Milton's original. This is necessary, he explains, because the Italian takes more words than the English, a result of the large number of one and two syllable words in English and, although he fails to mention it, because of the conciseness and precision of poetry. Thus he usually takes ten lines of Italian verse to translate six or eight lines of English, with an average of about seven lines, so that the first book is 798 lines in English and 1014 in Italian, Book II is 1055 to 1329, and Book VI 912 to 1151. As the basic line for his translation, Rolli chose verso sciolto, an unrhymed hendecasyllabic line with an accent on the tenth syllable, as more suited to the Italian language, with its frequent unaccented endings, and he cites the end of the first line of the poem as an example, "fruit" as against "frutto". The major variant forms are the use of "verso Sdrucciolo", which ends in esser Traduttor litterale. N o non basta per ben tradurre tali Opere; spiegarne il senso in altra lingua. (Fol. 1 ν.) Rolli's literalness often extends to fidelity to Milton's word order. The degree to which he matches it might be considered, along with his comments on the Miltonic style, in light of F. T. Prince's discussion of Milton's diction and prosody, which he considers more Italian than latinate (The Italian Element in Miltorìs Verse, Oxford, 1954), developing a suggestion from Dr. Johnson.

170

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

a dactylic foot, thus adding a second unaccented syllable, and of a truncated, "masculine" ending, which is the exact equivalent of Miltonic iambic pentameter. Perhaps the best way to illustrate the failings and virtues of Rolli's work is to quote two of the most familiar passages from the poem; for this purpose the first sentence of the poem shows the difficulties of an extreme literalness, a certain heaviness, even awkward in places: Dell' Uom la prima Trasgressione e il Frutto Di quell' Arbor vietato, il cui mortale Gustar, Morte nel Mondo e ogni Mal nostro Apportò con la Perdita dell' EDEN, Finché poi ne ristora un Uom più grande E ne racquista la beata Sede; Canta o celeste Musa che d ' O R E B B E O di Sinai su la secreta cima Ispirasti Ί Pastor che al Seme eletto 10 Fu il primo ad insegnar come in principio 8 Sorsero fuor del Caos la Terra e ι Cieli: O se il Colle di SION più ti diletta E il Ruscel di SILÓE che presso scorse All' Oracol di DIO; quindi io t'invoco All' aita del mio rischioso Canto Che con Voi non mediocre, alto più intende Del Monte Aonio sorvolar, tracciando Cose ancor non tentate in prosa o in rima. (1.1-18) Of Man's First Disobedience, and the Fruit Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal tast Brought Death into the World, and all our woe, With loss of EDEN, till one greater Man Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat, Sing Heav'nly Muse, that on the secret top Of O R E B , or of SINAI, didst inspire That Shepherd, who first taught the chosen Seed, In the Beginning how the Heav'ns and Earth Rose out of CHAOS: Or if SION Hill 1 0 Delight thee more, and SILOA'S Brook that flowd Fast by the Oracle of God; I thence Invoke thy aid to my advent'rous Song, That with no middle flight intends to soar

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Above th' Aonian Mount, while it pursues Things unattempted yet in Prose or Rhime.

171

(1.1-16) 97

In this passage Rolli has managed, however, to catch some of Milton's poetic effects. The alliterated " m " of lines two and three echoes Milton's alliteration of "w", and certainly much of the heaviness is in the original, while the wrenchings of syntax are often more native to Italian than to English. Even Rolli's "Arbor" is latinate in Milton's fashion, if perhaps less happily. There is nothing here that offends Italian as when in Book I X (11. 23-24) "inspires Easy my unpremeditated Verse" is translated as "ispira/Facili non premeditati versi" (11. 30-31). The first eighteen lines of Book III show how Rolli, while being equally literal, could capture certain qualities of Milton's poetic intensity which struck responsive chords in his translator. Indeed, this may be a clue to the basic quality of Rolli's rendering, for his range was far more limited than Milton's and his finest moments are those where his nature and poetic talent are most similar to Milton's, the moments of closest correspondence between two basically dissimilar natures, especially in an elegiac tone or where Milton is drawing most closely upon Italian models. This passage, for example, is much smoother:

10

Salve o Santo Lume, primogenito Germe del Cielo, o Coeterno Raggio Dell' Eterno; poss' io privo di biasmo Esprimer Te? Giacche DIO stesso è Lume, Ne abeterno altrove sè dimora, Che dentro a Lume inaccessibil; dunque Dimorò in T e o risplendente Effluvio Dell' Increata risplendente Essenza: O s'ami più d'udir che un puro sei Eterno Rivo; chi diranne il Fonte? 7 Eri prima del Sol, prima de' Cieli, E alla Voce di DIO, tu qual con un Manto, T u rivestisti il Mondo che sorgea Dall' Acque atre e profonde, conquistato Fuor dall' informe vacuo Infinito:

•7 Quotations from Paradise Lost are from John Milton's Complete Poetical Works Reproduced in Photographic Facsimile (Urbana, 111., 19431948), III.

172

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

20

T e rivisito or io, ma con più ardite Ale, scampato dallo STIGIO Stagno, Benché gran tempo in quel tetro Soggiorno Ritenuto allorché nel volo mio Fra estreme e medie Oscurità portato, 16 Ad altro suon, che a quel di TRACIA Lira. Cantai del CAOS e dell' eterna N O T T E . (III.1-22) Hail holy Light, offspring of Heav'n first-born, Or of th' Eternal Coeternal beam May I express thee unblam'd? since God is Light, And never but in unapproached Light Dwelt from Eternitie, dwelt then in thee Bright effluence of bright essence increate. Or hear'st thou rather pure Ethereal stream, Whose Fountain who shall tell? before the Sun, Before the Heavens thou wert, and at the voice Of God, as with a Mantle didst invest 10 The rising world of waters dark and deep, W o n from the void and formless infinite. Thee I revisit now with bolder wing, Escap't the STYGIAN Pool, though long detain'd In that obscure sojourn, while in my flight Through utter and through middle darkness borne With other notes then to th' ORPHEAN Lyre I sung of CHAOS and ETERNAL NIGHT, . . . (III. 1-18)

Aside from Rolli's occasional use of elision within a line for metrical reasons and his close following of Milton's use of italics for emphasis, it will be noted, in the second passage particularly, that he has repunctuated the poem for greater clarity. Aside from freely adding or deleting commas, he strengthens a comma to a semi-colon in 1.5, III.5, and III.7 (English numbering). More important, he has revised sentences, replacing the periods in III.6 and III. 15 with a colon, turning the comma at the end of III. 18 to a period to end his first sentence, while Milton's period in 111.21, not quoted, is replaced by a semi-colon. These changes do not, of course, alter the sense, and they are less sweeping than those of some later editors of the English original. T o be exact, Rolli's translation of the poem is not complete, for he omits two passages, a total of forty-three lines. The reason for these omissions is made clear in a letter to L. A. Muratori

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

173

from Giuseppe Riva, dated 3 (Jan.?) 1727, where he writes, Rolli, with his fiery muse, works on his translation of Milton, and is thinking about leaving a gap where the English poet speaks about Indulgences and the Trinity, so that the book won't be forbidden in Italy; but he hasn't made up his mind about this, nor do I know how to advice him, for one cannot be a good Catholic and at the same time an exact translator.98 There is no further reference to the problems with the Trinity in the correspondence, so that Rolli must have satisfied himself of at least the apparent orthodoxy of the passages in question. The first omission also comes from Book III, the passage on Indulgences to which Riva referred, and he referred to it again in writing to Muratori on 18 February 1729, saying that Rolli continues his most beautiful translation, and says that he is leaving out of Milton those few verses which concern our holy religion, and that instead of our friars and bishops, in the edition that he hopes to bring out in Italy, he will replace them with their Lordships of England." The threat to replace Roman bishops with English ones was never fulfilled, but Rolli did omit twenty-four lines in Book III, 11. 474-497, the lines in which "Embryos and idiots, eremites and friars", accompanied by "reliques, beads,/ Indulgences, dispenses, pardons, bulls", are whirled "o'er the backside of the World" into the Paradise of Fools — an Ariostan note that Rolli might have been expected to retain. The omission is indicated only by a long dash after 1. 599, and a jump in the English numbering from 467 (1. 590) to 498 (1. 600). More unusual is Rolli's omission of nineteen lines in Book XII, *8 Rolli colla sua musa feroce lavora alla traduzione di Milton e pensa di lasciar una lacuna là dove il poeta inglese parla delle Indulgenze e della Trinità per che il libro non sia proibito in Italia, ma sopra ciò non ha risoluto, nè io saprei consigliarlo, perchè non si può essere buon cattolico ed insieme esatto traduttore. Quoted in Sola, op. cit., p. 349. 09 Rolli, se si ricorda, continua sua bellissima traduzione, e dice che lascia fuori nel Milton quei pochi versi che riguardano la nostra santa religione e che invece de' frati e de' Vescovi nostri, nell' edizione che ne dovesse mai fare in Italia, metterà questi Britannici Eccell.mi.

174

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

11. 515-534, from the peroration of Michael's great speech, the passage dealing with the state of the church until the second coming. The persecutions of formalized religion —the Church of Rome in particular — are scathingly condemned, as against Grace, Liberty, and the individual conscience. But unlike his practice in Book III, Rolli does not merely omit these lines. Rather he replaces them with thirty lines of his own, numbering them consecutively with the Italian, although the English numbering is suspended, thus indicating to the careful Italian reader what is Milton and what is not, although nowhere does Rolli refer to these excisions or this addition as such. The passage in question is not entirely out of place, for Milton's attack on ecclesiastical corruption and intolerance (those who "seek to avail themselves of names, / Places and titles, and with these to join / Secular power" and who "Spiritual laws by carnal power shall force / On every conscience") is replaced by a Miltoninspired attack on "Cieco Zelo crudel". N o t only are the tone and subject-matter of Milton imitated, but some of the imagery is suitable, and even familiar, as well it might be, for here Rolli has borrowed from St. Peter's denunciation in "Lycidas". Thus "vedrà quei Lupi / Che in vesta di pastor, divise errante / Lo traviar" (11. 696-698), like the pastoral metaphor throughout this passage, "l'assassin Coltello", and even the "fiamme d'Infamia e di Vendetta" strike an appropriately Miltonic note. But Rolli may also have drawn the image of the wolf and the tone of this angelic denunciation from one of Milton's sources for St. Peter's speech in "Lycidas": St. Peter's denunciation of papal corruption in Canto XXVII of the Paradiso, 11. 57-58. In vesta di pastor lupi rapaci si veggion ai qua su per tutti i p a s c h i . . . Prefaced to the work in both the earlier and the completed form is a twenty-five page "Vita di Giovanni Milton", an intelligent essay on the life of Milton and the origins of his art, as well as on the problems of translating Paradise Lost into Italian. The biography is complete, if brief, with particular emphasis on the Italian journey, and the essay closes with a brief description of

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

175

his other works. The nature of blank verse is examined, as well as the influence of Italian writers on English poetry, by a comparison of "Galfredo" Chaucer ("che pronunciasi — Ciaser") and Shakespeare, with references to individual works, including the Troilus and Crise y de and the Clerk's Tale, in connection with Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio, and Othello in relation to Cinthio. Rolli also praises the chronicle plays as an admirable means of teaching history. These are, of course, among the earliest references to Chaucer and Shakespeare in Italian. Rolli also includes in the Vita a brief passage on Addison's remarks in The Spectator — from which he had drawn — as well as mentioning Hogg's Latin version of both Paradise Lost (1690) and Samson Agonistes, Berge's German translation (1682), and SaintMaur's French prose rendering (1727), which he praises for including a biography and Addison's papers, but objects to as insufficiently literal, especially in contrast to his own version. The introduction was given intact in the Verona edition and was carried over to the 1735 edition with the alteration of only the last paragraph, which need no longer promise the completion of the work. The book itself is, fittingly, Rolli's handsomest publication. The four page dedicatory poem ("All' Altezza reale di Federico, prencipe di Vallia e prencipe elettorale d'Hanover, l'umilissimo obligatissimo e fedelissimo servo, paolo rolli") is preceded by a full page engraving of the prince; the life of Milton is preceded by a full page portrait of the poet; and the features of the translator precede the poem itself. In general, the folio volume, printed in large clear type, is splendidly produced. The poem takes 399 pages (the last page is numbered 397, but page numbers 287 and 288 are repeated), and is followed by four pages of "Varie lezzioni et emendazioni" to the first six books, that part of the poem originally published in 1729, although the text itself had been liberally revised. The title page of the 1735 volume is instructive, as it lists Rolli's full complement of titles. It reads De / Paradiso Perduto / poema inglese / di Giovanni Milton / traduzzione / di / Paolo Rolli / compagna della Reale Società / in Londra / Vacclamato

176

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

mW Accademia degP Intronati / in Siena e pastore arcade in Roma. // Londra / presso Carlo Bennet. M.DCC.XXXV. A second title page was prepared the following year, dated 1736, which is the same as that for 1735, except that "patrizio tudertino" follows Rolli's name, and the device has been changed. There is no particular explanation for this, except possibly Rolli's desire to include his recently granted title — a patent of aristocracy from his mother's native Todi — or the desire of the publisher to make the work appear as new as possible. But the last page of the poem continues to carry the date "A' XIX di Gennaro del MDCCXXXV", presumbably the date when the compositor completed the poem or when the last page was printed. The quarto edition of the first six books published in 1730 at Verona also contains Rolli's Italian version of the Remarks on M. Voltaire's Essay, dedicated here to Maffei as "il più Benemerito Letterato d'Italia". A note by Alberto Tumermani, the printer, states that the text was furnished him by "Il Signor Robinson Gentilomo Inglese di gran condizione, e di gran talento", and "My lady Lechmore sua consorte". The poem itself is dedicated to Cardinal Fleury, the French first minister, whom Rolli praises especially for preserving peace, in which the Cardinal was as ardent as Walpole himself. The appearance of both the Remarks and the "Life of Milton" makes the 1730 Verona edition an important milestone in Italian criticism of English literature, and far more important than Conti's slightly earlier passing mention of Shakespeare, since these together treat Shakespeare at some length, and — more briefly — Chaucer and Spenser as well, the names which still rank first in English literature, while the epigraph to the volume is from Addison's Spectator No. 291: "Nè basta ad un Uomo che voglia erigersi in guidice Critico, l'aver esaminato gli Autori, s'egli non à pur anche una chiara e logica Mente." Rolli had also employed this same epigraph for his Remarks on Voltaire, where it was also appropriate. Whatever changes or omissions in the poem Rolli considered or undertook in the name of Mother Church had little effect. As early as 1732, the Verona edition of the first six books was placed on the Index by a decree dated 21 January, joining

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

177

Milton's State Papers, and remained there until the sweeping revision of 1900 under Leo XIII. Apparently the decree was never extended to include the complete poem, as it is the only

one cited in later editions of the Index librorum

prohibitorum.

The essay on Voltaire was included by name, as part of the title of the work, and the introductory remarks on Milton would be covered by implication; thus the objection might have been to any part of the volume, not just to the poem, for the first entry (in the 1734 Appendix to the Index) does not go beyond the mere listing of the book by title. Despite this ban, the entire translation was reprinted in Paris in 1740 and in the Paris-Verona edition of 1742, apparently the first Italian edition of the complete text, although it may have been printed abroad to escape the censure of the church. Perhaps the best evidence of the quality of Rolli's translation was the frequency of republication, even as late as 1794 (Venice), the same year that Mariottini published the first books of his translation, also in London, curiously enough. But in discussing the translations that have followed, Allodoli comments that "considered from one point of view, [Rolli] is the best translator, and with his version it is possible to follow the true thought of the poet". 100 And one can only agree. One of the most revealing glimpses into Rolli's methods and intentions in the preparation of his translations and editions is found in the preface to his translation of Steele's The Conscious Lovers as Gli Amanti interni, published only two years after the remarkable success of the play (7 November 1722). The very choice of the play is interesting, for it suggests that Rolli was sympathetic to Steele's aims, both moral and sentimental, and this is brought out in the preface, "Al Lettore". Speaking of Steele's desire to move both the heart and the mind, but especially the former, he wrote: It seems to me that Sir Richard achieved this aim entirely: the art of touching the passions is highly developed in this play; the didactic part and that concerned with the conduct of human actions come out in the nature of the characters and in natural 100

Allodoli, op. cit., p. 143.

178

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

dialogue, and not in a pedantic string of well-written maxims in which the author speaks, not the characters... .101 More important than this praise of Steele's dramatic naturalness, however, is Rolli's statement of his two reasons for translating the play, of which the second is probably the more important: the introduction of Steele's play to Italian readers, and the providing of a good, but familiar, text upon which English students could practice their Italian. In his own words: The first aim of this translation was the desire to give to Italy an example of the best English comedy, and, especially in this one, a fine model of the imitation of the ancients. Terence's Andria is imitated, or better, emulated by our author; yet because the development of the plot, the manners, and the characters are of our own age, the work is more vivid and interesting to the audience. . . . My second aim is that of giving the English who learn Italian a book which is easily understood with the original nearby; a book of natural dialogue to help in speaking the language. Our poets are extremely difficult, even more for those who teach them than for those who are taught, who are for the most part versed at least in their own poets. Our histories and prose works are in a highly-wrought style and complex, which besides being difficult, doesn't teach discursive language. Therefore I hope for one reason the Italians, and for both reasons the English readers, will welcome this translation, and will encourage others like it.102 Questo fine parmi ottenuto intieramente dal Cavaliere Steele: l'Arte di movere le passioni è in alto grado in questa sua Commedia: la parte istruttiva e regolatrice degli Umani costumi v'è sparsa nei Caratteri personali e nel naturale dialogo, e non nello infilzamento pedantesco di bene scritte sentenze, co'l quale l'Autore parla e non gli A t t o r i . . . The Conscious Lovers. Gli Amanti Interni. Commedia Inglese Del Cavaliere Riccardo Steele. Londra, MDCCXX1V, p. fol. A3v. 192 II primo motivo di questa Traduzione fu il voler dare all' Italia un Saggio delle Ottime Commedie Inglesi, e particolarmente in questa un vero Modello della Imitazione degli Antichi. L'Andria di Terenzio è imitata o per meglio dire, emulata dal nostro Autore; per chè la Catastrofe la Condotta e i Caratteri sono dell' età nostra ed interessano così più vivamente gli Spettatori. . . . Il secondo motivo è stato quello di dare a gl'Inglesi che imparano la lingua italiana, un libro di facile intelligenza con l'Originale d'appresso: un libro di naturale colloquio per facilitarsi a parlare. I nostri Poeti sono difficilissimi, e più a quelli che insegnano; che a quelli che imparano poiché 101

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

179

This is probably the best statement of Rolli's rationale for his English publications, the desire to further the teaching of Italian, and to bring closer the Italian and English literary cultures. Undoubtedly this is why he added explanatory notes for Italian readers, in which he took special pains to praise the commentary on Addison's "Vision of Mirza" (Spectator No. 159) in I.ii, and in which he takes issues with Steele at one interesting point. In the second act interview between Indiana and young Bevil, the conversation turns to opera, in part as an indication of their extreme sensibility. In comparing two Bononcini operas of early 1722, Rolli's Crispo (10 January) and the Zeno-Rolli Griselda (22 February), the dialogue runs: Bev. Jun. Oh! Now then, I can account for the Dispute: Griselda, it seems, is the Distress of an injured Innocent woman: Crispo, that only of a Man in the same Condition; therefore the Men are mostly concerned for Crispo, and, by a Natural Indulgence, both

Sexes for Griselda.

Ind. So that Judgement, you think, ought to be for one, tho' Fancy and Complaisance have got ground for the o t h e r . . . I own, Crispo has its charms for me too: Though in the main, all the Pleasure the best Opera gives us, is but meer Sensation. — Methinks it's Pity the Mind can't have a little more Share in the Entertainment. — The Musick's certainly fine; but, in my Thoughts, there's none of your Composers come up to Old

Shake spear and Otivay.103

Rolli, interestingly enough, omits Indiana's speech here, but appends a long note to that of Bevil (whom he calls "Lelio"), which begins as explanation, but then bursts out to air his obviously pent-up feelings against the critics who dismiss the opera as "nonsense". How, he asks, could Steele praise the sensila più gran parte di questi sono già versati almeno ne'propij Poeti. Le nostre Istorie e le Prose sono d'alto stile e periodiche, onde oltre l'esser elleno difficili; non insegnano la lingua discorsiva. Quindi spero che per il primo Motivo gl'Italiani, e per amendue, gl' Inglesi Lettori auranno in grado questa Traduzzione, e daranno incoraggiamento ad altri simili. Ibid., pp. fol. A3v, Α4ν, Air. 103 The Conscious Lovers. A Comedy. As it is Acted at the Theatre Royal in Drury-Lane, by His Majesty's Servants. Written by Sir Richard Steele (London, 1722), p. 34.

180

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

bility of the opera in one speech, and in the next speak of it as "meer Sensation"? T h e speech, then, must be an interpolation by the players, who thus contradict the author's clear intention in order to disparage the opera from jealousy. As a result of this contention, Rolli omits the speech in question, but answers the implied insult; he defends the long and honorable tradition of the Italian dramma in musica — which, he adds, owes so much to "the generosity and intellectual delicacy" of the directors of the London opera — against the old and familiar charge of being "an inexhaustible font of Nonsense". He even cites the Tatler and the Spectator as the source for the libel, a strange way of demonstrating that Steele would not prefer the spoken to the sung drama in his own play some ten years later. One other note is of some interest, for to a reference to Bononcini's popular "Dolce sogno" (from Griselda), he speaks of its "indescribably expressive melody", and goes on to praise his friend ("gran Maestro e grande Espressor musicale della umane passioni"), and to turn this into a compliment to Bononcini's patroness, Her Grace the Duchess of Marleborough [«V], the first-born child of a great Commander, who took Signor Bononcini into her service with an annual pension of £ 500 sterling: Generosity worthy the worthiest daughter of so great a hero.104 It is also relevant to note that many of the characters have been given typically Italian names, even reminiscent of the commedia deir arte. Of particular interest is the change of the servant Tom into the traditional Italian servant Brighella, while his sweetheart is no longer the pastoral Phillis, but Rosetta, as befits her low station; the young hero, of course, has been given the name traditional for lovers in Italian comedies. The characters are named as follows:

104

Dramatis Personae

Interlocutori

Sir John Bevil Mr. Sealand Bevil jun. Myrtle

II II Il Il

Ibid.,

pp. 165-166.

Cavaliero Beville Signor Silandi Signor Lelio Beville Signor Mirtilo

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Cimberton Humphrey Tom Daniel Mrs. Sealand Isabella Indiana Lucinda Phillis

181

Il Signor Cimberti Onfri Brighella Daniele La Signora Silandi La Signora Isabella Signora Indana La Signora Lucinda Rosetta

Thus the English originals and their counterparts in the Italian theatre are neatly combined. One further point of interest is found on the title page, for the symbolic emblem of Cupid and Psyche bears the appropriate English legend, "Perpetual Fountain of Domestic Sweets", from Rolli's favorite Milton (PL, Bk IV), whom he was then engaged in translating. The work is dedicated "All Eccelenza di Lady Francesca Manners", who would seem to have been one of his pupils to judge from the praise of her "knowledge of the sweet Italian tongue". Lady Francis was the third daughter of John Manners, second Duke of Rutland, who was a director of both the Royal Academy of Music and of the Opera of the Nobility, Cuzzoni's protector, and the dedicatee of the Handel-Haym Tamberla.no (1724), who clearly was in the forefront of the noble protectors of the Italian circle. There is even a point of contact with Steele here. In the Bevil-Indiana scene already mentioned, Steele pointlessly introduces a violinistic "turn" by one Signor Carbonelli, who plays a sonata and then leaves. According to Rolli's note at this point, he was a "virtuoso violinist in the service of His Grace the Duke of Rutland", so that his introduction in the play, however unapt dramatically, could be a compliment to the Duke, as would the dedication of the translation to his daughter. Steele's play, by way of comparison, was dedicated to the king, a tribute to both its virtue and its success. Of the translation itself, little need be said except that it is notably plain, direct, and exact, with no important changes in wording or meaning except the one omission already noticed. Rolli's prose is clear, simple, but mature, so than an Italian would find this an intelligent and adult version, while the student of

182

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Italian would find it at once intelligible and instructive. The change of names is the only attempt to prepare the version for an Italian audience; beyond the changes already noticed, Mirtillo is used as both first and last name, in place of Steele's "Charles", and Sir Geoffrey (V.iii) becomes "il Cavalier Geffri". Rolli has even kept Steele's use of a rhymed "tag" to end each scene, although he may need from two to six lines to give the exact meaning of Steele's couplet or occasional quatrain, a further evidence of Rolli's exceptional fidelity, perhaps in conscious contrast to the English "renderings" of the opera libretti, to which he so strongly objected. Finally, it might be observed that this was the first translation of the play, and the only one yet into Italian, although it was translated into French three times during the century (1736, 1778, 1784), the first time by the Abbé Prévost, the creator of Manon Lescaut, and into German in 1752.105 Like many of his contemporaries, Rolli seems to have been extremely interested in the translation of classic literature, and himself produced two such translation, the product of his later years in England. The first of these, the Delle ode d'Anacreonte Teio, traduzione di Paolo Rolli (1739), suggests the influence of Anacreon on his own work, but it also contains two further translations into Italian, these from the English, Hamlet's "To be or not to be" and some verse by Elizabeth Singer Rowe, who had been a close friend of his pupil the Countess of Hertford. The second classic translation suggests the Arcadia of his youth and his own recent pastoral dramas, for it is based on the inspiration of most modern pastorals, Virgil's Eclogues: La Bucolica di Publio Virgilio Marone, αΙΓ Altezza Serenissima di Giorgio Prencipe della Gran Britannia da Paolo Rolli, Compagno della George Aiken, The Life of Richard Steele (London, 1889), II, pp. 391392. The contrast with Prevost's translation — one of a series which included All for Love, "Alexander's Feast", The London Merchant, and On the Art of Sinking in Poetry — is instructive. F. H. Wilcox, in "Prevost's Translations of Richardson's Novels", points out that "these translations are not perfect; they do violence to the originals in a number of ways. Passages are omitted, the style is toned down, and the bienséances of French criticism are carefully observed." University of California Publications in Modern Philology, XII, No. 5 (1923), p. 347. 105

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

183

Reale Società (1742). The dedication seems to be to the future George III, son of Frederick, at that time about four years old. In the same category as the Anacreon and Virgil might be listed Rolli's early edition (1723) of Salvini's translation into Italian of the Degli Amore di Abrocome ed Anzi a. the Ephesiaca of Xenophon of Ephesus (Senefonte Efiseo). This edition was probably prepared largely for pedagogic purposes, although the work was inexplicably popular at the time, and this version of the extant books by the noted Florentine philologist has attained classic status in Italian, despite flaws which disturbed Cocchi. It might be noted here that, as a result, Cocchi published his own Latin translation of the work, with the original Greek text, in London in 1726. One of Rolli's more unexpected London works is a translation into Italian of a Latin treatise on Rome by a Dutchman. This may well have been a commissioned work, but it certainly must have also been a labor of love for a homesick romano, as well as a way of making available in England (if not in English) a work of considerable antiquarian interest. This was a work by Bonaventura van Overbeke (1660-1706), Reliquiae antiquae Urbis Romae, quorum singidas... perscrutatas ... utque in aes incidit B. ab Overbeke, Opus postumum M. ab Overbeke ... e di curvit. 3 torn: L.P. Amstelaedami, 1708.iM These three sumptuous folios are dedicated, surprisingly enough, to Queen Anne. The description of each monument is prefaced by a full page engraving of the ruin, which greatly enhances its value. These engravings, however, are not included in the octavo volume published in 1739 as Degli Avanzi della Antica Roma, opra postuma di Bonaventura Overbeke. Pittore e cittadino d'Amsterdam, tradotta e di varie osservazione critiche e riflessive accresciuta da Paolo 10 ® As I have not seen the first edition of the work, this title is taken from the British Museum Catalogue of Printed Books. I have, however, examined the second edition, published at T h e Hague in 1709, which has what is probably the complete title: Reliquae antiquae Vrbis Romae, Quorum Singularis Innocenzo XI, Alexandre Vili & lnnocentio XII. PP.M.M. Deligentissima perscrutami est, ad vivum delineavit, dimensus est, descripsit, atque in aes incidit Bonaventura ab Overbeke. Opvs Postvmvm Michael ab Overbeke stt!s sumptibus edi ouravit.

184

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Rolli, Patrizio Tudertino, Compagno della Reale Società in Londra. There is no comment necessary on the translation, which is Rolli's usual good work, but it is interesting to speculate whether it might have been prepared in connection with another London work of 1739 with the same name, listed in the catalogue of the British Museum as Stampe degli avanzi delF Antica Roma ... rinovate... e accresciute da G. Amiconi. The combination of title, language, city, and year seems too great for sheer coincidence, and the publication of text and pictures at the same time would be sensible, giving greater meaning to each, but reducing the bulk of folio volumes by publishing the text separately. This is certainly the most likely explanation for the seeming coincidence.

3. ROLLI AS EDITOR

Aside from the Paradise Lost, the most important of the translations that Rolli published in London was neither his own nor Salvini's, but the first edition of the famous translation of Lucretius by the Florentine Alessandro Marchetti (1632-1714). The work, translated into unrhymed hexameters as early as 1669, according to Crescembini,107 was forbidden publication in Florence as a result of ecclesiastical disapproval. It was published only after Marchetti's death, and even then in a foreign country, from an apparently faulty manuscript copy furnished Rolli by a former English minister to the Medici court, John Molesworth.108 The work had been banned by the Church because of Lucretius' philosophy, which was considered materialistic, and hence antithetical to church doctrines. Indeed, this feeling was so strong that of the nine editions of Marchetti's version published in the eighteenth century, only one (the eighth) was published in Italy, in Venice in 1778. The fourth, sixth, and seventh were published in London (1751, 1760,1765) from Rolli's 107

Quoted in G. Carducci, "Alessandro Marchettii", in Primi Saggi, Opere, op. cit., VI, p. 321. 108 Rolli's preface, fol. A4v.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

185

version, while the last, that of 1779, was also published in London, but after Marchetti's original manuscript, and it stood as the standard text until Carducci's edition of 1864. In publishing the translation in 1717, however, Rolli was not going directly against the Church, for its was not put on the Index until the following year, probably as the result of his edition.109 Praised by critics from Crescembeni and Tiraboschi until the present day, Marchetti's is still considered the classic Italian translation of Lucretius, unrivaled both in the beauty of its language and the understanding of Lucretius' thought. 110 Rolli's edition, Di Tito Lucrezio Caro, della natura della cose, libri sei, tradotti da Alessandro Marchetti, lettore di filosofia e mattematiche nelV Università di Pisa et accademico della Crusca. Prima Edizione., shows his evident pride in introducing this work to the public. It is dedicated to Prince Eugene of Savoy ("All' Altezza Serenessima d'Eugenio Francesco, Prencipe di Savoja e di Piemonte, Cavaliero del Tosone d'oro, Presidente del Conseglio aulico di Guerra, Tenente Generale del Armi di S.M.C.C., Generale Maresciallo dell' Impero e Governatore de' Paesi bassi Autriaci"). The Prince would seem to have been a patron in whom Rolli was particularly interested, for he also sent him a copy of the completed Del Paradiso perduto via Riva.111 Prince Eugene, an old companion of the Duke of Marlborough, was a notable patron of art, as well as one of the great generals of the age, and had spent some time in London. There is no evidence as to whether or not Rolli's interest was returned. The Introduction, which was often reprinted, opens with a brief account of Marchetti, with particular praise for his elegant diction, and of the manuscript used in the edition. The last half, however, is devoted to an explication of the method or orthography used, and of his own system of establishing it, an interest which Rolli frequently develops elsewhere in his scholarly work. The entire essay is greatly to his credit, despite this aside, and shows an adventurous side to Rolli seldom seen, as well as his w· 110 111

Carducci, "Alessandro Marchetti", op. cit., pp. 346-349, 332. Ibid., pp. 327-330. Letter to Riva, 29 January 1735.

186

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

better-known lifelong devotion to literature, and especially to the great works of his native tongue, whether or not they were yet recognized as classic. His adventurousness was tinged with discretion, perhaps, for he hid behind the pseudonym (at once protecting and revealing) of P. Antinoo Rullo. An interesting bibliographic problem is raised by Rolli's only London "anthology", the two volume collection of Italian satirists published in 1721 and 1724. The first volume was published with the expectation of the second following it the next year, but a change of plan seems to have delayed it. The contents are indicated by the title, II Primo Libro delle Opere Burlesche di M. Francesco Berni, di M. Gio. della Casa, del Varchi, del Mauro, del Bino, del Molza, del Dolce, e del Firenzuolo — the title omits only Benedetto Macchi, who is also included. The project was intended to be an annotated edition of the most famous Italian satirists, from the famous Giunti edition of Opere Burlesche (1548-1555). For one reason or another, something arose to change the plan of the second volume, which was called Il Secondo Libro delle Opere Burlesche di M. Francesco Berni, del Molza, di M. Bino, di M. Ludovico Martelli, di Mattio Franzesi, di P. Aretino, e d'altri autori. Con aggiunta in fine del Simposio del magnifico Lorenzo de' Medici. The additional authors in this volume are Francesco Coppetta, Vincenzio Martelli, Strascino da Siena, Andrea Lori, Luca Martini, Francesco Baldelli, Valerio Buongisco, Luco Valoriani, G. A. dell'Anguillara, Ludovico Domenichi, two authors identified only as "S.B." and "M.B.", and the anonymous author of "Le Terze Rime di Bronzino Pittore". A possible reason for varying the authors published in the second volume, rather than following the Giunti edition, may be found in a set of three volumes of the Opere Burlesche of Berni et al., bearing the date 1723, the first two volumes of which are marked London and the third Florence. According to Antonio Vigili, Berni's biographer, these volumes are a fraud, as they were actually published in Naples, the two "London" volumes in 1723, the other in 1729.112 112

Antonio Vigili, Francesco Berni (Firenze, 1881), p. 525.

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

187

The Giunti Opere Burlesche, of which these are a reprint, had become very rare, especially as the Holy Office did not look upon the work with any favor at this time. The idea for the London disguise probably came from the Rolli edition, which would not have been generally distributed in Italy, and thus could provide a cover, without offering competition. These ill-printed volumes, then, have no authority, nor do they reprint the notes of Salvini, much enlarged by Rolli, included in the English issue and highly praised by Vigili. The changes, therefore, may have been made in Rolli's second volume in order to make his work more distinctive, and to avoid confusion with the clandestine version. It was, of course, the Church's ban which helped to create the rarity of the work, so that in a real sense Rolli's edition sprang — at least in part — from the same intention as the Naples edition, although motivated more by scholarly and literary concerns, and not mere opportunism. T h e first volume of Rolli's edition is dedicated to the notable virtuoso Thomas Coke of Norfolk ("All' Illustrissimo Signore II Signor Tomasso Coke di Norfolk"), with signs of a very real respect. Not only does Rolli speak here of Coke's knowledge and love of Italian letters, of his collections of books, pictures, drawings, and sculpture, and of his general "conosenza e buon gusto"; it should also be remembered that Rolli's edition of the Decameron was after a rare sixteenth century copy in Coke's library, and that Coke was on the first board of directors of the Royal Academy of Music and on that of the Opera of the Nobility. A friend of Burlington, Coke (1697-1759) is now famous particularly as the builder of Holkham, and as founder of the great collections there, which fully deserve Rolli's praise. The great library was established with the books and manuscripts that Coke purchased during his extended grand tour (1712-1718), and it is possible that he met Rolli during his stay in Rome in 1714.113 Among those whom he is known to have encountered in Rome then was the young William Kent, the future architect 113 Charles W . James, Chief Justice Coke, His Family and Descendants at Holkham (New York, 1929), p. 188.

188

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

of Holkham,114 while he probably met Zeno in Venice in 1717.115 Coke's generosity in lending his books was widely known and praised, as in the case of Rolli's Decameron, or the edition of the Iliad after a Holkham copy, prepared by Michel Mattaire (1721) and dedicated to Coke.118 A descendant of Sir Edward Coke, Coke of Norfolk was created Baron Lovel in 1728, and in 1744 Earl of Leicester and Viscount Coke of Holkham. In 1740 he became a member of the Society of Dilettante.117 Considering his extended Italian sojourn, his connections with the opera, and with two of Rolli's editions, it would seem that Coke was a particular patron and probably a friend of Rolli. More important, his friendship with Burlington and his patronage of Kent, both evidenced by the Palladian splendors of Holkham, suggest a further tie between the neo-classic in architecture and the Italian influence in literature and music, as represented by Rolli and the opera. This Coke, it might be noted, should not be confused with Sir Thomas Coke, who was no relation. Sir Thomas (d. 1727) was Vice-Chamberlain for over twenty years (1706-1727), and his title was generally used to distinguish him from Coke of Norfolk — these distinctions are made in the list of first subscribers to the Royal Academy of Music.118 The heir to Melbourne Hall in Derbyshire, the friend of Bolingbroke and Pope, the son-in-law of the second Earl of Chesterfield, Sir Thomas is now remembered primarily as the great-grandfather of Lord Melbourne.119 If Coke presents one of the all-too-rare cases where the praise showered in a dedication is probably justified, the same may well be true also of the dedicatee of the second volume of Opere Ibid., p. 187. Ibid., p. 203. 1W Anna Stirling, Coke of Norfolk and his Friends: the Life of Thomas William Coke, first Earl of Leicester of Holkham (London, 1912), p. 21. For a suggestion that this generosity was not entirely disinterested, see p. 21, n. 2. 117 Ibid., p. 21. 118 Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 91-92. 119 W . M. Torrens, Memoirs of the Right Honourable William, second Viscount Melbourne (London, 1878), I, pp. 7-9. This distinguishing between 111

115

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

189

Burlesche, Walter ("Gualtiero") Plumer. He is praised, of course, for his knowledge and love of Italian, but mention is also made of his purchase of at least part of the library of the famous Giuseppe Valletta (1636-1714) in Naples 120 — a library called by Natali "one of the most notable in Italy".121 "Gualtiero Plumer" is presumably the same "Walter Plummer or Plomer" (? 1682/31746) who matriculated at Peterhouse in 1699,122 the son of John P. Plumer of Blakesware, Herts., who was High Sheriff of Hertfordshire in 1689-1690. Admitted to Gray's Inn in 1702, he was M.P. for Aldeburgh (Suffolk) in 1717-1727, and for Appleby (Westmoreland) in 1730-1741. He lived at Chediston Hall, Suffolk, an Elizabethan house. As M.P. he appears to have been a notable speaker among the anti-Walpole Whigs, and his speeches are often among those reported in the Parliamentary debates in The Gentleman's Magazine, 1731-1741, after June 1738 under the "Lilliputian" sobriquet of "Plurom". There is no record of Plumer's taking the grand tour, but biographical details are scarce, and it can only be assumed that this is the Plumer known to Rolli, for he is the only one of that name of whom records survive.123 4. ROLLI A N D T H E ROYAL SOCIETY

Rolli was neither the only nor the first Italian to be elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, although many of the distinguished foreign Fellows were "corresponding members", a more honorific

the two Cokes might appear superfluous, were it not that they have been confused by historians and biographers. For example, see Sir Charles Petrie, Bolingbroke (London, 1937), especially pp. 304-305. 120 Enciclopedia Italiana, s.v. "Valletta", XXXIV, p. 934. 121 Giulio Natali, Il Settecento (Milano, 1936), I, p. 30. 122 Alumni Oxoniensis, 1500-1886, ed. Joseph Foster, Early Series (Oxford, 1891), III, p. 1173. 123 if plumer himself is thus lost to literary history, his childhood home is not. Under William Plomer, younger brother of Walter, Mary Field — the maternal grandmother of Charles Lamb — entered service at Blakesware, and spent the rest of her life there. She was often visited there by her grandchildren, and the part of their youth spent at Blakeston is recalled by Mary Lamb in Mrs. Leicester's School ("The Young Moha-

190

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

title. The Record of the Royal Society124 reveals a most interesting array for the age, including a future Doge, Pietro Grimani (elected 1712). "Conte Antonio de' Conti" is listed for 1715, Luigi Antonio Muratori for 1717, Dr. Antonio Cocchi not until 1735, while both Francesco Algarotti and Marchese Scipione Maffei are found under 1736. "Dr. Paolo Antonio Rolli", however, was elected in 1729 —the listing gives no explanation of the title, which never appears elsewhere. Probably the only one of these who was not a corresponding, i.e. non-resident, member, he seems to have taken a considerable interest in the activities of the society, although it was then less strictly scientific than it has since become. Rolli was proud enough of his membership in the Royal Society to append "F.R.S." to his name on all subsequent important publications, but his first — and only — contribution to the Philosophical Transactions was a paper read on 20 June 1745, not long after his departure for Italy. Entitled "An Extract, by Mr. Paul Rolli, F.R.S., of an Italian Treatise, written by the Reverend Joseph Bianchini, a Prebend in the City of Verona; upon the Death of the Countess Cornelia Zangari & Bardi, of Cesna. T o which are subjoined Accounts of the Death of Jo. Hitchell, who was burned to Death by Lightning; and of Grace Pett, at Ipswich, whose Body was consumed to a Coal." 125 The account is of interest principally as a curiosity, for the two ladies seem to have expired of spontaneous combustion, and the explanations are supported by other examples, including one tale reported by Maffei, as one might have expected from the connection with Verona. Rolli's paper would seem to have been well received, for in 1751 it was printed in French as an appendix to another work, also translated from the English. This was the

Dissertations sur La Chaleur, avec des Observations

Nouvelles

metan"), and by Charles Lamb in Rosamund Gray, "Blakesmore in H—shire", "The Last Peach", and, above all, in "Dream Children". For an account of the house, the family, and the Lambs' connection with both, see E. V. Lucas, The Life of Charles Lamb (London, 1907), pp. 23-37. 124 London, 1940. 125 Philosophical Transactions, op. cit., pp. 447 ff.

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

191

sur La Construction et La Comparison des Thermometres (Paris, 1751). Written by an Edinburgh doctor, George Martin (17021741), and translated by Louis Anne La Vivotte, it was drawn from Martin's Essays Medical and Philosophical (London, 1740, Essays III-IV). The volume also includes Dr. Robert Douglas' An Essay concerning the Generation of Heat in Animals (London, 1747) and "A Letter to Martin Folkes, Esq; President of the Royal Society, from Cromwell Mortimer, M.D. Scr. of the same, concerning the natural Heat of Animals", taken from the same volume of the Philosophical Transactions as Rolli's paper. The principal interest of this republication is the company of eminent physicians in which Rolli is to be found, and in general the evidence of far greater scientific interests than any of his other works would suggest. This scientific-humanistic bias Rolli shared with Maffei and Cocchi, of his own group, and with Voltaire, Algarotti, and Goethe among other eminent eighteenth century men of letters. Of course membership in the Royal Society carried considerable social prestige, but Rolli's membership would seem to be justified by a real interest in the scientific problems which were then perplexing his contemporaries, and in particular the nature and properties of heat. Whether his dilettante interest would qualify him for membership today is doubtful, but — fortunately — irrelevant. Rolli the scientist made one belated, if anonymous, appearance in English literature. In Chapter XXXIII of Bleak House, Dickens holds an inquest on the most celebrated victim of Spontaneous Combustion, Krook. T o bolster his "hypothesis" — in which he evidently believed — he cites, separately, the Philosophical Transactions (vol. VI, not vol. L) and Bianchini's account of the death of the Countess Cornelia Bardi. Defending this "hypothesis" in the preface he added later, he mentions Bianchini's account again, as published in Verona in 1731 and reprinted in Rome. But he doesn't mention his undoubted source, which is not Bianchini, but Rolli's English version, whether Dickens had seen it himself or only knew of it through some reference. So exits Paolo Rolli, F.R.S.

192

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

5. ROLLI AS POLEMICIST N o t all of Rolli's work involved compliment or scientific inquiry. T h e eighteenth century was also an age of debate, and — quite naturally — an age of able debaters. Among these, Rolli was prominent, for among others he took on the greatest polemicist of the century, and emerged with some honor. This, of course, was Voltaire, with whom Rolli crossed swords in 1727-1728 on the subject of epic poets and epic poetry. T h e Italian's first important debate, however, began in the preceding year, 1726, when an Italian teacher in Paris, Giuseppe Buonamici,

published his Lettera critica... sulle Osservazioni aggiunte all' edizione del Decamerone del Boccaccio fatta in Londra nel MDCCXXV, attacking in large part certain principles of orthography introduced by Rolli in his edition of the Decameron. T h e basis of this attack was the question of the purity of the Italian language outside Tuscany. As a Tuscan, Buonamici maintained that only one born and raised a Tuscan can speak with authority on matters of style and usage, an argument long defended by the Florentines in the face of protests from the rest of Italy. One particular object of Buonamici's criticism was Rolli's attempt to institute certain orthographic changes into the spelling of standard Italian, after the style of certain dialects, to make the language conform more closely and logically to Latin. This involved the doubling of the consonant " z " where it derives from the Latin " c t " rather than from the Latin " t " . which would be represented by the single " z " ; hence, "benedizione", from "benedictione", would become "benedizzione", while "devozione" would be unchanged, as it derives from "devotions".12® Authority is cited against Rolli, especially the Avvertimenti della

lingua sopra il Decamerone (1584-1586) of the noted Florentine scholar Leonardo Salviati (1540-1589), and Buonamici closes the subject with "Therefore, since the Tuscans pronunce Devozione and Benedizione in the same fashion, why should Rolli wish that they be spelled differently? Reason requires rather that the 126

Rolli, Decamerone, p. 11; Buonamici, Lettera critica, p. 25.

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

193

written form follow pronunciation, of which it is the picture and the image." 127 Objections are also raised to most of Rolli's textual alterations and to the notes on them, and finally on the gathering of 662 lines of verse abstracted from Boccaccio's prose, Rolli commenting that "It might also be observed that the prose of good poets may be entirely without verses, and that of authors who are only writers of prose have them in abundant quantity: this is the result of the more delicate ear of the former, who recognizing the accidental verse in the sentence, change either the word or its position, or else truncate the ending, thus breaking it, and giving prose rhythm to the sentence." 128 Buonamici considers the entire search absurd, and quotes a friend with whom he examined a volume of Rolli's Rime, with results considered convincing: "If the prose of good poets is almost entirely empty of verses, as Signor Rolli says here on page 35, what can we say when we find that the short dedicatory letter begins with this beautiful verso sdrucciolo. Il sommo Pregio dell' Uom Meritevole. 129 And with this parting sally, Buonamici closes his remarks. Rolli's reply begins in the same style as Buonamici's, for it is addressed to the same unnamed noble person who apparently had taken an interest in the matter and solicited the earlier work. It begins calmly enough, avoiding the tone of ironic admiration 127 E infatti, poiché i T o s c a n i pronunciano Devozione e Benedizione nel medesimo modo, perchè vuole il signor Rolli che si scrivano diversamente? L a ragione richiede pure che la scrittura seguiti la pronuncia, di cui ella è ritratto ed imagine! Buonamici, op. cit., p. 25. 128 Puossi di più osservare che le Prose de buoni Poeti son forse affatto prive di versi, e quelle de solamente buon Prosatori ne anno abbondante quantità: il che deriva dall' orecchio più delicato de' primi: i quali, accortisi di qualunque accidental Verso ne' periodi; o cangiandone le parole o la lor giacitura, o troncandone le terminazione, lo rompono, e prosaica misura gli danno. Rolli, Decamerone, op. cit., p. 35. 129 Se le prose de' buoni Poeti sono quasi affatto prive di versi, come il Sig. Rolli dice qui a carta 35; che doveremo dir noi che vediamo, la corta lettera dedicatoria cominciare con questo bel verso sdrucciolo. Il sommo Pregio dell'Uom Meritevole. Buonamici, op. cit., p. 28.

194

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

employed by Buonamici, but it eventually settles into a section of which Valiese properly comments that "It is not worth the trouble of following Rolli in this discussion, for from page 52 through page 74 of his answer, we read nothing but observations of a personal character which throw open to question the motives of the polemic." 130 The beginning of the Lettera Rispondente del Signor Rolli is more moderate in tone, fortunately. T o the charge that it was necessary to be born or raised in Tuscany in order to deal properly with matters of fine detail concerning the Italian language, he answers that such is not the case. "Bembo, Ariosto, the two Tassos, Chiabrera, Guarini, Baldassar Castiglioni, Paolo Beni, Annibal Caro, Alunno, Tassoni, Cinonio, Castelvetro, and many others of our famous writers were not born in Tuscany, and most of them were never even there. But they were Italians." This is, indeed, an almost irrefutable answer to an argument based principally upon prejudice and snobbery, and certainly one belied by Rolli's own lyric poetry, which is notable for its grace and purity of idiom. Following this, Rolli takes up the objections raised to his discussion of the text of the Decameron and its various editions, and to his textual notes and corrections. Whatever the justice of the arguments on either side, they need not be summarized, although it might be noted that Fassini gives the nod to Rolli, dismissing his adversary as a "syllable-counting poetaster". 131 It might also be noted that Rolli's arguments have not deflected in any particular the course of Italian orthography. Concerning the other matter of the verses to be found in prose, Rolli belabors his opponent as a pedant with faulty ears, and points out a number of more correct verses to be found among his own prose.132 In Rolli's defense on this rather strange point, one whose potential value to the study of prose style is ignored except for Rolli's very general comment, Fassini lists several Valiese, op. cit., p. 114. Sesto Fassini, "II Decameron e una Bega Letteraria Settecentesca", Rivista d'Italia, XVI, pt. 2 (1913), p. 877. 132 Rolli, Decamerone, pp. 62-64. 130

131

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

195

other such studies, including one demonstrating more than 4000 such verses to be found in the prose of Manzoni's 1 Promessi Sposi, by one Alfonso Cerquetti (Parma, 1889).133 The implications of the Voltaire controversy are much greater, and considerably more interesting, than those of the Buonamici affair. In 1727, during an extended visit to England, Voltaire published his Essay upon the Epick Poetry of all the Europeaii Nations from Homer down to Milton, along with his Essay upon the Civil Wars of France. The essays, the first work written by Voltaire in English and presumably corrected by one or another of his noble patrons, were intended to prepare the British reader for the publication of VHenriade, Voltaire's principal attempt at a French epic. The poem was published uncut for the first time in London in 1728, with a subscription list of nearly 350 names, headed by those of the king and queen, and a dedication to Queen Caroline.134 His success was not universal, however; after reading the pretatory essays in manuscript, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu made one of her best mots, for "she told him that she simply did not believe he had written it: the English was too good to be by him and too poor to be by a distinguished person".135 Lady Mary's strictures were largely stylistic, of course, and in his preface Voltaire quite makes amends for any such failings.186 The objections of Rolli, however, were against the bases of Voltaire's judgments, his poetics, and above all, his knowledge of the subject — especially the Italian poets — concluding in what is virtually a personal attack. In itself, Voltaire's brief (93 page) treatise does not appear particularly disturbing, but rather as eager to please an English Fassini, "// Decameron", op. cit., pp. 878-879. 134 White, op. cit., p. 7. I am indebted to Miss White's study for many details concerning Voltaire's essay and Rolli's reply. 135 Halsband, op. cit., p. 120. 136 "It has the Appearance of too great a Presumption in a Traveller, who hath been but eighteen Months in England, to attempt to write in a Language, which he cannot pronounce at all, and which he hardly understands in Conversation. But I have done what we do every Day at School, where we write Latin and Greek, tho' surely we pronounce them both pitifully, and should understand neither of them if they were uttered to us with the right Roman or Greek Pronunciation", p. 1. 133

196

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

reader, with its flattering references to Pope, 137 and favorable comments on Dryden, Waller, and Denham, in addition to the inclusion of Milton among the great epic poets. The Essay is divided into nine principal sections, dealing with eight major epic poets (Homer, Virgil, Lucan, Trissino, Camoens,138 Tasso, d'Ercilla y Zuniga, and Milton), plus an introductory section. The opening remarks are of particular interest, for Voltaire here puts forth his concept of "national taste", which naturally varies between any two countries, as it changes within any single country over an extended time. Thus, he says, the "Italian softness, their Witticism so often degenerating into Conceit, the pompous and metaphorical Stile of the Spaniard, the Exactness and Perspicuity of the French, and the Strength peculiar to the English, their Fondness of Allegories, their running into Similies, are so many distinguishing Marks." 1 3 9 From this he attempts to point out those elements in each poet which are in accord with a national taste, but perhaps objectionable to the foreign reader, and to distinguish these from the faults to which any reasonable critic will object, whatever his nationality. Milton's "darkness visible", for example, he feels to be a legitimate "nationalism" which is not to the French taste, but Ariosto's Lunar Paradise he finds an intolerable conceit — indeed, he finds Ariosto generally beyond the pale.140 Among the modern poets, the greatest praise Of Pope's translation of the Iliad, Voltaire commented flatteringly, but probably sincerely, that "Those who cannot read him [Homer] in the Original, have Mr. Pope's Translation; they may discern the Fire of that Father of Poetry, reflected from such a polish'd and faithful Glass" (p. 48). For documentation of Voltaire's friendship with Pope, see Archibald Ballantyne, Voltaire's Visit to England (London, 1893), especially pp. 70-91. 138 Although Voltaire demonstrates some knowledge of Italian and Spanish, he seems to have been unable to fathom the Portuguese of Os Lusiados. That his knowledge of the poem was derived from Sir Richard Fanshawe's English rendering (1655) is demonstrated by his comment on the close resemblance between Camoens' lines to the Nymphs of the Tagus and Denham's famous lines on the Thames in "Cooper's Hill" (p. 76) ; the resemblance is unknown to those familiar with the epic in the original, for it is a flourish added by the translator. See White, op. cit., p. 112, n. 1; Ballantyne, op. cit., p. 121. 139 Voltaire, Essay, op. cit., p. 42. 140 For a discussion of Voltaire's change in attitude toward Ariosto, see White, op. cit., p. 50. 137

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

197

is reserved for Tasso ("No man in the World was ever born with a greater Genius, and more qualify'd for Epick Poetry") and Milton (Paradise Lost is "the noblest Work, which human Imagination hath ever attempted" 141 ). Exception is taken to certain episodes in these great poets, as the allegory of Sin and Death or the artillery in the War in Heaven episode in Milton, or to the Ismeno-Olindo-Sophronia episode in the Gerusalemme Liberata. This last is criticised for reasons based upon a mistaken reading of the passage, but in part also upon the grounds that these seemingly important characters soon disappear from the poem, and their failure to reappear disrupts the unity.142 The principal failing in an otherwise intelligent essay, aside from some few errors in fact, is the frequent disparaging of Ariosto, and often by extension of Italian taste, as, " T h e Virtuosi of Italy have disputed for a long while and still contest which of the two Ariosto or Tasso deserves the Precedency. But everywhere else the chiefest Exception that Men of Understanding take to Tasso is that of having too much of Ariosto in him." 143 Voltaire also calls certain images in Milton "those low comical Imaginations, which belong by Right to Ariosto". 144 In his conclusion, Voltaire complains that the French have produced no true epic — it will be remembered that the Essay was intended as a preface to his own epic on the Civil Wars in France — and comments in closing that "the best Reason I can offer for our ill Success in Epick Poetry, is the Insufficiency of all who have attempted it. I can add nothing further, after this ingenuous Confession." 145 Voltaire's Essay in its original form provoked two important replies from Italians resident in London, of which Rolli's Remarks

upon M. Voltaire's Essay on the Epick Poetry of the European Nations (1728) was the first, the second being Baretti's A Disser-

tation upon the Italian Poets, in which are intersperced 141 142 143 144 145

Voltaire, Essay, op. cit., pp. 77, 104. Ibid., pp. 83-84. Ibid., pp. 89-90. Ibid., p. 117. Ibid., p. 130,

some

198

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

Remarks on Mr. Voltaire's Essay on the Epic Poets (1753). Some two centuries later Valiese leaps again to the defense of the attacked poets, finding a malevolence in Voltaire which somehow is at odds with the tone of the Essay. H e accuses the Frenchman not only of ignorance of parts of Italian literature to which he had not pretended knowledge, but also of vaunting the superiority of French taste — which he may have felt, but certainly did not express, as it would have quite upset his notion of national tastes, while he points out acutely both the defects and the advantages of the French taste.146 T h e praise which Valiese gives Rolli's answer is indeed high, that "this fine essay [bel saggio] of Rolli's . . . deserves being read and studied not only by Italians, but by the English themselves." 147 Rolli's essay was published immediately in two translations, one into French, the Examen de l'Essai de M. de Voltaire sur la poésie épique, translated by the Abbé Antonini (1728), the other into Italian by Rolli himself. These Osservazioni sopra il libro del Signor Voltaire che esamina l'Epica Poesia delle Nazioni Europee, scritta originalmente in Inglese, e stampate nel 1728, dedicated to Maffei, were published in Verona in 1730 with the first six books of Rolli's Milton translation. 148 T h e work is interesting for several reasons, the first of which is the number of errors of simple fact and of judgment that Rolli finds in Voltaire's essay. The second is Voltaire's reaction to Rolli's critique, for wittily listing the Italian among the non-poets, 149 he then proceeded to revise the essay in accord with many of Rolli's suggestions and corrections while undertaking the changes necessary to suit the work to a French audience, thus conceding a victory 146

Valiese, op. cit., pp. 116-122. Ibid,., p. 124. 14e This is the text used in this study. 149 Letter to Jacob Vernet, 14 September 1733. " . . . qui conque écrit en vers doit ecrire en beaux vers, on ne sera point lu. Les poetes ne réussissent que par les beautes de detail; sans celu Virgile et Chapelain, Racine et Campistron, Milton et Ogilbi [John Ogilby], le Tasse et Rolli seraient égaux." Voltaire's Correspondence, ed. Theodore Besterman (Geneva, 1953;, III, p. 139. The linking of Tasso and Rolli, to the disparagement of the latter, gives the ironic fillip to the passage for the reader familiar with the then recent controversy. 147

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

199

seldom won against the great Frenchman. 150 T h e final French version of the essay, it has been demonstrated, is quite a different work f r o m the original. 151 A third reason f o r interest in Rolli's essay is the tone, for it is along the lines of a personal attack, marshalling the resources of scorn, irony, reductio ad absurdim, selfrighteousness, and the many other devices of personal polemic. Voltaire is taken to task limiting his title to the European nations, for, says Rolli, "I have never yet heard of Asian or American Epic poems". 152 If Voltaire suggests that the French like long speeches in plays more than the English, citing Corneille as an example, Rolli counts verses to discover that the longest speech in French drama is 104 lines in China, and cites a speech of ninety-nine lines f r o m I Henry IV (III.ii.29-128), and another of sixty-five lines in Richard II (V.v. 1-66), 153 although Voltaire's observation was as basically correct then as it is today. By the time that the remarks on Milton are reached, it is evident that there will be little reasoned criticism, for Voltaire need only say "black" for Rolli to snap "white". Although the modern reader tends to see white with Rolli, not only here, but throughout the work, the method of argument is not often enough literary criticism. This is evident particularly when one contrasts this usual method with the long passage in the middle of the essay where Rolli eloquently defends the variety of the Italian language, and the purity and continuity of the Italian literary tradition f r o m Dante and Boccaccio, an unexpectedly modern position for the Arcardian Rolli, while commenting on Voltaire's statement that the Italian language was carried to its highest perfection only at the end of the fifteenth century. 154 Here, for once, is the voice of reason, and the result is true criticism. It is here that the warmth and depth of Rolli's feeling for his language lä0

An instructive comparison is Voltaire's quarrel with the distinguished Président de Brosses — see Lytton Strachey's "The Président de Brosses", Biographical Essays (London, 1960), pp. 112-121. 151 See White, op. cit., pp. 41-48. 152 Rolli, Remarks, op. cit., p. 2. 153 Ibid., pp. 16. The speech in / Henry IV is not continuous, as he notes, being broken midway by an interjection of a line-and-a-half. Ibid., pp. 30-32.

200

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

and its literature can best be felt, and one can begin to understand — if not accept — the passion with which he belabored the foreigner w h o dared attack any part of either, for any reason whatever. T h e justice of his observation on "the first, the best, and the never-interrupted Standards of the Language and the Stile" stemming from the early fourteenth century and not from the late fifteenth century, was among the points apparently recognized. N e v e r anxious to be found in error, especially by his compatriots, Voltaire omitted the offending lines in his French revision, replacing them with a paragraph which begins: "la poésie fut le premier art qui fût cultive avec succès. Dante et Pétrarque éscrivirent dans un temps où l'on n'avais pas encore un ouvrage de prose supportable." 155 A basic point in Rolli's attack on Voltaire's poetic theory is the Frenchman's rejection of certain qualities of fantasy. This would limit poetry in both subject and treatment, to a sternly rationalistic quality, as is to be found in UHenriade, for which the Essay serves as an apologia or "poetic". This seems, indeed, to be more its actual intent — a clarification of a poet's concepts and intentions — than to be a straightforward, disinterested critique of certain epic poets. O n occasion, however, Rolli refutes one of Voltaire's points b y citing the example of UHenriade against the critical pronouncements of its author. As Voltaire's o w n poetic, then, it would deny (as Voltaire at that time did) the beauties of Ariosto, rejecting in particular the entire concept of enchantment or magic as a legitimate subject for poetry, thus limiting the play of the imagination. Further, his final and clinching objection to Homer's Iliad is on a formalistic objection to what might be called the imaginative construction of the poem: "Many of the Books of the Iliad are independent from one another; they might be transpos'd without any great alteration in the Action: A n d perhaps, for that Reason, they were call'd Rhapsodies. I leave to the Judgment of the Reader, if such a W o r k , let it be never so well written, never so teeming with iss White, op. cit., p. 104, n. 2.

THE U F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

201

Beauties, can be interesting, and win our Attention." 159 It is at these points that Voltaire is seen at his most neo-classical, while Rolli seems to be reaching forward in the direction pointed by Antonio Conti, as Professor Robertson has suggested, toward a more liberalizing "romantic" attitude.157 For example, in reply to Voltaire's rather stuffy comment that the "Taste of the English and of the French... [is] adverse to any machinery 158 grounded upon Enchantment", Rolli first points out that The Faerie Queene ("a poem greatly admired in England"), Macbeth ("to my mind the finest English tragedy"), and The Tempest were apparently unknown to Voltaire, for they demonstrate an English taste for "machinery grounded upon Enchantment". Then he goes on to show that not only did the fantastic come to Italy from France through the tales and legends growing out of French history, on which Boiardo, Ariosto, and Bernardo Tasso based their epics, but that France not only had been, but remained, the home of the most famous writers of Romances. Finally Rolli concludes that by "machines" Voltaire means allegory, and that to follow him in censuring the use of allegory, would leave only "invention", which would be "meer Gazettes in verse".159 A comparison of Voltaire's original English text with his revised French translation demonstrates that many of his alterations are in accord with Rolli's suggested corrections, including the change of the title, first translated as Essai sur la poésie épique de tout les nations écrit en anglais par M. de Voltaire (1732), and finally shortened to the present Essai sur la poésie épique.1™ He emended several clear mistakes, as that Milton saw h.àrûrà'sAdamo in Milan instead of Florence, or concerning the nature of the Ismeno episode in Tasso, which Voltaire seems to 154

Voltaire, Essay, op. cit., p. 53. I have corrected an obvious misprint in the punctuation. 157 Robertson, op. cit., pp. 96-120. iss Voltaire, Essay, op. cit., pp. 84-85. 139 Rolli, Remarks, op. cit., pp. 48-49. 160 Sesto Fassini, "Paolo Rolli contro il Voltaire", Giornale Storico della letteratura italiana, X X X I X (1907), p. 96.

202

THE LIFE AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

have misread and ridiculed by mistake.161 But most important, Voltaire has lessened his strictures against Ariosto throughout the essay, either removing or softening the too frequent harsh remarks he had made about the great Italian poet, who was a particular favorite of Rolli's, to judge from the various editions of his plays and satires that Rolli prepared for publication in London. This is undoubtedly to the good of the Essai, and gives it a more balanced tone, more in accord with the original concept of national taste, which in itself Rolli would never accept (on firm grounds of neo-classical theory) and which Voltaire (equally buttressed by contemporary theory) would not relinquish. But Rolli's defense of the neo-classic concept of imitating nature is in itself a strong one and relevant to what has been said earlier about the basis of his approach to the drama: In short, Poetry in all its kinds is the more perfect, the more it imitates Nature in her beautiful performances; wherefore Poetry, like her only model, Nature, does renew, but never changes its Productions. Even when Poetry invents marvellous things, as Transformations, Winged Horses, &c., it does nothing else but join different natural Productions, that in Nature are never together. T h e Mind cannot express any Image but such as it has first received through the Senses.162 That Rolli was correct in suggesting throughout his essay that Voltaire's knowledge of Italian was limited, the Frenchman tacitly admitted in another context. Concerning his later admiration for Ariosto, he wrote in 1761, "Je ne l'amais pas assez dans ma jeunesse; je ne savois pas assez l'Italien." Remembering the respectful consideration which Voltaire seems to have given Rolli's remarks, to the point of omitting comparisons to which particular objections had been raised, it is surely a point of legitimate conjecture whether Voltaire's reconsideration of Ariosto, and perhaps his further study of Italian, may not have resulted at least in part from his encounter with Rolli. T h e revisions of the Essai would suggest that this is at least possible. ,ßl 162

Ibid., pp. 93-94. Op. cit., p . 1 1 .

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

203

The principal fault of Rolli's Remarks is the absence of precisely that feeling of unity which makes Voltaire's Essay delightful to read, for both unity of tone — especially Voltaire's tone of reasonable criticism — and a structural unity are missing, as is so often the case with "replies". But Rolli nevertheless felt that he had been justified, and that the palm had fallen to him, as is clear from the victorious tone of his correspondence at this time.163 It is, however, interesting to speculate whether Rolli's inclusion in The Dunciad was in part motivated by this frequently just, but thoroughly ungenerous, attack upon a friend of the often equally ungenerous English poet, Alexander Pope. These, then, are the divisions of Rolli's work, and he worked long and devotedly in all of them. If he is seldom to be found in the first rank of literary men, yet his place is more than merely "historical", especially as a lyric poet — the second of his age in Italy. Even this brief examination of his life and works has suggested connections which link him to many of the most important men of the age, in England, France, and Italy, to some indirectly, to others more directly. If Pope attacked him, at least he certainly knew Rolli, and the attack itself is mild enough. That he was a friend as well as teacher to many of his patrons suggests the personal charm now found (if faintly) only in the letters to Riva, and which bound him to those with whom he was in essential agreement, men like Burlington, Coke, Pembroke, Stair, and Bathurst, as well as to Queen Caroline and her daughters among the Handelians, in addition to the "rebellious" Prince of Wales. If, in the long run, Rolli's self-imposed embassy to England seems a failure, it was a highly useful one, and if it had produced only the translation of Paradise Lost would have been justified. But to have held the torch of Italian culture proudly for nearly thirty years, to have tangled with Walpole and Voltaire without being bested, and to have remained second lt):i Letter to Möns. Domenico Passionei. It is in this letter that Rolli speaks of the Italian publication of the answer to Voltaire, "in m y translation . . . dedicated to my old friend the Marchese Scipione Maffei". Quoted in Fassini, "Paolo Rolli contro il Voltaire", op. cit., p. 99.

204

THE L I F E AND WORKS OF PAOLO ROLLI

only to Metastasio in the Italian lyric and the lyrical drama, is not to have been a failure. If Rolli was not able to see the victory of the neo-classical ideals which he held, yet he is more than a mere precursor of Baretti, for whom he did much to prepare the way. And that in itself might have been enough.

IV C O N T I , MAFFEI, AND COCCHI

Thus far in this study of the Italian circle, three aspects of the cultural inter-relation between England and Italy in the early eighteenth century have been investigated. First the background of this relationship was discussed, focusing upon the historical interchange between the countries, the reasons for its decline, and the literary resurgence in Italy around 1700 which opened the possibility of a return of the Italian influence on English letters, and on European culture in general. Then the dominant form that the Italian influence took, the opera, was discussed — poetry decked with all of the blandishments of melody and virtuoso performance — to see why this form at first succeeded and then declined. The most important single figure in this cultural invasion, Paolo Rolli, was examined in an investigation of his work, his life, his reputation, and his influence, in a further effort to discover why the Italian influence was unable to reestablish its former prestige, as well as to see what effect it did have on English cultural life. Finally, it is now necessary to look at several other members of the Italian circle and their Italian confreres to continue the study of the effects of their activities, both in England and in Italy. The first of these is Antonio Conti, priest, scientist, man of letters, and friend of the great, for he was among the first of this group to establish himself in English intellectual life, however briefly, and to maintain his interest in things English and his friendships with his English acquaintances. Antonio Cocchi may have been less meteoric on his English visit, but his thorough acquaintance with England and his extended propagandizing for

206

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

all things English from his home in Florence make him a central figure in Anglo-Italian cultural and intellectual relations for more than thirty years. Between the discussion of these two, I have placed a brief study of Scipione Maffei, who was in England for only a few months, but whose importance in the Italian literary reform is so central as to make his brief stay important beyond what its duration would indicate. Further, like Muratori he served as a kind of fixed point of reference for the Italian circle abroad, advising, assisting, and generally aiding them — and Rolli in particular — to maintain an invigorating, constant contact with Italy. It is perhaps surprising that Giuseppe Riva is not included in the group, for his name has often occurred in this study. The reason is the disappointingly small amount of information that can be discovered about him, so that he remains at best a shadowy figure, despite the various accumulations of correspondence to him or by him. Even the dates of his birth (c. 1685?) 1 and death (c. 1737) are conjectural. His diplomatic career began in Rome in 1704 as an agent for his native Modena —this much is clear from the first of the letters to Muratori published in excerpt by Ercole Sola. In 1712 he was in Vienna, and from 1715 to 1729 he was in England as secretary to the Modenese Resident and as commercial representative of the Duke. He accompanied the king to Hanover in 1725 and 1729, and undertook a mission to Holland in 1719. His friendships seem to have gone beyond the Italians in London, for the journeys to Hanover suggest favor at the English court, while preserved among the Riva papers in Modena are several carefully preserved invitations to dine with Anastasia Robinson and the Earl of Peterborough, informal and brief notes in the clear, delicate hand of the singer. Riva presented his views to the public only once, and even then anonymously. This was the Advice to the Composers and Performers of Vocal Mustek (London, 1727), which was also

Catologo della Biblioteca del Liceo Musicale di Bologna, ed. Gaetano Gasparini (Bologna, 1890), I, p. 93 gives c. 1696, which is undoubtedly too late. 1

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

207

published the next year in the original Italian, Avviso ai compositori, ed ai cantanti (London, 1728). In this brief work —it is only fourteen pages in the original — Riva objects to the extremes of both composers and performers, to the composers {i.e. Handel) who would emphasize the musical over the poetic and the work over the performer and to performers who would distort the composer's intent in order to display mere virtuosity and who were musically untrained in anything except technique. The pamphlet, it is clear, is in the tradition of Marcello's well-known Il Teatro alla Moda (1722), which it often echoes, and also of Algarotti's later Saggio sopra l'opera in musica (1763). The criticism of singers was also taken to be personal, for a pamphlet of 1728, Alla Signora Fa—na Bo—ni [Faustina Bordoni] (preserved with the two versions of Riva's work in the Liceo Musicale of Bologna) chides the singer for taking the criticism to herself. Signed only A.C. (Angelo Cori?), it is apparently a reply to two answering salvos by supporters of Faustina, which have not been preserved. The Rolli-Riva and the Rolli-Senesino correspondence suggests that the Italian circle favored Cuzzoni and that Handel preferred Faustina, although eventually disappointing her by his engagement of Strada, but this is difficult to document. In any event, Riva's work was apparently felt to be cogent, for in 1740 Lorenz Christoph Mizler von Kolof published his own translation of it in Leipzig as an appendix to his Musikalischer Staarstecher, clearly identifying it as the work "des herrn Riva", "damaliger residenten des herzogs von Modena zu Londen, und daselbst hrsg. bey Tomaso-Edlin anno 1728" — all of this in the title of his own work. In 1729 Riva returned to Vienna, where he apparently spent the rest of his life. Something has already been suggested about his friendship with Metastasio, and the nine Metastasio letters to him document this, although none of his answers have come to light. After 1735 there are no more letters, but after 1737 there are several letters to Giuseppe Rovatti, Riva's nephew, which mention him in the past tense — the evidence on which his death is probably to be dated 1737. But Riva makes one last appearance in the correspondence of Metastasio. On 22 January

208

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

1770, he wrote Rovatti, who considering writing a biography of Riva and publishing Metastasio's letters to him: . . . I advise you, my dear Signor Rovatti, to put aside completely the thought of writing the life of Giuseppe Riva, your late uncle. I have had more reason than you to respect and love him: during my long intimacy with him, I came to know well his quick and 1 1 lively inteir ' ' r" round, and the lively wit which famous writer if he had found the occasion to exercise them. But during the course of his too short life, which I know so well, he was distracted by a series of accidents, none of them his fault, so that he neither wrote nor did anything that would seem astonishing, useful, or pleasing to readers.2 Unfortunately for Riva's biographer, Rovatti gave up his plan, and with this Riva passes from the scene. From this brief discussion of Riva, based on the few available pieces of evidence, then, the present study will turn to those on whom more information is available: Conti, Maffei, and Cocchi. I If Rolli played the most important single part in introducing Italian literature and thought into England in the early eighteenth century, one of the most important roles in introducing contemporary English letters to Italy was that performed by Antonio Conti, the first translator of Pope into Italian. But where Rolli was a man of letters by profession, Conti spent most of his life in comfortable retirement, under no necessity to publish in order to live. As a result, there is no large body of published work by Conti, and much of his production was left incomplete or otherwise unfinished. Except for a sprinkling of letters and transla2

. . . io vi consiglio, mio caro signor Rovatti, a deporre affatto il pensiero di scriver la vita del nostro fu signor Giuseppe Riva vostro zio. Io ho avuto ragioni di stimarlo ed amarlo più di voi: nella mia lunga consuetudine con lui ne ho conosciuto il pronto e vivace ingegno, la decente supellettile letteraria e la festiva felicità, che avrebbe potuto facilmente renderlo celebre scrittore se avesse avuto l'occasione d'esercitarlo; ma nel corso della non lunga sua vita, a me perfettamente nota, non per sua, ma per colpa d'un concorso d'accidenti che l'hanno distratto, egli non ha nè scritto nè operato cosa di cui possa la notizia recar meraviglia, utile o diletto a' lettori. Opere di Metastasio, op. cit., IV, p. 792.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

209

tions, nothing has been published since the mixed-bag of the two volumes of Prose e Poesie published in 1739 and 1756, the remains of a proposed opera completa. Thus it is that while Conti made the first Italian translation of "The Rape of the Lock", it was not published until seven years after his death, making it the second to appear. For Conti the English experience was a decisive one, which marked the change in his interests from primarily scientific to literary. Both of these fields are rather surprising, for he was originally brought up to be a priest. He was born in 1677 in Padua, of an ancient, but recently ennobled family, 3 and became a priest about 1699, but he retired from active service in order to devote himself entirely to science, following his discovery of Cartesian philosophy in 1706.4 His reputation was made in science with an article in the Giornale dei letterati for 1716, which was considered a defense of Italian science and philosophy. This was likely to interest Maffei and Muratori in him, but it also brought him to the attention of Malebranche, Fontenelle, and Leibnitz. Therefore with his reputation prepared, he embarked upon his travels in 1713, going to Paris. He was not to return to Italy until 1726, a very different man. In Paris Conti became acquainted not only with scientists and philosophers, but with literary men, including Fontenelle, Martelli (also visiting Paris at that time), and Maffei's friend, the actor Riccoboni. Thus his interests may well have encompassed literature before April 1715, when he joined a group of French scientists going to London to observe the total eclipse visible there on 22 April of that year.5 Conti's English reception was, 3

The earliest account of Conti's life is the Vita prefaced to the second volume of the Prose e Poesie (Venice, 1756), pp. 1-308, "Notizie intorna la vita e gli studj del Sig. Abate Conti", by the editor, Toaldo, hereafter cited as "Toaldo". In 1893-1894 Gioachino Brognoligo published L'Opera letteraria di Antonio Conti in L'Ateneo Veneto, XVII (1893), pp. 162-179, 327-350; XVIII (1894), pp. 137-209, 260-310, 49-84, 225-254. Also see Robertson, op. cit., pp. 96-119. I have generally given references to Robertson as the most readily available; thus the information on Conti's birth and parentage is in Robertson, pp. 96-97. 4 Ibid., p. 97. 5 Ibid., p. 19.

210

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

if anything, warmer than that in Paris, and he was immediately introduced to Newton, who took a great liking to him, and proposed him for membership in the Royal Society (17 November 1715). He also came to know the king's German mistresses, the Baroness von Kilmansegge (later created Countess of Darlington), affectionately known to her royal lover as "Elephant", and Mme. von Schulemburg (later Duchess of Kendall). Both are well sketched by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu in her "Account of the Court of George I", the former as a woman of wit and spirit, the latter as a fool. The Baroness von Kilmansegge, apparently something of a bluestocking, took an immediate interest in Conti, and introduced him to George I, still recently arrived in England. The king also became attached to the Italian savant, who at least spoke French, while George spoke no English, and Conti was able to interest the king in his scientific theories.8 Conti also moved in the much livelier circle around Caroline of Ansbach, then Princess of Wales, a learned group which often included Newton. Toaldo quotes a letter from Conti to his friend Vallisnieri which gives an amusing picture of these evenings, for the princess (like the king) preferred to hear of scientific matters in French, while such eminent men as the learned Dr. Clarke knew only English and Latin. The discussions, then, would be conducted in Latin, which Conti then translate into French for the benefit of his royal audience.7 These pleasant evenings, and even more crowded days, were interrupted in the fall of 1715 when Conti was attacked by asthma, and forced to retire to "Kinsington" to take advantage of the country air.8 While there he began to contemplate a poem on Newtonian philosophy on the model of Genest, who wrote one on Cartesian philosophy. More important, he met Katherine Sheffield, Duchess of Buckinghamshire and Normanby. These two events proved to be the turning-point in Conti's career, for the Newtonian poem showed that he had considerable talent for versifying, while the Duchess not only gave him her husband's « Brognolio, op. cit., XVII, p. 335. 7 Robertson, op. cit., p. 100. 8 Toaldo, p. 37.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

211

Essay on Poetry to read, but also his reworking of Julius Caesar, which set Conti thinking on the drama, and which inspired his first tragedy, Cesare. As he set to work on this new career, he translated the Duke's Essay into Italian verse and sent it to Muratori, who replied with a letter full of praise for both poet and translator. "It is true that I am dealing with a translation", he wrote, "but this is such that it has all the air of being original".9 Conti also tried his hand on a number of English poets, including Milton, Dryden, Pope, Prior, and Swift.10 Most of these, it may be noted, were friends of Sheffield, and it was probably he who brought Conti into contact with the literary circles of London, as distinct from the court and scientific circles which he had previously frequented, or the virtuoso set which gathered around Lord Pembroke, Rolli's patron.11 But Conti did not move entirely in literary circles. At the same time he was involved in the Leibnitz-Newton quarrel over the discovery of the differential calculus. Newton had undoubtedly discovered his "fluxions" in 1666, but Leibnitz had undoubtedly published his findings first, and the rules of scientific enquiry have always agreed to give credit to the first to publish, whatever another may have discovered but kept hidden. The Royal Society had appointed a court of inquiry to judge the dispute in 1712, but its findings in favor of Newton were rendered suspect by his being president of the society at that time. Ironically, in 1715 both Newton and Leibnitz became subjects of the same ruler, for Leibnitz was a principal ornament of Hanover, as Newton had long been in England. As an impartial observer and friend of both combatants, Conti was asked by the king himself to arbitrate the dispute,12 but it was clearly an impossible task. No sooner did he attempt to show the priority of Newton's papers on the subject than Leibnitz became displeased, and that Newton apparently took offense, Toaldo judges from the alacrity with which he turned on Conti in 1725, 9 10 11 18

Epistolario, op. cit., V, 1889, letter of 20 August 1717. Robertson, op. cit., p. 100. Prefatory letter to II Cesare (Faenza, 1726), pp. 55-56. Toaldo, p. 29.

212

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

on seemingly trivial grounds.13 Indeed, the whole unpleasant business was brought to an end only by the unexpected death of Leibnitz in 1716. Conti had clearly done his best to remain impartial, but he was too close to Newton to remain so, or to convince Leibnitz of his fairness, and this was scarcely a matter in which impartiality was pleasing to Newton. Leibnitz's death came just in time to prevent Conti from meeting him, for in October of 1716 the king invited Conti to Hanover. In making the journey, however, he paused in Holland too long, to visit Amsterdam and Leyden, so that he only arrived in Hanover on the day of Leibnitz's funeral.14 Thus ended all attempts at reconciliation. Hanover agreed with Conti's health even less than England, and despite the honor of dining with the king every day, he was often sick, and returned to England in March 1717,15 to devote himself the more to literary matters. He found his circle there diminished by one, for Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, with whom he had apparently been on good terms, was already on her way to Constantinople. Probably he had met her in Hanover, and he was to meet her again in Paris on her return in September 1718, and again in Venice in 1739. She also addressed to him some of the most celebrated of her "Embassy Letters" from Constantinople and Tunis.16 The tone throughout these letters is light and flattering, the matter curious and even learned; but however charming and interesting the letters may be, they are never really personal. There is always the suggestion of a setpiece, the feeling that they were designed for more eyes than those of their recipient. Apparently like other published correspondence of the age, in their present form the letters have been revised and retouched. Thomas suggests that the long letter describing Lady Mary's trip from Constantinople to Tunis, one of the finest of the set, was originally in her letter-book as to 13

P. 30. Robertson, op. cit., p. 101. » Ibid. m Moy Thomas prints eight letters to Conti, Letters and Works, op. cit., I, pp. 141, 164, 196, 202, 242, 246, 250, 276, but he suggests that the first may be spurious. 14

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

213

her sister, not to Conti. 17 And if there were ever any personal touches in the letters, they have vanished. But the opportunity to exchange confidences in person came before Lady Mary returned to London, for when she reached Paris in September of 1718, she found Conti there, when he innocently introduced her to Toussaint Rémond de Saint-Mard, 18 who was to cause her considerable trouble in the next few years. In the course of their friendschip Conti became involved in Lady Mary's literary affairs several times, the first apparently early in their acquaintance. This was when Lady Mary dedicated to him her brief French sketch "Carabosse", which dates probably from the spring of 1716.19 Under the guise of transcribing a defective manuscript, she gives the opening of the familiar Sleeping Beauty story, the wishes of the good fairies cancelled by the wishes of the wicked Carabosse, turning all of the princess' virtues to her disadvantage. As this was undoubtedly Lady Mary's portrait of herself, the dedication ("A l'Abbé Conti") 2 0 suggests more real friendship than anything in the formal letters to him as they now exist. In 1719 Conti was also involved in one of the earliest publications of a work by Lady Mary. This was one of her letters to him, which probably had been copied and published without his permission, and certainly without hers. It was advertised to be "the genuine Copy of a Letter written from Constantinople by an English lady who was lately in Turkey, and who was no less distinguished by her wit than by her quality, to a Venetian nobleman, one of the Prince Virtuosi of the age". 21 T h e compliment to Lady Mary is clear, but that to Conti is perhaps rather more flattering and less to the point. Distinguished Conti certainly was, but perhaps "Venetian Prince Virtuoso" was intended to add the note of romance lacking in the tone (if not of the subject-matter) of the letter, on the condition of Turkish women. Undoubtedly Lady Mary was displeased with the 17 18 19 20 21

I, p. 250, n. 1. Halsband, op. cit., pp. 90-1, 102-105, 108-109. Ibid., p. 55. Letters and Works, op. cit., II, p. 232. Ibid., I, p. 246, n.; Halsband, op. cit., p. 100.

214

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

manner of publication, and even with the publicity, but the appearance in print cannot but have flattered so conscious and accomplished a stylist. Conti's third literary encounter with Lady Mary came some twenty years later, when they met again in Venice in 1739. She speaks of him often in her letters, as when to her husband she wrote: "My house is properly a meeting of Literati; the Procurator Grimani seldom fails coming when I am at home, and the Abbé Conti never." 22 It may well have been at this time that Conti made the Italian verse translation of Lady Mary's French essay on marriage, "Sur la maxime de M. de Rochefoucault, qu'il y a des mariages commodes mais point de delicieux" (probably c. 1726).23 The translation was published for the first time in the 1756 volume, with the note that it was by the "celebre Miledy Meri Montagni", and that Conti intended it as a model for his poetic countrywomen. 24 The poem itself,25 420 lines of unrhymed hendecasyllabics, follows the argument of the essay closely, differing primarily by cutting it slightly, and by a clearer statement of the subject at the opening to make it more self-contained. It is a pleasant enough, smooth piece of work, but hardly such as would raise the tone of Italian poetry, and its place is more that of a curious token of an interesting literary friendship than of a work to be studied in its own right. The same is also true of Conti's nine other translations from Lady Mary, which follow the versified essay in the Prose e Poesie.2* These are "Sollecitata da l'istante vostre", (I) from her "The Lover, a Ballad" (p. 498); "O mille volte voi felice" (II), from "An Epistle to the Earl of Burlington" (p. 477); "Poco conosci il cor" (III), from "An Answer to a Lady" (p. 521); "Se etade, infermità, dolori, angustie" (IV), from "Written at 22

Letter of 21 January 1740, quoted in Halsband, op. cit., p. 186. Pietro Grimaldi, the future doge, was also an old friend, as former Venetian ambassador to England. 23 Ibid., p. 121-122. 24 Prose e Poesie, op. cit., Il, p. I. 25 Ibid., II, pp. II-XIII (309 f f ) . 26 Ibid., II, I, pp. XIII-XXII. Page references are to the Letters and Works of Lady Mary, op. cit., II.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

215

Lovere" (p. 521); "I parici versi a me son sacri?" (V), from "An Answer to a Love-Letter, in Verse (p. 474) ; "Perchè vivete voi così solinga" (VI), from "Song" (To Lady Irwin, p. 511); "Colà vedete quelle due Colombe" (VII), from "Verses, written in a garden" (p. 516); "Della notte secreta argentea Diva" (VIII), from "A H y m n to the Moon" (p. 504) ; and "I nostri Padri nati schiavi" (IX), from "Epigram, 1734" (p. 520). T h e most interesting of these is the eighth, for in the works of Lady Mary is printed an Italian version as "Translated by Herself". That such is the case is unlikely, for the version is almost exactly the same as Conti's, except that "her" version prints "serena" in the first line instead of "secreta", to translate her own "secret", and Conti's version has dropped the second line, which is probably a printer's error. T h e further evidence that the translation is by Conti comes from their mutual friend Algarotti. In his "Pensieri Diversi sopra materie filosofiche e filologiche", he writes of the poem that "the abate Conti turned it into Italian verse", and procedes to give the original to please "the lovers of English poetry", who wished to see it.27 Lady Mary certainly may have helped Conti with his translation, and it may well be among her papers in her own hand; but the credit undoubtedly belongs to Conti. Conti's second stay in England would appear to have been a time for consolidating his literary interests (1717-1718). By then he had gained a fair knowledge of English letters, probably much of it through his acquaintance with English writers. It may well have been from knowing Pope that he conceived the idea of translating "The Rape of the Lock" and "Eloisa to Abelard" into Italian, just as his friendship with Sheffield had encouraged him to attempt the "Essay on Poetry". Toaldo says little of this second sojourn, except that he kept up his friendships, especially that with the Princess of Wales, and that he both studied and encouraged others to study. His own study was to include fragments of a now vanished attempt at turning Paradise Lost into Italian verse — a task taken over by Rolli — and a "philosophic-poetic introduction" for Rolli's edition of the Marchetti 27

Opere del Conte Algarotti

(Venice, 1791-1794), VII, p. 80.

216

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

Lucretius; but, comments Toaldo, this either was never finished or rejected, thus joining the great body of tempting, vanished fragments. 28 The other category, encouraging others to study, had a more sure result. According to Toaldo, Conti not only assisted Rolli in his work, but also took an important part in the full publication of the Newton-Leibnitz dispute and of the important Leibnitz-Clarke correspondence. This was contained in two volumes published in Amsterdam in 1720, edited by Pierre des Maiseaux (or Maizeaux), the Receuil de diverses pieces, sur la philosophie, la religion naturelle, Vhistoire, les mathématiques, & c. par Mrs. Leibnitz, Clarke, Newton, & autres Autheurs célebres. The first volume contained the exchange between Leibnitz and Samuel Clarke set up by their mutual friend the Princess of Wales, and published by Clarke in 1717 in English and French. 29 The second volume contained the letters to Conti from Leibnitz and Newton, written in 1715-1716; a letter to Leibnitz from Conti; letters from Leibnitz to the Baroness von Killmansegge, Rémond, Chamberlayne, and des Maiseaux, among others; his notes on Malebranche's Principles, Shaftesbury's "Letter on Enthusiasm", and Bayle's Dictionary, a letter by des Maiseaux to Conti, and several others. Toaldo claims that the work was suggested by Conti, and that he furnished des Maiseaux with all of the material which forms the second volume. This is certainly possible, considering the frequency of Conti' appearance in it and his acquaintance with all parties, and Toaldo notes that in correspondence des Maiseaux always wrote of it as "notre Receuil".80 The work was reprinted in 1740.31 With this work ended Conti's contribution to the Leibnitz-Newton-Clarke controversy, although the whole matter was to be reopened in 1725 when Newton quarreled with Conti over the publication of the Chronology. When Conti's health forced his return to France in 1718, he 28

Pp. 44-45. See The Leibnitz-Clarke Correspondence, ed. H. G. Alexander (Manchester, 1956), especially the introduction (pp. i-lvi) for the fullest account of this exchange. 29

30 31

44_

Alexander, op. cit., p. Ivi.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

217

did not drop his English interests. Rather, this second, more extended sojourn in France (1718-1726) was the time when he completed several of his most important English-inspired works, the two published translations from Pope and the tragedy on Julius Caesar. His interest in literary matters was undoubtedly stimulated by his attendance at the salon of Mme. de Caylus, and his close friendship with her writer-son, the Comte de Caylus. The countess was not only a great beauty — her beauty and charm had so aroused the jealously of her aunt, Mme. de Maintenon, that she once was exiled from Versailles for several years — but a woman of intelligence as well, and her salon seems to have been one of the most interesting in Paris.32 A close relation of Mme. de Caylus was the Marquise de Villette, who became the second Lady Bolingbroke in 1719 by a secret marriage in the private chapel of the British ambassador, Lord Stair.83 With others of the Caylus circle, Conti became a frequent visitor at La Source, and acknowledges that his translation of "The Rape of the Lock" was completed at this time with the encouragement and assistance of "Milord Bolinbroock". It may well have been at this same time that Conti made his translation of "Eloisa to Abelard", which was published after his death with no introductory remarks. It was apparently under the combined pressure of the Caylus circle, the Bolingbroke set, and the Italian actor-manager Riccoboni and his wife, that Conti finally completed II Cesare, begun in England.34 Like Sheffield's play on which it is modeled, Cesare attempts to give classic form to the action which makes up the first part of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, through the funeral oration. Both Sheffield and Conti followed this with a Marcus Brutus, which covers the remaining portion of the play, but Conti especially treats it as an independent drama, and it need not be considered now, as it was not written until 1744. That his interests were not exclusively English is seen in his Paul Baratier, Lord Bolingbroke, Ses Escrits Politique (Trévoux, 1939), p. 194. ss Prose e Poesie, op. cit., II, p. XXIII. 34 Robertson, op. cit., pp. 102-103.

32

218

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

Italian translation of Racine's Athalie, undertaken in 1720 while in the country with Mme. de Caylus, for whose aunt Racine had written the play.35 But his friendship with Mme. de Caylus found its apotheosis in 1732 with one of Conti's strangest works, "II Globo di Venere" ("The Globe of Venus"). Giacomo Zanella suggests that it was Conti's attempt to "introduce into Italy the philosophical, or rather metaphysical, poetry that Pope had introduced in England". 38 But it is difficult to find any connection with the "Essay on Man", or even "The Temple of Fame", in this Platonic-Leibnitzian-Wolffian work. It ends with the apotheosis of "la Contessa di Chelo", as he says in his introduction, "to show to the world her virtue and my gratitude". 37 The two translations from Pope are among Conti's most important work. They have never received their due because of the delay in publication, but their merit is beyond question of priority. Toaldo gives a brief account of the translation of the poem, which suggests the circumstances, as well as the circles in which Conti moved. As it was, while staying at a place near Orleans called La Source, he translated the Rape of the Lock with the assistance of Mylord Bolingbroke, in order to entertain some ladies with whom he was spending the autumn. One of these was the Countess de Caylus, who made a most elegant [French] prose version from the Italian translation.38 Concerning these versions, Mme. de Caylus wrote that "we rendered the whole thing exactly, except for two or three phrases which were changed at the beginning and another passage or two, in order to make it go better. There is also a preface by the professed translator that isn't bad, and a letter by Mr. Pope that is quite good".39 The translation was originally to be dedicated to the Duc de Villeroy, a close friend of the Caylus' and of Conti, but when the poem finally appeared, it was with a dedication to the 35 36 37 38 :,n

Prose e Poesie (Venice, 1739), I, pp. CLVI-CLVII. Paralleli Letterarie (Verona, 1885), p. 88. Prose e Poesie, op. cit., I, p. VII. Ibid., II, p. 62. Ibid.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

219

Marchese Manfredo Repetta. That Conti and Mme. de Caylus had thought of publishing their versions anonymously is clear from the letter just quoted, but something intervened, and publication was not set until 1739 when "Il Riccio Rapito" was among the poems set in type for the proposed second volume of the Prose e Poesie. Only one volume was published at that time, and the rest of the edition was dropped, until Toaldo brought out the posthumous volume in 1756, containing the poem as originally set. This delayed publication took the priority for a published version from Conti, for in 1739 a translation was published in Florence by Andrea Bonducci.40 This was reprinted in 1750 along with other translations from the English, including the first publication of Conti's "Lettera d'Eloisa ad Abelardo". It is strange for a reader long familiar with "The Rape of the Lock" to examine it in translation, and most instructive. Much of the grace has been retained by Conti, but much of the wit vanishes with the altering of the exact interplay between form and meaning. Toaldo praises "Il Riccio Rapito" by saying that Conti translated "not as a grammarian, but as a poet", 41 which suggests one of the differences with the even more literal version of Bonducci. But even with a high degree of talent and poetic good will, much is lost. Pope must indeed be one of the most untranslatable of poets. An idea of what happens may be given through simple statistics, for Pope's 794 lines have become 1050 lines in Conti, an increase of over 250 lines. Although occasionally this is the result of added detail, as in Ariel's speech in Canto I, it is generally caused by the necessity of translating Pope's compact couplets so that the sense is preserved rather than the form. Thus to take one of the most familiar couplets, Here Thou, great Anna! whom three Realms obey, Dost sometimes counsel take — and sometimes Tea. becomes two-and-a-half lines in Conti: 40

11 Riccio Rapito, poema eroi comico del signore Alessandro tradotto dall Inglese in verso Toscano (Florence, 1739). " P. 63.

Pope,

220

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

. . . e tu grand' Anna Cui tre Regni ubbidiscono, vi scendi Or a prender consiglio, ed ora il Tè. As translation expands, wit vanishes; and the translator can do little to stop it. The changes in the opening mentioned by Mme. de Caylus are clearly part of an attempt to convey the spirit of the poem to the continental reader, replacing the Miltonic echo with more specific suggestions of Virgil and, especially, Ariosto. Thus "What dire Offense from am'rous causes springs" becomes Canto l'offesa, la vittoria, e'l pianto Lo sdegno, la battaglia, e la sconfitta, Per Riccio tronco, che diè tanta briga A' Silfi, a' Gnomi, a L'Ipocondria, al Cielo Onde al fin risplendette astro novello.42 I sing of the offense, the victory, and the lament The disdain, the battle, and the loss For the injured Lock, which gave such trouble T o Sylphs, to Gnomes, T o Spleen, and to the Sky Where at last there shines a new constellation. More than Virgil's inevitable "Arma virumque cano", this would suggest to the Italian reader the similar catalogue-opening of the Orlando Furioso: Le donne, i cavallier, l'arme, gli amori, le cortesie, 1' audaci imprese io canto .. .43 This would make the mock-heroic qualities of the poem far more meaningful to the Italian reader. Further, as is clear, Caryl is dropped, Belinda is not mentioned so early, and instead the themes of the poem are rehearsed in order to prepare the reader for what is to come, a more generalized opening than Pope's. These lines also suggest certain of the changes necessary in translation, the rendering of essentially untranslatable terms. One of these appears in Conti's translation of "spleen" as "hypocondria", a related notion, perhaps, but not the same thing. In 42 43

Prose e Poesie, op. cit., II, p. XXX. Orlando Furioso, ed. Lanfranco Caretti (Milano, 1954), p. 19.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

221

Canto IV, fops become "cicisbei", and in the last Canto beaus are "Zerbini", while "A Beau and a Witling" are described as "Un dei più Cicisbei del Mondo, / E un de me' pettinati". One other point of interest is the notes to the poem, for Conti is particularly careful in pointing out the epic parallels, especially in Canto III. He also has a considerable note on "the Glory of the British Queen" (1.77 in 1712, III. 13 in 1714): "At that time they performed in London an opera [un Drama in musica] where there was introduced an ancient Queen of Britain".44 Since there is no known opera of that name, and a queen of Britain does not appear in any of the English-Italian productions, this could refer to Charles Hopkins' popular rhymed tragedy Boadicea, Queen of Britain (1697), but this was probably not much of a topic of conversation by 1712. Thus it is likelier to refer to Oriana — always a popular English name — the beloved of Amadis of Gaul and the Emperor Constantius, as well as the daughter of Celius, a British King, in The British Enchanters (1706) by Pope's friend George Granville, later Lord Lansdowne. Oriana is not a queen, of course, but a princess; but the difference is not so great, and the play was one of the most spectacular of the Dramatic Operas. If the necessity for the allusion is not great, it does clarify the topical nature of the passage, and certainly Conti might have had his information from Sheffield, Lady Mary, Bolingbroke, or even the poet himself. In translating Pope's dedication of the poem to Arabella Fermor, Conti spells her name "Farmer". This seems to have been an English error as well, for in two poems on reigning beauties quoted in Tillotson's edition of the poem, the name is spelled "Farmer".45 For some reason Conti also alters the paragraphing slightly, but makes no other changes. It is probable that the translation of the "Eloisa to Abelard" followed the "Rape of the Look", for here Conti is in far greater control of his material. Of course the subject may have been more congenial to his talents, and certainly to the Italian tradition, for the genre of heroic epistles stems from Ovid. Whatever 44 45

Prose e Poesie, op. cit., II, p. XLII.

The Poems of Alexander Pope, II, op. cit., p. 351.

222

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

the reason, this was a sufficiently successful effort for Zanella to prefer the Italian version to the original.46 Again Conti has felt it necessary to alter the poem in places, but he takes rather greater liberties here, with considerable effect. The form he uses is the terzina, which suits the subject and treatment far better than his unrhymed hendecasyllabics fit " T h e Rape of the Lock". The opening of the poem is direct, omitting Pope's first eight lines entirely, and taking up the idea of "Dear fatal name!" Abelardo, Abelardo, oh quanto amore Al tuo nome dolcissimo diletto Sento svegliarsi, e intenerirmi il core! Nome fatai, stammiti chiuso in petto, E a queste labbra per tant' anni mute Entro a sacro silenzio abbi rispetto. Abelard, Abelard, oh how much love At your sweetest, delightful name I feel awaken, and soften my heart! Fatal name, remain closed in my breast And to these lips, silent for so many years, Come the holy silence, still respected. As is clear from these opening lines, Conti's poem is a poetic paraphrase of Pope's keeping the structure and ideas of the original, but treating them with freedom enough to achieve a truly poetic effect in Italian — a procedure of which Pope could not help but approve, for it is the technique that he himself used even more freely when translating. Beyond the altered opening, the most interesting difference comes at the end, for Conti also omits the last eight lines, including the probable allusion to his friend Lady Mary, and has a most effective final cadence with the lines on the dead lovers. The revision of the poem is such that Conti emphasizes the romantic element, while underplaying the "gothic", softening the outlines, and stressing the pathos. The effect is more pathetic, but perhaps less moving because weaker in contrast. But unlike "Il Riccio Rapito", the "Lettera d'Eloisa ad Abelardo" is able to stand as a poem in its own right, and not just as a reflection of a greater work. 48

Op. cit., p. 90.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

223

Whether Conti intended to publish the "Eloisa" along with his other translations in 1739 is not known, but is probable. If so, it is ironic that the first publication should be with the Bonducci "Riccio" in 1760, in company with Bonducci's version of Thomson's poem in praise of Newton. 47 In 1791 it was reprinted in an interesting collection entitled Poesie Inglesi di

Alessandro Pope, di Jacobo Thompson, di Tommaso Gray, con la traduzione in varie lingue.48 This volume contains Pope's "Eloisa" in English, Italian, and French (a verse translation by Colardeau), Thomson's "Hymn to the Creator" in English and Italian, and Gray's "Elegy" in English, Italian (Cesarotti), and Latin. Undoubtedly long familiar in manuscript, "Eloisa" was now well on its way to becoming an anthology piece. Pope was not the only English poet translated by Conti while in France. One of the curiosities of his translating fervour is a version of Dry den's Alexander's Feast, arranged as a cantata. "Draide, celebre poeta Inglese", as Conti calls him in the dedication,49 might not have recognized his work at first glance, for this is another of Conti's free versions, for chorus and two solo voices. One of these solo parts is a narrator, as Conti explains, while the other is Timotheus himself, and the work has been renamed "Timoteo" to mark this shift in emphasis. The basic pattern is still Dryden's, but Conti has freely altered and arranged as he saw fit, expanding some parts and omitting others entirely. The closing part of the poem, relating the subject to the occasion, St. Cecilia's day, is omitted entirely, and the work ends with the burning of "another T r o y " . "Timoteo" came to the attention of another artistic Venetian nobleman, Benedetto Marcello, who set the work as a cantata, and encouraged Conti to write another similar piece, which resulted in the original work "Cassandra", on the same plan. Strangely enough, the article on Marcello in the fifth edition of Grove credits Marcello himself with the translation of "Timoteo", Although dated Naples, this volume was printed in Florence, as the 1739 volume had been. 48 There is no place of publication given, but it may have been Brescia, as it is dedicated, anonymously, to the Corniani brothers, of Brescia. 4e Prose e Poeñe, op. cit., I, p. X L .

47

224

CONTI, M AFFE I, AND COCCHI

credit which he did not claim. That relations between Marcello and Conti were friendly is suggested not only by the existence of "Cassandra", but by the warmth with which Conti speaks of the art of music in the dedication to "Timoteo", citing many classical examples, and praising his composer as the restorer of these ancient glories.50 The most important of Conti's Paris works, and the one which made his literary reputation, was the Cesare, which like the Pope translation had been begun in England, and was now completed only at the urging of friends, especially the actors Riccoboni and Elena Bailed, his wife. 51 As was usual with Conti, he made no effort to publish the piece, and it came out in 1726 only because Cardinal Bentavoglio took the initiative and published it without Conti's permission. This was possible because the work had already become known in manuscript, Greco having shown it to Orsi and Muratori, so that Conti could profit by their criticism. The edition itself, Il Cesare Tragedia del Sig. Ab. Antonio Conti nobile veneto con alcune cose concernenti l'opera medesima. In Faenza MDCCXXVI, contains more than the play alone. As the title suggests, it includes a long letter about the play written by Conti to the Cardinal, a letter by Martelli to Conti about the play, Conti's answer (which is the most important of all), his poem "Il Tempio d'Apollo", dedicated to Martelli, and some verse to the Cardinal by Frugoni, whose antiFrench tone annoyed Conti far more than the publication itself. The letter to Martelli is important because it contains Conti's account of the genesis of the play, and also because it contains the first published mention of Shakespeare in Italian.62 "Sasper", he writes, "is the Corneille of the English, but much more irregular than Corneille, although like him full of fine ideas and of noble sentiments".53 The source for his play, he freely admits, is the Julius Caesar 50

Ibid., p. XLII. Toaldo, p. 53. 52 Robertson, op. cit., p. 103. 58 Sasper è il Cornelio degl' Inglesi, ma molto più irregolare del Cornelio, sebbene al parti da lui pregno di grande idee, e di nobili sentimenti. Op. cit., p. 54. 51

225

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

of Sheffield, whose Caesar, and Marcus Brutus are the Caesar of Shakespeare divided in two. But Conti's version is much less sensational even than Sheffield's, for where his friend included all the play up through the funeral oration, Conti limits his action to a single place — the courtyard of Caesar's house — and employs his time more economically, ending with the report of the murder. The play, indeed, is in no sense a translation of Sheffield's, and the specifically Shakespearean note is entirely absent. Rather Cesare is inspired by Sheffield, but developed upon Conti's own lines, and many of the resemblances can be attributed to the common source in Plutarch.54 The fame of the play in its own time was considerable, as it is without doubt surpassed only by Merope as the finest Italian tragedy of the century before Alfieri. It is certainly superior to Conti's other three plays, written considerably later. The second of these, Marco Bruto (1744), covers the same subject matter as Sheffield's Marcus Brutus, but without the success of Conti's earlier play, while Giunto Bruto (1743) concerns the story of the earlier Brutus, and Druso (1748) deals with the corrupt court of Tiberius. These plays, however, suggest one lesson that Conti learned from Shakespeare, the depiction of history through the drama. Like Rolli, he particularly admired the idea of the chronicle play ("the life of each king giving material for a tragedy"), a model which he felt that Italy might well follow, and which he initiates in his four Roman plays.55 One other English influence which Conti admits is that of Addison, and of Cato in particular. He praises the play highly, saying: "The first regular English tragedy is Cato by Mr. Addisson [sic]. The character of Cato is marvelous, and above all just, without the idealized, larger-than-life character attributed to the Romans by Corneille."5® He goes on to object to the love interest, as have most critics, particularly in comparison with Sheffield's Caesar, where a love element is absent. It was on the 54

This is discussed most fully in Ald-el-Kader Salza, VAb. e le sue tragedie (Pisa, 1898). 55 11 Cesare, op. cit., p. 55. « Ibid.

Antonio

Conti

226

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

example of these two plays that he developed his blank verse, as well as his dramatic outlook, with a curious nod to Milton, as he felt blank verse to be the best suited to the historical subject. It is probable that these were the principal English influences, Shakespeare, Sheffield, and Addison, especially as it is unlikely that he encountered either of Jonson's Roman tragedies, for otherwise the subject of Druso might suggest Sejanus His friendship with Riccoboni and Elena gave Conti an unexpected place in one of the most famous eighteenth century works, The Memoirs of Jacques Casanova di Seingalt. In chapter 29, writing of Paris (the preceding chapter is "My Apprenticeship in Paris"), Casanova mentions Elena Balleti, whom he met around 1750. She was known, under her theatrical name of Flamina, in the literary world by several translations, but I had a great wish to make her acquaintance, less on that account than in consequence of the story, known throughout Italy, of the stay that three literary men of great fame had made in Paris. Those three literati were the Marquis Maffei, the Abbé Conti, and Pierre Jacques Martelli, who became enemies, according to public rumour, owing to the belief entertained by each of them that he possessed the favours of the actress; and being men of learning, they fought with the pen. Martelli composed a satire against Maffei, in which he designed him by the anagram of Femia.6* Casanova's tale is an amusing one, but fortunately it is demonstrably untrue, as the three men were never in Paris at the same time. The Riccoboni company was not in Paris until 1716, when Conti was already in England. He returned to Paris in 1718, but may not have overlapped with Martelli — whom he had known on his first visit —as Martelli was in Bologna in 1718.59 Conti See ibid., p. 63. The further influence of Addison, with that of Hutcheson ("Utchinsono") on Conti's aesthetic theories is extremely complex, especially as much must be implied from the fragments given by Toaldo. They are discussed by Robertson, and, as a corrective to his more Romantic view, by Victor Hamm in his important "Antonio Conti and English Aesthetics", Comp. Lit., VIII (19Í6), pp. 12-27. 68 The Memoires of Jacques Casanova di Seigalt, tr. Arthur Machen (New York, 1925), III, p. 88. 58 Robertson, op. cit., p. 124. 57

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

227

returned to Italy in 1726, and Maffei did not reach Paris until 1733. Il Femia sentenziato (1724) is indeed a satire on Maffei, but for literary reasons. The tale does suggest that Maffei may have been in love with "Flaminia", who had created the part of Merope, and it may not have originated with Casanova, of course. But he does make some amends to Conti when he writes that "In order to please her [Elena], I spoke to her of the Abbé Conti, and I had occasion to quote two lines of that profound writer." 60 Unfortunately he fails to add which they were. In 1725, shortly before his return to Italy, one of Conti's most important London friendships was broken off, that with Newton. The quarrel came over the French publication of Newton's Chronology of the Ancient Kingdoms, originally compiled at the request of Caroline of Ansbach. As Conti later told the story, the Chronology was a bare outline, and he was able to understand the principles of Newton's system only through conversation and by asking questions. These details he embodied in the work, which was translated into French and published by Nicholas Fréret as Abregé de la Chronologie de M. Newton avec des observations (Paris, 1725) .β1 The publisher, Cavelier, had apparently attempted to get Newton's permission for the publication, both writing directly to him and to his (and Conti's) friend Costa, but Newton would neither give nor withhold permission. When the work was published, however, he took a different view of the matter, claiming that he had been misrepresented, and slandered by Fréret's comments, which he took as an attack. His highly indignant account of the matter was published in 1726 in the Philosophical Transactions,62 ending with an attack on Conti, accusing him of bad faith not only in this, but also in the Leibnitz matter: Abbe Conti came into England in Spring 1715, and while he staid in England, he pretended to be my Friend, but assisted Mr. Leibniz in engaging me in new Disputes, and hath since acted in the same Manner in France ... And that he hath been doing in «» Op. cit., p. 89. 41

«

Toaldo, p. 58. Number 389, dated July-August 1725, XXXIII, pp. 315-321.

228

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

Italy, may be understood by the Disputes raised there by one of his Friends, who denies many of my Optical Experiments, though they have been all tried in France with Success. But I hope that these Things, and the perpetual Motion, will be the last efforts of this Kind.83 Conti's response was that Fréret's remarks were not an attack, and that they were on the system rather than the Chronology proper. Further, he felt that bad faith was hardly a question, as his copy came not from Newton, but through the Baroness von Kilmansegge, who had copied the Princess of Wales' copy. Conti's action may not have been entirely above reproach in this matter, but the eighteenth century reader had reason to be grateful to him, for in 1728 was published, this time authorized, Newton's revised Chronology. It became one of the popular works of the century, and was widely translated. The Italian version was not made by Conti, as might have been expected, but by Rolli, in 1757, the Cronologia degli antichi Regni emendata. Opera postuma del Cavalier Isac Newton. Despite the personal unpleasantness connected with this affair, Conti did not lose faith in Newton, and "never ceased to speak and write of Newton with the highest praise".04 In 1726 Conti returned to Venice and spent the rest of his life in Venice and Padua.®5 Except for the renewal of his friendship with Lady Mary in 1739-1740, and his continual championing of Newton, his close contact with the English, both as a nation and as a literature, was over. In the 1730s, his work seems to have been mostly philosophic, in which he was influenced by English and German writers — Locke, Hutcheson, Addison, Newton, Leibnitz, and Wolff especially; but it exists only in fragmentary form. In 1739 came the first of the proposed six volumes of the Prose e Poesie, but because of a quarrel no more were issued.60 Perhaps this was a part of Conti's temperament, for he seems to 63 64 65 ββ

Ibid., pp. 320-321. Toaldo, p. 60. Robertson, op. cit., p. 65. Toaldo, p. 68.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

229

have constitutionally incapable of finishing anything. As he told Newton, "I write, as I travel, for pleasure." 87 Almost the only surviving complete works by Conti after 1740 are the tragedies, including the long-promised revision of Cesare (1742). He did some translating, including the Merope of Voltaire (1744). This brought up to the minute the range of his translations, which had included Anacreon, at least parts of Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, and Sophocles among the Greeks, Ovid, Virgil (parts of the Aeneid and the Eclogues), Catullus, and the Horatian lyrics from the Latin, Racine and Voltaire (including parts of UHenriade)68 from the French, while from the English, he translated Milton (much of Paradise Lost), Pope, Dryden, Sheffield, and Lady Mary in particular. He planned a history of modern philosophy, 69 but like so much else, it was never realized. His last work was Druso (1748), and the next year he died in Padua.70 He was buried there, in the family chapel in the great church of Saint Anthony. Conti was of a rare species. Like others of his generation, he seemed a kind of universal talent, moving in all fields of science and ait, in all societies, learned and courtly, and drawing something from all that he saw. But for all of his charm and intelligence, he seems to have lacked the discipline of a Muratori or even a Maffei. H e retained something of the dilettante even amid his most inventive flights, for he was indifferent to fame, and indifferent to publication. It was as if a gentleman must not appear to care too much, and as a result the world lost much of great potential interest. But despite this indifference, Conti remains one of the central figures for the development on the continent of interest in, and knowledge of, English letters, especially in Italy and France. N o t only had he been to England, but he had seen and talked with the important figures there, both the great and the noble, and had been accepted by them as one of themselves. In this lies much of his interest and importance. 67

68 69

70

Ibid., p. 72.

Ibid., pp. 77-78.

Ibid., p. 81.

Ibid., pp. 85-86.

230

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

II Although the Marchese Scipione Maffei spent only three months in England, nevertheless he deserves a place among the London group. One reason might be the great stir that his arrival made in England, but other distinguished visitors were received nearly as well. More important, Maffei provided one of the strongest links that bound Rolli and his friends to Italy and to the Arcadian tradition. Only Muratori was as important, and Maffei had the advantage over Muratori in having himself written one of the major texts of the Italian literary revival with his drama Merope (1713). Further, like Conti he was a friend of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, who has left a fine picture of Maffei at home in her letters. Historian, archaeologist, critic, dramatist, poet, soldier, and even impresario, Maffei well deserves the title bestowed by his latest biographer, "un europeo del settecento", 71 for he was indeed a citizen-at-large of all Europe, although one based firmly in his beloved native Verona. His international reputation was based largely on two works, his two books, really two parts of one work, on Verona — the treatise on Roman amphitheatres, De gli anfiteatri (Verona, 1728) and Verona illustrata (1732) — and his one important dramatic work, Merope. T h e tragedy had been written for the Riccoboni company, and had enjoyed immediate success in Modena, where it was first performed, and in Venice, the theatrical capital. 72 This was not surprising, for Merope is far better than the academic stuff turned out by Gravina and Martelli in their efforts to reanimate the Italian drama, and certainly better made than most of the operatic dramas of the day. It was also important because Maffei rejected the idea that all tragedies must contain a romantic love plot, and constructed his drama entirely on the theme of maternal love. 73 His time scheme is rather more flexible than the French would permit, but he does follow the spirit of the essential unities, especially 71 72 73

Silvestri, op. cit. Robertson, op. cit., p. 150. The contrast with Cato is particularly telling on this point.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

231

that of action, more closely than many of the "regular" Frenchmen. The fame of Merope was not limited to Italy, either. It was translated into French by Fréret (1718) and Du Bourg (1743), as well as appearing in Riccoboni's Nouvelle Theatre italien (1733); it appeared in German prose in 1742, and again in German in 1752, and was translated into English in 1740 by William Ayre. 74 As J . G. Robertson points out, with "the production of this play Maffei became for a time the most famous man of letters in Italy, and to the outside world, the most famous Italian". 75 It was with this fame gathering behind him that Maffei began his single foreign journey in 1732. Having just completed his great work on Verona, he left his native country for what became a sojourn of five years abroad, which took him to Switzerland, France, England, the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria, before he reached Venice late in 1736 and Verona by the beginning of 17 3 7.78 The course of his travels may be followed in his letters, especially those to his friend Bertoldo Pellegrini, and in the journal of the young Frenchmen who accompanied him on most of the expedition, Jean-Francois Séguier (1703-1784), extracts from which have been published.7"' Maffei's nearly three years in France, mostly in Paris, resulted in his meeting almost everyone of importance, particularly in the capital. He was made a member of the Academie des Inscriptions, having justified his election by publishing his newly compiled Galliae antiquitates (Paris, 1733). 78 As important, he met Voltaire, who wrote Thieriot in London (24 July 1733) : " J e crois que vous verrez dans quelques mois le marquis Maffei, qui J. G. Robertson, Lessing's Dramatic Theory (Cambridge, 1939), p. 284, n. 1. It was also put into Spanish, Russian, and even Serbian — see Robertson, Studies in the Genesis of Romantic Theory, op. cit., p. 150. 75 Robertson, Studies in the Genesis of Romantic Theory, op. cit., p. 150. 76 Maffei, Epistolario (1Ί00-1155), ed. Celestino Garibotto (Milano, 1955), II, pp. 769-773. 77 Gaston Boissier, "Un savant d'autre fois", Revue des Deux Mondes, Ser. II, XCII (1871), pp. 446-472. 78 Ippolito Pindemonte, Elogio del Marchese Scipione Maffei (Verona, 1784;, p. 50. 74

232

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

est le Varron et la Sophocle de Verone. Vous serez bien content de son esprit et de la simplicite de ses mœurs." 79 This friendship with Voltaire led to an understanding between them, that Voltaire would translate Merope into French, as he wanted to do, while Maffei would put UHenriade into Italian in return. It was this understanding that led to the famous quarrel, when Voltaire published his own Merope (1743, but written in 1736), dedicated to Maffei, but in the dedication criticising Maffei by implication. Maffei's answer was published in the 1745 edition of the Italian Merope, and answered by Voltaire in the 1748 edition of his French version, in two letters, the first a strong attack under the pseudonym of "Lindelle", the second a temperate answer to his own attack under his own name. It was this controversy, coupled with the 1767 production of Voltaire's play in Hamburg, that led to the writing of Lessing's celebrated essay on the two plays. This was published in fifteen consecutive issues of the Hamburgische Dramaturgie (Nos. XXXVI - L), and forms the longest, most widely ranging piece in the journal, and certainly the most important. 80 In late April or early May of 1736, Maffei left Paris for London. 81 His stay in England was brief — some three months — but triumphant. He met everyone, he saw everything, and he admired as much as he was admired. He was, of course, presented to the royal family. The Prince of Wales seems to have taken particular interest in him, apparently speaking Italian, for Pindemonte comments admiringly "he was expert in our language, in which his teacher was the celebrated Rolli".82 The Prince asked to see some of his poetry, so Maffei offered him a translation into Italian of the first book of the Iliad, which so pleased Frederick that he immediately ordered it to be published. Maffei sent an account of this to Pellegrini with evident satisfaction, although showing where his true bent lay: "I have published a 78 80

Voltaire's Correspondence, op. cit., III, p. 108. See the discussion in Robertson, Lessing's Dramatic

especially pp. 211-221, 281-292. 81 82

Epistolario, op. cit., II, 756 η. Op. cit., p. 53.

Theory,

op.

cit.,

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

233

book here, what do you say to that? But it is only a few pages, and what is worse, it is verse." 83 His letters clearly reflect the same attitude, for he is far more explicit about the bibliographical and archaeological treasures to be found than the literary. Thus he visited Conti's friend Richard Mead, in whose library he transcribed for his friend Corsini a rare manuscript of Greek epitaphs brought from Smyrna by William Sherard.84 At Lord Oxford's he collated a rare manuscript of Vitruvius ("the most beautiful I ever saw") for his friend Poleni; 85 and while viewing the collection of Sir Hans Sloan, he copied Greek inscriptions, presumably for himself.86 Whether Maffei saw much of Rolli or not is uncertain, as there is no mention of him in the London letters. It had been Maffei who had overseen the publication of the first six books of the Del Paradiso perduto in Verona in 1730, when Rolli had dedicated the prefatory essay against Voltaire to him. But the scattered references in the Epistolario, in the letters from Paris before Maffei left for London, suggest a coolness on Rolli's part, for reasons not entirely clear to Maffei. Rolli was apparently unwilling to take charge of a bale of books to be consigned to him.87 Shortly before leaving Paris, Maffei wrote Pellegrini (8 April 1736) saying that "I have often had letters from Sig. Milnay, and shall inconvenience him in London far more willingly than Rolli." 88 The books were sent elsewhere, to one Beluni, "but perhaps that old friend is also in a snit", he adds.89 Rolli's name does not appear again. Whether he saw Rolli or not, Maffei did meet the patrons of the Italian circle, especially Lord Burlington, who presented him with his edition of Palladio's Terme. As Maffei wrote of the sights he saw on his travels, he saw "Sumptuous buildings, 83

Epistolario, op. cit., Ibid., II, p. 760 and 85 Ibid. 89 Silvestri, op. cit., p. 87 Epistolario, op. cit., m Ibid., II, p. 753. 89 Ibid., II, p. 756. 84

II, p. 761. n. 165. I, p. 688.

234

CONTI, MAFFEI, AND COCCHI

and most of them of the best architecture. Their God is Palladio, and truly they build things worthy of him. The pavement is gold: streams go everywhere; a perpetual comforting green, trees that go to the sky. The nobility retire to the country with all grandeur."90 This was written as he had just returned from an eighteen-day tour through the country, where he saw Pembroke's great house, Wilton, and its collections. He also visited Salisbury, where he admired the church,91 nearby Stonehenge, and Portsmouth, where he was astonished by the size of the "Royal William", but where he also saw the planetarium, and above all, "at the house of his friend Milnay he kissed the first telescope that Newton had made and at the same time consecrated with his immortal hand."92 The tour was eventful for two other reasons, beyond the sights he saw. First, he met Pope at Twickenham, perhaps through the Earl of Peterborough, the husband of Anastasia Robinson. At that time Pope declared his intention — apparently never realized — of translating Merope.9Z It is hardly surprising that Maffei was delighted with this promise, for to have his play translated into French by Voltaire and into English by Pope would please any man, and it is a pity that this grandiose plan was never realized. The other important event came during a five-day stop in Oxford, where he was made an honorary Doctor of Laws. Pindemonte reports that the modest Maffei was able to hear his praises proclaimed with no immodesty, as he was unable to understand the English pronunciation of Latin.94 This honour put a kind of official seal on his English welcome, comFabrice suntuosissime, e quel ch'è più d'ottima architettura. Il lor Dio è Palladio, e per verità fanno cose degne di lui. Il terreno e d'oro: fiumicelli da per tutto; un verde perpetuo che consola, alberi che vanno al cielo. I signori stanno in campagna con tutta la pompa. Ibid., II, p. 758. 91 Pindemonte, op. cit., p. 54. 92 Ibid. «"» Ibid. 94 Dr. Johnson comments on the difference in his "Life of Milton", remarking that "There is little reason for preferring the Italian pronunciation to our own, except that it is more general; and to teach it to an Englishman is only to make him a foreigner at home." The Works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D., ed. Arthur Murphy (London, 1823), IV, p. 127. Milton, of course, could not stand the English pronunciation.

90

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

235

pleting the pattern of court, city, and university, the worlds of the court, the virtuoso, and the scholar being quite distinct. It also gave Maffei an opportunity to visit the Bodleian and the Ashmolean. The details of his visit to Cambridge are recorded with rather more detail by his traveling companion Séguier. They visited the University while on their way to Harwich, to embark for Holland, accompanied by Thomas Hay, Lord Dupplin (later Earl of Kinnoull, the "prating Balbus" of "An Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot"), Henry Hare, Baron Colerain, an old friend of Maffei's from Italy, and John Theophilus Desaguliers, scientist and chaplain to the Prince of Wales. The antiquarian Martin Folkes welcomed them, showing Maffei an unpublished treatise on the ancient Egyptian system of measuring with cords, which was only understood by three men (Maupertois, Folkes, and one other), according to the much impressed Séguier. The highlight of the visit was an introduction to the master of Trinity, Richard Bentley, then 74. Maffei's young companion reported his impression in his journal: Je m'attendais à trouver un autre homme; minuit praesentia jamam. Ce docteur ne nous parla que de vin et de la peur cju'il avait de voir les bouteilles vides. Il est vrai que cette peur n'était pas sans motif, car, en quelques minutes, il savait fort bien les vides. Il nous dit qu'il ne s'occupait plus à l'étude, et que, rassasié de travail et de gloire, il se reposait. Il fit ensuite apporter du punch, liqueur fort qui plâit beaucoup les Anglais, et il pria la compagnie d'en boire, après en avoir bu lui-même très largement, non dans un verre, mais coupe qui contenait plus de sept à huit pots de cette liqueur. C'est là toute la conversation que nous eûmes avec set illustre biberon.95 With this vision of the redoubtable Bentley, Maffei and Séguier sailed out of England for Holland, thence to Vienna, Venice, and Verona. But Maffei did not leave English minds as readily as he did English shores. In 1742 Pope published The New Dunciad, now Book IV of the complete poem; in speaking of academic dunces, Pope mentions Cambridge, M

Boissier, op. cit., ρ, 460.

236

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

Where Bentley late tempestuous wont to sport In troubled waters, but now sleeps in Port. (11. 201-202) The note on this reads viz. "now retired into harbour, after the tempests that had long agitated his society". So Scriblerus. But the learned Scipio Maffei understands it of a certain Wine called Port, from Oporto, a city of Portugal, of which this Professor invited him to drink abundantly. SCIP. MAFF. de Compotationibus Academicis. How Pope (or Pope and Warburton, for the note is initiated "PW") came to learn of Maffei's encounter is not recorded. It might have come through one of the gentlemen present — Dupplin was a nephew of Pope's friend Harley, Earl of Oxford — or from Maffei himself in a now-lost letter to Pope, Burlington, Mead, or some other mutual friend. The story might even have become common knowledge, while Pope's fondness for a pun and Bentley's proverbial fondness for Port would explain the change from "punch". Sutherland correctly suggests that the line "may possible refer to some occasion at Cambridge when Maffei was too hospitably entertained by Bentley"; 96 but apparently not aware of the truth of his conjecture, he fails to cite Séguier's amusing gloss on Pope's irony. Pope's note is not directed at Maffei as the butt of the joke, which Sutherland finds puzzling if aimed at the "learned" Italian. Instead Maffei's fame and scholarly reputation are worked into the elaborate fun at Bentley's expense, while Pope also develops a nice Scriblerian jest at the Italian's well-known erudition, in memory of an unforgettable occasion. Maffei also comes to life in the letters of Lady Mary, and in particular in her letter (24 July 1755) on the occasion of his death. They had met in London, but as she recalls him it was in his Veronese splendor. The portrait she sketches is remarkable enough to bear quotation at length: This year has been fatal to the literati of Italy. The Marquis Maffei soon followed Cardinal Querini. He was in England when you were married. Perhaps you may remember his coming to 88

The Poems of Alexander Pope, op. cit., V, p. 362.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

237

see your father's Greek inscription; he was then an old man, and consequently now a great age; but preserved his memory and senses in their first vigour. After having made the tour of Europe in the search of antiquities, he fixed Iiis residence in his native town of Verona, where he erected himself a little empire, from the general esteem, and a conversation (so they call an assembly) which he established in his palace, which is one of the largest in that place, and so luckily situated, that it is between the theatre and the ancient amphitheatre... His gallery was open every evening at five o'clock, where he had a fine collection of antiquities, and two large cabinets of medals, intaglios, and cameos, ranged in exact order. His library joined to it; and on the other side a suite of five rooms, the first of which was destined to dancing, the second to cards (but all games of hazard excluded), and the others (where he himself presided in an easy-chair) sacred to conversation, which always turned upon some point of learning, either historical or poetical. Controversy and politics being utterly prohibited, he generally proposed the subject, and took great delight in instructing the young people, who where obliged to seek the medal, or explain the inscription, that illustrated any fact they discoursed of. Those who chose the diversion of the public walks, or theatre, went thither, but never failed returning to give an account of the drama, which produced a critical dissertation on that subject, the Marquis having given shining proofs of his skill in that a r t . . . One day in the week was set apart for music, vocal and instrumental, but no mercenaries admitted to the concert. Thus, at very little expense (his fortune not permitting a large one), he had the happiness of giving his countrymen a taste of polite pleasure, and showing the youth how to pass their time agreeably without debauchery . . . I have had many honourable invitations from my old friend Maffei to make one of this society; some accident has always prevented me.97 This letter suggests the various aspects of Maffei's character and genius, but Lady Mary fails to mention one activity which made him a particularly important figure in continuing the Italian tradition which Rolli was attempting to establish in England. This was his work as an editor and scholarly journalist. The most important result of this was the foundation of the Giornale dei letterati d'Italia (1710-1740), although most of the actual editing was done by Apostolo Zeno. Conceived as an Italian 97

Op. cit., II, pp. 286-288.

238

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

counterpart to the Memoirs de Trévoux by Maffei, Zeno, and Antonio Vallisnieri, the Giornale was intended to clarify and propagandize the reform movement in Italian letters, especially its independence from French domination, and "to hold high the honour of Italian culture and literature against foreign attack". 98 Under the editorship of Zeno (1710-1718) and his brother Pier-Caterino (1718-1728), the Giornale took the lead in replying to the French critics who followed Boileau and Bouhours, or their German followers in the Leipzig Acta." It also performed the important function of noting and reviewing important books, especially those concerned with Italian subjects, from all over Europe. In this way it provided a center, a kind of rallying point, for those concerned with the rehabilitation of the Italian literary reputation in all parts of Europe. The Giornale came to its effective end in 1732, although volumes were published in 1733, 1739, and 1740.100 T o fill the gap, Maffei began the Osservazione Letterarie (1737-1740) on his return from his tour, assisted by Séguier and many others among his Modenese friends and correspondents.101 Despite the title, the journal was concerned almost exclusively with scientific matters, reflecting the turn which Maffei's own thought was taking. The importance to Italian culture in general lay in Maffei's suggestion that scientific pieces be written in Italian, not in Latin, in order to be the more readily available to Italians. If the French, and many of the English, had been following this practice, why not the Italians? And so his scientific journal in some degree justified its humanistic name. From its highest point at the time of his travels, Maffei's English reputation sank into a gradual decline. Haym had published Merope as early as 1721 (with G . B. Recanti's Demodice as Due tragedie). In 1731 the Scottish antiquary-musician Alexander Gordon (1692?-17 54?) published his translation of

De gli amfiteatri as A compleat history of the ancient amphi-

98 w 100 101

Silvestri, op. cit., p. 108. Ibid., pp. 107-108. Ibid., p. 113. Ibid., p. 115.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

239

theatres. More peculiarly regarding the architecture of those buildings, and in particular that of Verona. Made English from the Italian by A. Gordon. It reached a second, revised, edition in 1735. In 1731 George Jeffreys claimed to base his tragedy Merope on Maffei, although adding that "the Freedom I have taken to accomodate it to the English Stage, has in a great measure, alter'd its Property". 102 This was a bit of mystification, for a comparison of the plays shows that Jeffreys' is entirely different, although the subject may have been suggested by the Italian drama, and that he was trying to ride to success on Maffei's reputation. He failed, after three performances.103 The 1740 translation by William Ayre is adequate, if not very lively, and at least suggests the nature of Maffei's tragedy better than Jeffreys or Voltaire. The tribute paid by Lady Mary in 1755 has already been quoted, but it is couched in terms suggesting that Maffei's name would be unfamiliar to her daughter. In 1759 came praise from an unexpected source. In An Enquiry into the

Present State of Polite Learning in Europe, one of his early pieces of hack journalism, Oliver Goldsmith ranks Maffei with Muratori, writing that "Maffei is the first that has introduced a tragedy among his countrymen without a love-plot. Perhaps the Samson of Milton and the Athalia of Racine might have been his guides in such an attempt." 104 In the second edition (1774), he removed a further remark, "Yet he seems as much inferior to either as a poet, as the subject of his Merope is more happily chosen." 105 And with this lightened comment by Goldsmith, Maffei drops quietly from English letters. In his own country, and especially in his own city, his fame is more secure. As the man who revitalized the form of tragedy, who was a scholar and historian of note (if overshadowed by his friend Muratori), and as the glorifier of Verona, his name is still honored. And so it was in the eighteenth century, when Maffei Merope. A Tragedy (London, 1731), Dedication. Nicoli, op. cit., II, p. 338. 104 The Works of Oliver Goldsmith, ed. Cunningham (Boston, 1854), II, p. 20. 105 Ibid., II, p. 20, n. 3. See also III, p. 270. 102

103

240

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

could stand as a symbol of the revitalization of the Italian tradition for which Rolli was striving in London.

Ill Of the three men who form the subject of this chapter, Antonio Cocchi was undoubtedly the one who maintained the longest and closest contact with England and English affairs. By profession a physician, his scientific interests ran through medicine and the natural sciences. In literature his interests were equally wide, if his efforts less productive, and he produced several translations and editions of his own. He also traveled: in 1722 he left Florence on a four-year "grand tour" in company of an English lord, visited Northern Italy and France, spent three years in England, and in 1726 returned to Italy by way of Holland and Germany. 109 But Cocchi's contact with England did not end with his return to Italy, for he maintained a voluminous correspondence with English scientists, and with other English friends, for the rest of his life, and in addition he became physician and confidant to two English Residents at the Grand Ducal court, Francis Colman and Horace Mann. His house was always open to the English, and the record of his hospitality is to be found in the journals and letters of numerous English visitors to Florence, with Lord Hervey, Spence, and Walpole the best remembered.107 One evidence of his learning is to be found in his diary, which is written in Italian, Latin, English, French, German, Greek, and even 108 All of this information comes from Andrea Corsini, Antonio Cocchi, un erudito del "settecento" (Milano, 1928), published as part of a series appropriately called "i curiosi della natura". The details of his tour are pp. 97-108. 107 The Cocchi family archive, preserved by his descendant II Conte Baidasserone, has preserved much of Cocchi's correspondence, including both the letters which he received and drafts of those which he wrote. It should be noted that his diary is now preserved in the Biblioteca Medica of the Università di Studi in Florence. The Cocchi letters have been microfilmed for the Deering Library at Northwestern University, to whom I am indebted for their use. All of Cocchi's correspondence cited hereafter is from this collection, unless otherwise identified.

CONTI, M AFFE I, AND COCCHI

241

Hebrew and Arabic108 — for one thing, it was his practice to use the language of the country in which he was writing, so that when in his travels he chronicles his journey from France to England, he also changes from French to English when he arrives at Dover.109 Cocchi (1695-1758) was born in Benevento of a Tuscan couple from the Mugello region, and he delighted in calling himself Filosopho Mugellano. He studied at the University in Florence, and then went to Pisa, where he took his degree in medicine in 1716.110 Although Francesco Redi had then been dead for eighteen years, his spirit still dominated the scientific scene, as Newton's was to do in England, and Cocchi became one of the last distinguished followers of the school of Redi. As Carducci wrote, "the experimental school, as well as that of good prose, ended in 1758 with the death of Antonio Cocchi".111 Cocchi probably learned his English from British visitors to Florence, and it was there that he met Theophilus Hastings, 9th Earl of Huntingdon (1696-1746), a young man of about his own age, presumably taking the grand tour. That Cocchi certainly knew English by this time is clear from two letters in the Cocchi archive, which contains a letter from Huntingdon dated 21 February 1721 (OS), and with it a draft of Cocchi's reply.112 Huntingdon's note is in rather simple Italian, while Cocchi's answer is in English, good if a little stiff, both having something of the exercise about them. Huntingdon, apparently pleased with his learned and multi-talented friend, offered Cocchi the opportunity to travel with him, and on 17 April 1722 Cocchi left Florence for Bologna, en route to Venice, where he was to meet the Earl, the beginning of his four-year travels.113 His patron, with whom he was eventually to differ, seems to have been a relatively intelligent man, for in 1728 — two years after Cocchi's return to Italy — the Earl married Selina Shirley, the blue108 10U 110 111 112 113

Corsini, op. cit., Ibid., p. 102. Ibid., pp. 12-13. Quoted in ibid., Filza 1, No. 279. Corsini, op. cit.,

p. 12.

p. 10. Cocchi's draft reply is unnumbered. p. 97.

242

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

stocking daughter of the second Earl Ferrers. Lady Huntingdon was to become famous through her protection of the Methodists, and in particular her close friendship with Whitefield, her interest in Methodism developing from the influence of her sister-in-law, Lady Margaret Hastings. If the Earl failed to join his wife in Dissent, neither did he attempt to restrain her, despite the urging of friends. It may be apposite to add that the Earl was a Whig, of the anti-Walpole persuasion.114 There is no evidence that he took any part in musical affairs, but his wife — by whom he is over-shadowed at nearly every turn — was a friend of Handel's and despite "a long break in their intercourse", she visited the composer by his particular request shortly before his death.115 The first stages of Cocchi's trip would seem to have been instructive, if uneventful. After about a month in Venice, he and Huntingdon set out for Paris, stopping frequently on the way, traveling through Bolzano, Innsbruck, and Strasbourg; the journey took forty days.116 It seems to have been this early in their journey that Cocchi found certain faults in his patron, which probably led to the break between them some time later — a fondness for pleasure and a tendency to stinginess. The letter which Corsini quotes, telling a friend of his life in Paris,117 suggests that Cocchi was more offended by the latter than the former, for he himself demonstrates a fondness for company as he relates the many social events of any given day. He also notes that he met Antonio Conti there. "Every day I am becoming acquainted with people, some of them well-born, but our acquaintance doesn't do much for my vanity, because such friendships are easy, and disappear rapidly. My best friend is a noble Venetian, known as the Abbé Conti; he lives here, and although getting old [Conti was 45], is a fine mathematician, very good poet, and with the uprightness of the ancients; but I see him rarely, because the absurd nature of my companion Charles F. Mullett, The Letters of Dr. George Cheyne to the Countess of Huntingdon (San Marino, Calif., 1940), pp. v-vi. See also George E. Cocayne, The Complete Peerage (London, 1910-1959), VI, p. 661. 115 Deutsch, op. cit., p. 813. 116 Corsini, op. cit., pp. 98-99. 117 Ibid., pp. 99-102. 114

CONTI, MAFFEI, AND COCCHI

243

[Huntingdon] isn't much pleased by such friendships." 118 This brief passage suggests, of course, the interests that would bring Conti and Cocchi together, and which are to be found in most of the London Italian circle, especially the scientific and literary. It also brings Cocchi near to the London group, for Conti undoubtedly directed the young Florentine to Rolli and Riva, and thus prepared the way for his larger acquaintance with the group. It also suggests the jealous nature of the Earl's attitude toward his protégé. Assuming that Cocchi arrived in France in July, about twoand-a-half months after leaving Florence, he spent about nine months there, for he arrived in England 24 March 1723.119 He found a group there happy to receive him, and entries in the diary soon begin to mention Rolli, Riva, and the Duchess of Shrewsbury. His friends soon came to number others of the opera circle, including the singers Berenstadt, Durastanti, and Senesino (as well as his brother), the composers Bononcini and Ariosti, and even Haym — all of these names that recur in the diary. Perhaps it was his reception by this group that encouraged him to leave Lord Huntingdon, for on 27 July, tired of the Earl's stinginess, he moved to lodgings in N e w Burlington Street, apparently encouraged by Riva and the Duchess of Shrewsbury. 120 His break with Huntingdon was not the end of their friendship, however, for as he wrote at the time, "Even so he's a good gentleman. His extravangances would even be charming if he were not so much in love with his money." 1 2 1 Perhaps Cocchi's differences with Huntingdon were not entirely without provocation on his own part. His patron apparently spent time with him in the morning or evening, speaking Italian, and felt that Cocchi was spending too much time in society, and too little at home. From the description in Cocchi's diary of his life in London during those first months, one hardly doubts this. But whatever the apportionment of blame, the 118 118 120

121

Ibid., p. 101. Cocchi's diary. Corsini, op. cit., p. 103. Ibid., p. 104.

244

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

agreement to separate was apparently relatively amicable, for Huntingdon gave Cocchi sixteen guineas as "back expenses" and thirty-four for the return trip to Italy. Further, in 1726 Cocchi dedicated to Huntingdon his edition and Latin translation of a Greek romance by Xenophon of Ephesus, The Loves of Abrocome and Anthia.122 Whether this edition represented a difference with Rolli or not, it is said to have been undertaken to correct the errors of Salvini's Italian translation, which Rolli had published in London in 1723. Cocchi's edition, with the original Greek text and his own elegant Latin rendering, has been praised for its beauty and exactness,123 but he did not displace Salvini's Italian version from favor — which, indeed, may not have been his intent — for Salvini's rendering was reprinted in London in 1757 and 1792, and in Italy well into the next century. But whatever the reasons behind the work, Cocchi's gesture to Huntingdon was a generous one, for this was the editto princeps, from a manuscript in the Laurentian library. The first printed version had been Salvini's translation, and these two doubtless inspired the first English rendering, by Rooke in 1727.124 Another of Cocchi's London patrons may well have been the Earl of Burlington, to whom he was to dedicate his 1728 edition of the Vita de Benvenuto

Cellini, but unfortunately there is no

further evidence on this point. But so generous an acknowledgment does at least imply generous favors, either bestowed or expected, and one would like to know more about this relationship. One other literary production dating from the London years came early in his stay. This was an essay in the form of a letter to an old friend in Florence on English life and education, which was included among the formal letters in his collected works.125 This "Lettera all' educazione e al genere di vita degl' Inglesi", noted as "Written from London on 6 August 1724 to Marchese 128

Xenophontis Ephesii Ephesiacorum libri V de amoribus Anthiae Abrocomae nunc primum prodeunt... cum Latina interpretatione Cocchii (London, 1726). 123 Corsini, op. cit., p. 8î. 124 F. H. Todd, Some Ancient Novels (London, 1940), p. 9. 126 Opere di Antonio Cocchi (Milano, 1824), I, p. 443.

et A.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

245

Carlo Rinuccini in Florence", generally praises the English way of life and method of education. Cocchi particularly admires the idea of a tutor and (as well he may) of a carefully conducted grand tour. After a passage on the titles of the nobility — always a problem to the foreigner — he praises the freedom of younger sons to enter a variety of professions, a concept which he holds up to the Florentines for imitation. He praises Florence for its many beauties and possibilities for development, at the same time judiciously selecting those aspects of English life which he finds most worthy of emulation. In general the essay is perceptive and to the point, suggesting that Cocchi had made instructive use of the sixteen months that he had then spent in England. Unfortunately Cocchi's diary gives little insight into the workings of the operatic circle in which he found himself. It may well be that he was not particularly musical, for he reported attending the opera only occasionally, seldom ever giving the title, and commenting not at all. But his friendships in London were certainly not limited to the opera group. His (and Rolli's) literary interests led to his being introduced to "Mrs. Milton", who pobably was the poet's daughter Deborah Clarke, who was known to live in London, rather than his widow, Elizabeth, who lived in Nantwich, Cheshire — both died in August 1727, a year after Cocchi returned to Italy. 126 The likelihood of it being Mrs. Clarke is increased by the comment on Deborah by the elder Jonathan Richardson, in his life of Milton, as "She who was so Visited and Reliev'd a few Years Since", 127 while Rolli also mentions her in his "Vita di Giovanni Milton". Most of these works and acquaintances emphasizes the literary side of Cocchi's interests, but his scientific background also brought him into contact with English science and scientists. The diary unfortunately does not record any details of his meeting with Newton, but it is clear that they did meet, perhaps brought together by their mutual friend Conti. Cocchi's membership in the Royal Society does not date from this period, though, J. Milton French, The Life Records of John Milton (New Brunswick, N.J., 1949-19Í8), V, pp. 308, 322-328. 127 Helen Darbyshire, The Early Lives of Milton (London, 1932), p. 277. 126

246

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

but had to wait some ten years. His friendship with Martin Folkes (1690-1754) may date from these years, although he could also have met Folkes in Italy around 1733, as well as his acquaintance with the celebrated physician Richard Mead, like Folkes to be a frequent correspondent in later years. His scientific acquaintance may well have been increased by his resumption of the practice of medicine for what Corsini calls "a selected clientele"128 as the best way of supporting himself in London. Thus he was established in London literary, scientific, and medical circles, while socially he knew not only the group around the Italian opera, but the court as well, having been introduced to Caroline of Ansbach, then Princess of Wales,129 a meeting which might have been arranged by the Duchess of Shrewsbury, by Lord Huntingdon, or even by Rolli. But after three years in England, Cocchi decided to return to his native Italy. The desire to see his family again was doubtless heightened by the news that friends, including his close friend Carlo Rinuccini, had obtained for him the chair of Theoretical Medicine at the University of Pisa, and he decided to accept, despite the many attempts made by his friends to keep him in England, including the offer of a large salary and high hopes for the future by the Princess of Wales.130 Therefore in late June or early July of 1726 he left England and made his way to Florence by way of Brussels, Amsterdam, Leyden (where he met Boerhaave), Cologne, Frankfort, and Bologna, arriving at his parents' home on 13 October after an absence of four-and-a-half years.131 This brought to a close Cocchi's direct encounter with England, but it proved to be the mere beginning of his other connection with England and the English, for his interest in both would seem to have grown with time rather than diminished. On the one side he maintained a considerable correspondence with friends and colleagues in England, including Rolli, Folkes, and Mead, while in Florence he became a close friend of Francis 128 129 130 131

Corsini, op. cit., p. 105. Ibid. Ibid., pp. 16, 105. Ibid., pp. 105-107.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

247

Coiman and Horace Mann, two of the English representatives to the Tuscan court, and he was a favorite with English visitors to Florence. In this fashion he was to maintain his ties with England until his death. One of the first of these friends was Francis Colman, father of the dramatist and manager George Colman the elder, who was appointed Resident to the court of the Grand Duke of Tuscany in 1724, after three years in Vienna. 132 A protégé of William Pulteney, Colman (c. 1690-1733) spent nine years in Florence, returning to England only once, in 1729.133 His health seems to have been poor for some time before his death, which took place in Pisa on 20 April 1733. If, as Page suggests,134 he was in Pisa to rest, it is also possible that he was there to be nearer to his friend and physician, Cocchi. Corsini notes that Colman retained Cocchi as his family physician for an annual payment of 200 lira,135 which might support this suggestion. The friendship between them would seem to have developed rapidly on Cocchi's return from England. The first letter preserved from Colman to Cocchi is from London, dated 3 February 1728/9, during Colman's single English trip, and suggests an easy relationship between them, as well as suggesting a continuing correspondence, as Colman gives Cocchi various messages for mutual friends. A second letter, dated 27 November 1728, suggests the friendly terms of the correspondence, closing with a comment on the quantity of punch he had consumed: " I am very merry, very unfit to write this l e t t e r . . . Burn this letter as soon as you read it, if you can read it." 1 3 6 Cocchi's knowledge of Italian was also useful to Coiman in other ways than delivering messages. Thus Colman wrote Cocchi (1731-1732?), " I beg you would do me the favour to translate the King's Speech and the Adress of the house of Lords into Most of the biographical information on Francis Colman comes from Eugene R: Page, George Colman the Elder, Essayist, Dramatist, and Theatrical Manager (New York, 1935), pp. 3-7. 133 Ibid., p. 6. 134 Ibid., p. 7. 135 Corsini, op. cit., p. 11. 13e Filza 1, No. 252. 132

248

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

Italian as soon as you can conveniently, & then send them me back. In granting me this favour You will extremely oblige, Sir, [etc.]." 137 In 1730 Colman acted as agent for Handel in hiring singers for the London opera. The management was particularly anxious to obtain the services of a leading castrato, as Bernacchi had failed to please. Eventually Senesino was re-engaged at a salary of 1400 guineas, which was 200 more than Handel originally offered. 138 If not unwilling to return to the service of Handel, Senesino was at least desirous of being urged, and holding out for the most persuasive offer. On the London side he was being kept abreast of developments by Rolli,130 while from Florence Colman was relaying Handel's offers with the assistance of Cocchi. Thus Colman wrote to Cocchi a letter dated only "Thursday 16 hours": I am very much Surprized that we have had no answer yet from Senesino, & therefore must desire you to write to him again this afternoon in the most persuasive & pressing m a n n e r . . . I send you enclosed Mr. Handel's letter, that you may represent to Senesino all the reasons contained in it why the Undertakers cannot go beyond the offer of 1200 guineas.140 Handel's letter has not, unfortunately, survived, but the letter to Cocchi shows the high degree of confidence that Colman placed in his friend. This confidence was shown again the next year, when Colman took Cocchi to Parma as his personal physican on a delicate diplomatic journey involving the Farnese dynasty, which like the Medici was expiring. The three sons of Duke Ranuccio II (1630-1694) had managed to produce only one child, and that a girl, Elizabeth Farnese, who in 1714 married Philip V of Spain.141 In 1727 Francesco, the penultimate male Farnese died,

137

Filza 1, No. 237. Handel's and Owen Swiney's letters to Coiman are reprinted in Deutsch, op. cit., pp. 256-260. 138 See ibid., p. 242. 140 Filza 1, No. 236. 141 Giovanni Drei, I Farnese: grandezza e decadenza di una dinastia italiana (Roma, 1954), Tavola XLI, pp. 294-295. 138

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

249

leaving the final honors to his brother Antonio (1679-1731), who the next year married a Modenese princess, Enrichetta d'Este.142 But time was closing in, for in November 1729 England, France, and Spain signed the Treaty of Seville, by which it was agreed that Parma and Piacenza, the Farnese duchy, would be garrisoned by Spanish troops, thus guaranteeing the succession of Parma, an Imperial fief, to Don Carlos, the eldest son of Elizabeth Farnese.143 This arrangement was supported by the Treaty of Vienna, signed 16 March 1731, by which Austria agreed to the terms of the Treaty of Seville in return for English support of the Pragmatic Sanction.144 Thus the way was opened for the Spaniards, especially as the last Farnese duke, Antonio, had died in January 1731. But, unexpectedly enough, he had died in the belief that he was about to become a father, leaving his duchy to his presumed heir, thus upsetting the carefully laid plans of Europe's statesmen and of his niece.145 Since his widow maintained that she was pregnant, a commission of representatives from the courts of England, France, and Spain — the signatories of the Treaty of Seville — and also of the Papacy, was appointed to oversee the matter. The Holy See, France, and England appointed a minister apiece, while Spain sent three. At the end of May the widowed Duchess underwent an examination to determine the accuracy of her story, and before the three Spanish commissioners, the Regents of the duchy, the dowagerDuchess Dorothea Sophia of Neuberg, and three doctors, was declared by four mid-wives who had examined her to be in the fifth month of pregnancy. 146 Therefore on 22 July Francis Coiman set out from Florence, accompaniel by Brinley Skinner, the British Consul at Leghorn, and Antonio Cocchi. Colman's health was already weak, so that Cocchi came as his personal physician and secretary, and not as Ibid., J. H . p. 198. 144 Ibid., 145 Drei, 116 Ibid., 14S

p. 284. Plumb, Sir Robert Walpole: The King's Minister (London, 1960), p. 229. op. cit., pp. 287-288. p. 289.

250

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

a medical advisor to the commission.147 The party stopped overnight in Modena, and arrived in Parma on the 24th. Then they sat, awaiting the results of the duchess' condition, endeavoring to assure the world that no impostor would be presented to the world as the heir to Parma. If such an imposition had been the intent of Count Stampa, Henrietta's advisor, the commissioners were successful. For over six weeks Colman waited in the heat of a north-Italian summer, despite his poor health, supported primarily by Cocchi and occasional excursions into the country,148 until in early September, the duchess not yet having given birth, she was declared to have been suffering from a false pregnancy. A day later, 14 September, Don Carlos of Spain was declared Duke of Parma and Piacenza.149 Cocchi made good use of the journey, beyond playing his minor role in the rather comic events in Parma. In Modena he had seen Muratori, and in Parma he became acquainted with Rolli's friend and correspondent, the Arcadian poet Carlo Innocenzo Frugoni, who was as yet unaware that his destiny lay with the Bourbon dukes, not with the Farnese. Cocchi was also able to examine at leisure the Farnese collections, which were still intact, and especially the fine library, as well as giving rein to his botanical interests in the surrounding gardens. In all, Cocchi seems to have enjoyed himself, and to have taken advantage of every opportunity, all at the expense of His Majesty's government.150 But unfortunately his own formal account of the trip, the "Parere sulla supposta gravidanaza di S.A.S. Enrichetta di Modena" (published in volume III of the 1824 Opere) is a straight factual one, impersonal to the point of leaving Colman and himself out entirely, and therefore of no immediate interest. His friendship with Colman was not to be a long one, for two Andrea Corsini, "Un viaggio a Parma di Antonio Cocchi e la supposta gravidanza della Duchessa Enrichetta Farnese", Revista della Biblioteca e degli Archivi, XXVIII (1917), pp. 49-74. Cocchi's diary is the source for the information in this article. 148 Corsini, Antonio Cocchi, op. cit., p. 113. 149 Drei, op. cit., pp. 290-291. An account of the anti-climactic end of the Farnese dynasty is also found in Yorke-Long, Music at Court, op. cit., p. 17. 150 Corsini, Antonio Cocchi, op. cit., pp. 111-114. 147

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

251

years later the Resident was dead, and Mrs. Colman returned to England with her infant son, George. But Colman's death was not to interrupt even briefly Cocchi's contact with England and the English. Not only had he maintained his correspondence with friends in England, but he also became acquainted with the various English visitors who came to Florence. One of the first such travellers came during Colman's absence in 1729, Lord Hervey. Travelling in an attempt to regain his health, Hervey had left England in July 1728 with Stephen Fox as companion, and by slow stages reached Italy in November, stopping at Rome and Naples before arriving in Florence, apparently sometime in in the spring.151 During the months in Florence, Hervey made a remarkable recovery, apparently as the result of a "long and dangerous" operation. What it was and who performed it are not mentioned, and it may, of course, have been performed by Cocchi. It is clear, in any case, from several letters addressed to Cocchi by Fox on the trip home, that the three became close friends during the stay in Florence. T h e first letter, dated 5 October, describes a meeting with the southbound Colmans at Turin. 152 The second, and more interesting, is dated 25 October from Paris: we are just come from Versailles where we have seen the Dauphin, and dined with the Cardinal de Fleury, who enquired much how we spent our time at Florence, and after Magliabecchi, who he said was a very learned man, et un des plus scavans qu'il avait jamais connu, Ld Hervey told him that he believed Dr Cocchi was his equal in all kinds of learnings, & that it was the pleasure he took in your company hindered him thinking Florence an extreme dull place; the Cardinal, who it seems has been at Florence, replied Florence doit etre un endroit bien ennuyant.153 A letter from Hervey himself, written the next year, emphasizes the friendship, although adding little information. But Hervey's Ilchester, op. cit., pp. 31-32. Filza 1, No, 248. isa Filza No. 247. The dates of these two letters, especially the second, tend to refute Hervey's own statement in the Memoirs that he returned in September 1729; see Ilchester, op. cit., p. 36. 151

152

252

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

interest in Cocchi is clearer in several later references, concerning Henry Fox's visit to Italy in 1731. On 13 September 1731 he wrote Fox, then in Spain, "If you should meet with Cochi at Florence, make my court to him; you know how to do it, where you have a mind. You will like him, because he has no affectation; and he you, because you have no belief. Adieu, I hope you are, and will be, well diverted ..." 1 5 4 And in a letter dated 1/12 October he again wrote Fox, "Send me word if you have talked with Cocchi, and if he answers. The people who have his way of reflecting seldom fall off." 155 Hervey's interest in Cocchi, then, suggests the ties of friendship which seem to have bound Cocchi to so many of the travelling Englishmen, as well as to his friends in London and Florence, and which make him an important link between Italy and the Rolli circle in London. The letter from Stephen Fox dated 25 October 1731, already quoted, is also important in another context, for it contains the first mention in the correspondence of Cocchi's projected edition of the Greek Surgeons, which was to occupy him for many years. His original plan seems to have been to publish a critical edition of one of the treasures of the Laurentian Library, the collection of classical texts on surgery compiled in the tenth century by the Byzantine physician Nicetas, once in the possession of Lorenzo de' Medici.156 Fox's letter transmits a suggestion that only those works not yet published be included, the recommendation of Dr. John Wigan (1696-1739), already known as the editor of Arateus. The project was never to be completed, owing to the enormous expense of the undertaking, for Cocchi wished to publish the work in both the original Greek and in his own Latin translation. Eventually he compromised in 1754 with the publication of a single folio volume, containing works of Soranus and Oribasius in Cocchi's emended text. This was the 154

Ilchester, op. cit., p. 88. Ibid., p. 99. 156 Fielding H . Garrison, An Introduction to the History of Medicine (Philadelphia, 1929), p. 125. T h e manuscript, pl. LXXIII, cod. 1, is described in Augusto Beccaria, I Codici di Medicina del periodo presalernitano (Roma, 1956), pp. 277-281. 155

CONTI, M A F F E I, AND COCCHI

253

Graecorum chyrurigici libri, Sorani umis de fracturarum signis, Oribasii duo de fractis et de luxatis e collectione Nicetae... descritti conversi atque editi ab A. Cocchi (Florence), an edition important primarily for Cocchi's perceptive handling of a corrupt text. 157 T h e letters dating from the years when Cocchi was working on this edition are filled with references to the projected work, which seems to have occupied much the same place in Cocchi's thoughts as the Del Paradiso perduto did in Rolli's, as a kind of monument; and the Greek Surgeons took even longer to bring even to partial completion, for twenty-three years passed between the first mention in the extant correspondence and the publication of the single volume. It seems to have been through his efforts to publish this work that Cocchi came to the attention of Dr. Richard Mead (16731754), the friend of Pope and physician to most of social, political, and learned London. A noted collector, he had gathered a magnificent library, and his interests were sufficiently wide that he is credited with aiding Theobald with his edition of Shakespeare.158 The Prodigal in Pope's "Epistle to Burlington", it will be remembered, buys "Books for Mead, and Butterflies for Sloane". The poet notes that these were " T w o eminent Physicians; the one had an excellent Library, the other the finest collection in Europe of natural curiosities; both men of great learning and humanity." 159 Cocchi must have been flattered by the interest of so famous a scholar, who was also a friend of Boerhaave, and who had been graduated M.D. at Padua in 1695.160 The first of the many letters from Mead is dated 3 November 17 34,1β1 and the correspondence was to continue until Mead's death twenty years later. The good doctor was apparently something of a projector, for he had soon pledged himself to help Cocchi issue the Nicetas collection by subscrip157 159 159

° "Ί

le

Corsini, Antonio Cocchi, op. cit., pp. 83-84. DNB, s.v. "Mead". The Poems of Alexander Pope, op. cit., Ill-ii, p. 132. DNB, s.v. "Mead". Filza 1, No. 210.

254

CONTI, M A F F F . I , AND COCCHI

tion, picturing such publication as easy and profitable. He also took it upon himself to introduce Cocchi to Englishmen traveling in Italy, especially those with scientific interests. Thus on 15 March 1736 he wrote to introduce Daniel Molyneux, 182 who was to become a correspondent himself on returning to England, and Mead may have been instrumental in bringing together Cocchi and Martin Folkes, who was in Italy for two-and-a-half years, c. 17 3 3-17 3 5.163 A future president of the Royal Society, Folkes (1690-1754) seems to have been instrumental in proposing Cocchi for membership in that body, undoubtedly supported by Rolli and Mead. In any event, Folkes adds a kind of "stop-press" postscript to a letter dated (in Cocchi's hand) 30 March 1736, "Monsigr Ceratti and yourself are this day elected F.F.R.S. your time of probation being out." 1 8 4 All of these friends became involved in the negotiations for publishing the edition of the Greek Surgeons, for which Mead began to solicit subscriptions. Even Rolli, in a letter of 1734, became a go-between for Cocchi and Mead in the project. But Mead's ebullience was not justified. Subscribers were harder to find than a bibliophile might have thought, probably because of the highly specialized nature of the work, and the Englishman was unable to obtain enough names to justify the enormous expense of printing the work. As negotiations dragged on for ten and fifteen years, Cocchi became despairing and even seems to have felt that Mead was not dealing fairly with him, although such suspicions seem to have been unfounded. But a part of the work was already set up in type, and Cocchi finally decided to go ahead with the first part of the project. Twenty years after the first mention of the edition, he wrote to Mead, in a letter the draft of which is dated 28 May 1751,165 that his resolve was to print only what was ready, and that not by subscription. Therefore he asked Mead to return the money already received from subscribers. A year later he sent Mead what seems to have been

183 184 165

Filza 1, No. 203. DNB, s.v. "Folkes". Filza 1, No. 185. Filza 4, No. 335.

CONTI, M A F F E I , AND COCCHI

255

sample pages,166 and two years later — the year of Mead's death — the work was published. But if the epistolary friendship with Mead had not always worked out as Cocchi had desired, it did help to bring him more centrally into the English scientific-scholarly world. Mead was able to introduce him to people like Anthony Askew, physician and classical scholar, who also became a frequent correspondent. Molyneux and Folkes have already been mentioned. There was John Clephane, the Scotch physician and friend of Hume (d. 1757),167 who wrote often on scientific subjects. In 1754 he attempted to obtain some kind of pension or preferment for Cocchi, working through friends at the court of Vienna.168 And there are many letters from Thomas Mangay, beginning in 1732, although the tone of these earliest letters suggests that they are part of an established correspondence. A clergyman in Durham, Mangay was the editor of Philo, so that their mutual classical interests could form the basis for friendship. Another correspondent who shared certain of these friendships was the painter and essayist Allan Ramsay (1713-1784), son of the author of The Gentle Shepherd and The Tea-Table Miscellany. In June 1736 he went to Rome to study with Solimena, in company with Alexander Cunningham (later Sir Alexander Dick). They arrived in Florence early in October, and were introduced to Cocchi by letters from Dr. Mead.189 The letters from Ramsay to Cocchi suggest that they soon became good friends, although the correspondence reveals few details. Returning to England after his studies, Ramsay was apparently in Italy again in 1755, for in a letter from Rome dated 4 November,170 he sends Cocchi a mourning ring from Martin Folkes, who had bequeated one to each of them. This friendship, if only briefly documented, is of particular interest not only because of Ramsay's ties with Folkes