Italy. In the [previous chapter], the progress of orchestration in relation to its beneficent guardian, the drama, was traced from the improvements initiated by Monteverde through those of Scarlatti. These new doctrines were, of course, assiduously seized upon by the latter's contemporaries and immediate successors. But indeed it was not until the advent of Spontini as late as the first part of the nineteenth century that Italian orchestration was again represented by an exponent of more than secondary importance, taking into consideration the achievements of Rameau in France, not to mention the great German masters. For Pergolesi excelled particularly in string writing, whereas Cherubini's scoring shows German influence rather than Italian. Nevertheless, Neapolitan propagandism exerted world-wide influence, and was directly fostered by such men as Buononcini, Durante, Porpora, Leo, Logroscino, all of whom were born in the last quarter of the seventeenth century; to the same chronological period belongs also Lotti (1667), a worthy representative of the Venetian School, who, although primarily a composer of sacred music of marked individuality, wrote a number of operas for Venice as well as several for Dresden and Vienna. Having resided for two years in Dresden, he aided the diffusion throughout Germany of operatic and orchestral principles that were conspicuously Italian even if not specifically those of Naples. Like him, Durante devoted himself almost exclusively to sacred writing. Leo, though producing many dramatic works as well as oratorios and chamber music, aided the advance of Italian art more as the teacher of Jomelli and Piccini than by his creations. Both G. Buononcini and the singing teacher, Porpora, were through the irony of fate led to aid artistic evolution by negative means, so to speak, since the trend of their ambitions brought them face to face with the genius of Händel, upon whom their machinations acted but as a stimulus. For, as will be remembered, Buononcini's defeat in London was followed fifteen years later by a second unsuccessful rivalry instigated by Porpora's faction. Logroscino is to be remembered for his development of opera-buffa and of the Finale as subsequently applied by Piccini. But it is clearly evident that none of these representative Italian composers contributed materially to orchestration with the exception that their instrumental accompaniments acquired greater freedom.
The brief career of Pergolesi (1710-1736) was consummated during the interim dating approximately from Gluck's birth to Haydn's. His fame is confined not alone to his sacred works, such as the Stabat Mater, but to his dramatic productions as well, of which the finest example is, of course, "La serva padrona," of opera-buffa propinquities. His proclivity for employing an orchestra of strings alone, as exemplified in the above mentioned representative works, was fortunate in that thereby he was able to concentrate his thoughts upon finish and detail, such as served as a valuable model for the period in which he was living, when string writing was as yet at an immature stage.
IV.
Germany. In Germany itself Italian influences predominated, and interest was centered chiefly upon the opera, in connection with which Scarlatti's tenets of writing for the orchestra were diligently copied. German dramatic activity paved the way to the establishment in 1678 of a permanent opera house in Hamburg, which enjoyed uninterrupted existence for sixty years. Most prominent among the composers for and directors of this enterprise were Theile (1646), Keiser (1674), Mattheson (1681), and Telemann (likewise 1681). Of these, Keiser accrued the greatest temporary popularity by reason of his prolific and sensational though shallow versatility. His orchestration, which was of the lightest kind, included various alternating groups of instruments. Fétis states that Keiser employed in his opera "Frédegonde" sometimes the strings alone, or the clavichord together with plucked stringed instruments and a bass. Again, the voice was accompanied by a single violin, an oboe and a bass, oboes alone, or a flute and viols. These combinations present nothing new; they were but in accordance with the customs of the times. Telemann also was possessed of a reputation sufficient to overshadow in his day that of Bach. Though the importance of his activity has since been reduced to insignificance, credit is at least due to him, not alone for his dramatic writings, but also for his contribution to concert and chamber music, which frequently revealed strong German tendencies, all too rare in the midst of Neapolitan sovereignty. So-called symphonies, overtures, concertos, quartets and the like are included in Telemann's exhaustless list of compositions, and in view of his intimacy with Bach, these works must have wielded at least transitory influence upon the experimental stage of that master's instrumentation and orchestral form. Händel likewise for three years devoted his energies to writing operas for the Hamburg stage; but this was in his youthful days, and, as has been already intimated, these attempts were but puerile and can have no possible bearing upon the art of orchestration.
Emanuel Bach (1714-1788) was also unquestionably attracted by the doctrines of this histrionic circle, although he was never directly associated with it. (Incidentally, therefore, it should be noted that he was not the successor of Telemann as director in operatic lines, a statement erroneously set forth by one historian of repute; he did succeed him as church musical director but not until later in life. In support of this correction it is but necessary to call attention to the fact that in 1738, the very year in which the degeneracy of the Hamburg operatic experiments culminated in the relinquishment of the enterprise, Emanuel Bach, being but twenty-four years old, went to Berlin, where two years later he became chamber cembalist to Frederick the Great.) The results of his efforts are of value to posterity in that he was instrumental in causing musical composition to be established on a more decidedly harmonic rather than contrapuntal basis. For although he honestly endeavored to fathom the profundity of his illustrious father, the subtle influence of his courtly surroundings and the effervescent superficiality of Neapolitanism could not but have its effect upon his art. Again, his early training was such as to foster a regard for what has been called the "gallant" style, and, as Dr. Riemann states it: "to this very tendency he owes his greatness, for by it he became the father of modern instrumental music, the precursor of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven in the department of the sonata, symphony, etc., which he clothed in more pleasing modern dress;" and thus "the son of the last master of the old school became the founder of the new school."
Passing reference is due to three further German contemporaries of Händel who were slaves to Italian principles. These were Hasse (1699), Graun (1701), Naumann (1741). After the downfall of the Hamburg stage, two distinct efforts were made to establish Italian opera at Dresden. Now the Dresden orchestra is over three hundred and fifty years old, and the interest attached to the name of Hasse is due to his prominent connection with that organization and the constitution of the same under his management. This band had been noted for its excellence already in the earlier stages of its existence, and even at the time of Monteverde it enrolled no less than thirteen strings and ninety-three instruments of wood, brass, and percussion. These dimensions were of gigantic proportions for those days, indeed, they compare favorably with the present size of the Dresden orchestra. That of Hasse was but half as large, but the distribution of parts was, of course, infinitely superior, and an orchestra of even fifty instruments, of which only half were strings, could readily have overpowered singers of Italian opera, had it not been for the subservience of the accompaniment to "il bel canto," the meagre quality of tone of the wood-wind, and the "thin" scoring then in vogue. It consisted of twenty-five strings in judicious apportionment, two flutes, five oboes, five bassoons, two horns, besides trumpets, trombones, kettle-drums and two clavichords. The prominence of reed quality and the incorporation of two clavichords, from one of which Hasse conducted, was in accord with the usages which Händel accepted. Hasse stands as the most successful native exponent of extraneous ideas, and, like his method of conducting which originated in Italy, his harmonic progressions as well as his instrumentation are of the simplest kind and disclose the same influence.
Graun achieved renown first as an opera singer, next as an opera composer; but of more enduring worth are his sacred compositions. Nevertheless he and Hasse were for a time the only maestri who wrote for the Berlin Opera, and the orchestral scores of Graun are considered by some to suggest a transition from the earlier symphonies to those of Haydn. One of his cantatas is scored for three flutes, three oboes, two violins, one viola, a bassoon, and a chorus in six parts. To this series of composers belongs properly the name of Naumann, even though he was born in the following generation; he displayed a fatal facility in expressing himself in conventional formulas, and his career was interrupted only by the ascendency of Gluck and Mozart.
V.
France. French musical art owes the stability of her early dramatic growth to three eminent composers: Lulli, Rameau, Gluck; and the first and the last of these were foreigners. Moreover into their hands was entrusted the moulding of French orchestration, for French orchestral music was not destined to disengage itself from bondage to the drama and assert itself as a clearly defined indigenous product until the nineteenth century. A sharp line of demarcation must be drawn between each respective career of these three pillars of the nascent stage. For Lulli had appropriated to himself all the glory attendant upon the Royal Opera, not alone as the director but as composer as well. Not until after his death did it become possible for others to reap the benefits of experience in hearing their own works produced, in consequence of which, latent talent had had no chance to expand. And the interim between Lulli and Rameau is signalized as a period of reaction during which the efforts of even the most prominent writers were but a pale reflection of those of their illustrious master.
Three composers, born in the second half of the seventeenth century, namely Campra, Destouches, Mouret, were the immediate successors of Lulli, and dedicated their services, such as they were, to the conservation of his ideals. Of these three men, Campra is popularly called the link between Lulli and Rameau. Campra possessed genuinely dramatic instincts, exercised his talents along sacred lines as well as secular, and revealed certain traits of independence and originality in that he dared to depart from Lulli's somewhat austere style by emphasizing the necessity for augmenting rhythmic effects, which was distinctly beneficial in the development of orchestration. It is interesting to note that he was the first Frenchman to employ the cor de chasse in opera, although Lulli introduced it into some of his ballets. The contributions of Destouches were of small intrinsic value other than the fact that the chivalrous surroundings of his earlier career as an officer had nurtured his natural temperament for the graceful and refined. And so with this æsthetic touch of a composer otherwise lacking in musical education, he added his mite to the development of daintiness in instrumentation, such as the use of two piccolo flutes in thirds in one of his ballets, and other minor though interesting details. Of Mouret's operas little can be said; but he deserves honorable mention for his labors as a conductor of the "Concerts spirituels," which, as the name implies, had been founded in 1725 to occupy the interregna whenever the opera houses were closed for religious reasons. Consequently, his name is rightfully connected with the evolution of the concert orchestra, for the "Concerts spirituels" exercised a discriminating influence at a critical time in French musical history, especially since subsequently, about the date of Beethoven's birth, it was reorganized by Gossec, with the result that it sprang into prominence equal to that of some of the foremost orchestras of Europe.