Shake the hearts of men more More Than the ruinous rage of furious tempests, More More than the rocky noife of tumbling cataracts!--- In bridal fongs, and vernal hymns Heated by a lover's fcalding tear Ye powerful finging forcerers! Oh fweep new harps! The finger of holy Nature Confecrated them for you. Glorious they are, and full of found, Not yet debafed by vulgar hands, Nor hung with ivy branches, or with rhyming bells.——” Strange as this may feem to fober readers, we will venture to fay that it is lefs nonfenfical than the original. ART. XVII. Le Revoluzioni del Teatro muficale Italiano, &c. i. e. The Revolutions of the Italian Opera, from its Origin to the prefent Time; by STEFANO ARTEAGA. Concluded. IN N conformity to a promife which we made to our readers laft year*, we return to this work; of which we then had only room for the skeleton, or table of contents. Though this hiftory of the Mufical Drama has been much read in Italy, we find, by feveral pofterior publications, that neither the Literati nor the Musicians of that country are quite fatisfied with the Author's decifions, or his manner of treating the subject. In the first place, he is a Spaniard, and partial to the poetry of his own country; and in the next, he is not allowed to be either a practical musician fufficient to judge of the composers whom he mentions, except by tradition, or deeply read in the hiftory of the art, or the profeffional talents of individuals. He writes, however, with elegance and fire, particularly in fpeaking of Lyric Poetry, which he feems to feel with much more enthufiafm than mufic. But difdaining all difcuffion of the theory or practice of the art, he confines himfelf chiefly to what he calls its Rhetoric and Philo'ophy. In his preliminary ditcourfe, Sig. ARTEAGA has characterized his predeceffors in a fummary way. He allows but four * See App. to Rev. vol. lxxvii. p. 547. whe who have written exprefsly on the mufical drama: Quadris, Algarotti, Planelli, and Napoli-Signorelli. He calls the former, A man of immenfe reading, but on whofe learning, tafte, or criticism, no dependence can be placed. He has filled half an huge volume of his Storia e ragione d'ogna Poefia with titles, dates, and names of authors, heaped promileuously one on the other, in fuch a way as to frighten memory, and destroy the most determined patience. The celebrated Count Algarotti, in his Saggio dell' Opera in Mufica, has manifefted tafte in his ufual flowery ftyle, enriched with all the embellishments of his own language, and of that of foreign countries. His reflections on the conduct of modern dramas are generally elegant and judicious; but he has not fufficiently mounted to the fource and principles of the musical drama, to ceferve the name of a complete critic. The Cavalier Planelli, in his Trattato dell' Opera in Mufica, is more profound, learned, fyftematic, and confequently more ufeful; embracing the object of his work in its whole extent. Yet, notwithstanding it is the beft didactic book on the fubject, it seems as if his reflections on lyric poetry were neither fo juft nor deep as the rest of his performance, nor has he fufficiently diftinguished opera from tragedy; and he fails ftill more in the hiftorical than in the critical part. • Il Dottor Pietro Napoli Signorelli, in his Storia critica de' Teatri, disappoints his readers in fpeaking fo little of modern times, after being fo diffufe on the ancient. This brevity has led him into haftyand ill-founded decifions on national merit, and inaccurate statements of facts. All these defects, however, have not prevented the Author from producing a learned and captivating book, nor his readers from hoping that he will foon publifh his Sistema dramatico, which he has promifed, and which will perhaps furnish those lights for which we vainly feek in his Hiftory.' This laft period and character are wholly omitted in the fecond edition; previously to the publication of which, a con-. troversy broke out, and was carried on with fome afperity, between the Spaniards and Italians, concerning the antiquity and comparative excellence of the dramatic productions of their feve ral countries. Napoli Signorelli, who had fpoken irreverently of the Spanish dramatifts, in his Critical Hiftory of ancient and modern Theatres, awakened Spanish patriotifm, and gave birth to a work entitled Saggio Apologetico, or an Effay in defence of the Spanish Drama. This was immediately anfwered, with confiderable abilities, by Napoli Signorelli, in his Difcorfo StoricoCritico, of which the reasoning and facts are enlivened with fo much wit and farcafm, that the Spaniards are lefs likely to forgive the author for being right than wrong. This feems to account for the fuppreffion of Arteaga's eloge on Signorelli. The firft chapter contains a well-digefted analytis of the Mufical Dramas, pointing out the fpecific difference between them and other kinds of dramatic compofitions. The author fays truly, that the word OPERA cannot be heard without remind ing us, not of a fingle uncompounded production, but an ag、 gregate of poetry, mufic, and decoration. He has not admitted, among the conftituent parts abfolutely effential to a mufical drama, Dancing, which many fpectators regard as the firft requifite: but ballets being feldom analogous or incorporated in the texture of a drama, he regards them in no other light than farces or intermezzi. In every other dramatic compofition, Poetry is the abfolute mistress and fovereign, to whom all things elfe are fubfervient; but in the Opera fhe is not the queen, but the companion of mufic and decoration, partaking of their fate, whether profperous or unfortunate. So that all fubjects of poetry, which do not contribute to pleafe the ear and eye, are banished from the Opera. But mufic being generally regarded as the moft effential part of this kind of drama, poetry must be fubordinate to its powers and effects. The union, therefore, of mufic with poetry, is the characteriftic difference between an opera and a tragedy or comedy; nor is the union fo abfurd as is often pretended, on account of the neceffity of heroes and heroines rejoicing, grieving, converfing, and reasoning, in fong. It is but transferring the fentiments of the poet from fpeech to melody, a more fweet and fonorous language. What the author fays concerning the neceffity of avoiding long difcuffions, moral fentences, or fubtil arguments, in mufical drama, is reasonable and convincing. The progress of the piece fhould be rapid; for if the poet becomes circumftantial, both the compofer and performer will find it extremely difficult to excite in the audience that degree of intereft and paffion which amounts to rapture; there fhould be an eafy and quick tranfition from one fituation to another, unincumbered with trivial circumftances; and an artificial combination of lively and pathetic fcenes, in which the few words that are used, want no other comment or illuftration than what is in the power of mufic to furnish. It is for declamation in tragedy to multiply words. and embellifh circumftances, and for the mufical dramatift to aim at precision in fentiments and rapidity of plot. Merope, in the French tragedy, makes a long and eloquent fpeech to Polyphontes, in calling for her fon; but Metaftafio makes a mother, in fimilar circumftances, explain herfelf in four lines: Rendi mi il Figlio mio, &c. * It is the painter's business to feize one interefting moment for the subject of an historical picture; and the poet and com When Mattei fung this air on our ftage, in the opera of Ciro riconozciuto, it had an effect which it would be difficult to produce by 400 lines of declamation. pofer pofer fhould be equally careful in selecting the precise point of time when an air is to be introduced in the scene of an opera. The frequent change of measure, fituation, and fentiment, in lyric poetry, is effential and neceffary to its genus. Mufic is the language of paffion, and the augmentation and refinement of the cries of nature, harmonized, and divefted of the harsher and more violent effects; adopting fuch only as penetrate the hearts without fhocking the ears of the audience. Playful and placid images, however, may likewife have admiffion in the lyrical complaints of lovers; fuch as in MetaRafio; Placido Zeffiretto Se trovi il caro oggetto, Gentle Zephir, if you fpy The charming object of my flame, Or in Quinaut's Ifis: Le Zephir fut temoin, l'onde fut attentive Gay Zephir was witnefs, attentive the ftream, When the fickle nymph fwore that her love ne'er should fade And have haften'd away with the vows which he made. and the horror and dread of Chi mai dell'Erebo, &c. in Orpheus, points out the numberless fhades of paffion, and endless variety at which mufical expreffion may aspire, without quitting its own limits and native powers. He fays that Song being the voice of paffion, whoever fings is in fome meafure out of his calm and natural fituation; as a man in a fudden tranfport is faid to be out of his mind or fenfes. So that mufical language can never be compared with common fpeech, unless with fuch as a man would ufe on extraordinary occafions. At least we may allow the lyrical language to be highly figurative, in order to exprefs and lead to thofe effufions of fentiment and paffion which uncommon fituations require. Indeed Metaftafio feems to have been the first and almoft the only lyric poet who has known the true and genuine bounds of mufical imitation and expreffion.' To this opinion, as lovers of mufic, we readily subscribe; and further, will venture to add, that the writings of that exquifite poet are so happily calculated to difplay the varied meafures and powers of vocal melody, that its fymmetry and refinement, during the prefent century, are perhaps more indebted to his verfification, than to the genius and labours of all the compofers who have made it the vehicle of their strains.. We have dwelt the longer on this part of the work before us, as it seems better executed than the reft, and more worthy the attention of our own lyric poets. The Ild chapter contains a hiftory and eloge of the Italian language; but the chief and beft part of what the Author fays in favour of its vocal properties, is copied from Rouffeau's Lettre fur la Musique Françoife, without once condescending to name him, though other mufical and philofophical critics are cited, fuch as D'Alembert, Buommattei, Bourdelot, Bettinelli, Eximeno, Gravina, and even Father Bobours, whofe weight in the difpute will not turn a ftraw. In Chap. III. he makes the fame furtive ufe of Dr. Burney's property, in fpeaking of Guido, John de Muris, and France, and of Father Menefrier's, in his account of the origin of mysteries and moralities. Chap. IV. he gives a fketch of the invention of fecular mufic, and the first application of mufic to modern languages, but feems. wholly unacquainted with the works of old mafters, or the periods when they flourished, of which his account is very innaccurate and confused. Chap. V. An account of the first attempts at dramatic mufic in Italy, compiled chiefly from learned men, ignorant of mufic; nor does he seem to know of what kind of mufic the firft operas confifted. In the VIth Chap. after filently tranfcribing Rouffeau's Reflexions on the Fondnefs, during the laft Century, for Ancient Mythology and the Marvellous, and the puerile Paffion of the Italians for Machinery, when the author has the courage to fay, tale fu A MIO GIUDIZIO, fuch was, in my opinion, the origin of the wonderful in mufical dramas,' he lofes all our esteem, and makes us unwilling to allow him the leaft merit of originality. If we had never read before what is contained in this work, we fhould have regarded it as one of the moft ingenious that mufic could boaft. Chap. VII. gives an account of the numerous attempts at the mufical drama in Italy, and feveral other parts of Europe, during the last century. Chap. VIII. The author returns to the machinery and marvellous of the operas that were occafionally reprefented in the feveral courts of Europe, in celebration of royal marriages, and orber |