While Beethoven contributed nothing essentially new to the opera, its chronicle is scarcely complete without ref erence to his " Fidelio " (a lonely bachelor's soliloquy on conjugal love), which was produced in Prague in 1805, for between Mozart and Wagner its greatness was unrivaled. Such was the nature of the genius of the " Mighty Ludwig " that he was hampered by the restrictions of the stage, but he nevertheless gave unwearying care to the work. Unfor tunately, his text was not of the caliber of " Don Juan," but frequently bourgeois and sentimental, but he brought to it the fulness of his powers, giving to it a deeper and more dramatic expression than any previous composer, and teach ing by it that perfection of musical form is not inconsistent with the achievement of the strongest dramatic effect. In spite of its Spanish background, " Fidelio " is thoroughly German. History repeats itself, and the public received this coldly, as it has many other great things. Weber, who man aged it, cried in disgust, "Bah! what they want is Punch and Judy!" Soon after this, romantic opera was crystallized into form in Weber's "Der Frieschfitz." It was a token of the same desire to return to nature after the long tyranny of the so-called classical that became apparent in literature at this time. In romantic opera, the people came into their own more thoroughly than ever before. It was founded on the folk-song which is the untrammelled expression of the popular heart. And just as heartily was it welcomed by the composer, for it was less restricted in form than the clas sical, which, since the days of Gluck, had held sway. Roman tic, as applied to opera, is a trifle elusive of definition. The works it describes are inspired by the medieval legends and tales of love and chivalry written in the old Romance dia lects and in consequence called romances. It is not neces sary that they shall deal with the supernatural, though sprites and witches, ghosts and mermaids, are as familiar figures of romance as they are of folk-lore. The text may speak of dashing knights and haughty ladies or deal with the common people. It is equally well at home in the depths of the sylvan vale and at the tournament. Weber, the most national of the German composers, knew the character of his people and embodied it in his music, and in " Der Freischfitz " he formulated a style which has been a model since his day. His use of the leitmotif fairly entitles him to the honor of its invention. Weber believed in the organic union of the various parts of the opera and excelled all his predecessors in the use of the orchestra as a means of dramatic charac terization. Among those who followed bravely in his foot steps were Louis Spohr (1784-1859) and Heinrich Marsch ner (1796-1861.) While Mozart, Beethoven and Weber were making his tory in Germany, we find no names to match theirs in Italy, the cradle of opera. In passing, credit must be given to Cimarosa (the worthiest of the composers between Scar latti and Rossini), who was equally at home in opera seria and opera buffa, his " Matrimonio Segreto " of the latter sort being a worthy monument to his genius. But the glory of earlier days had departed, and opera had gone far astray from the teachings of Gluck.
Another tyranny of the singer was at hand, and the amazing incongruities to which it gave rise have been the subject of many humorous descriptions. How it was haz ardous to speculate as to the relation of the characters upon the stage from any evidence furnished by their actions; how they frequently disregarded each other altogether and addressed themselves entirely to the audience; how the cho ruses were a thing apart and without significance, and the halls of Cmsar or the vales of Greece, whatever the scene might be, were but an elaborate setting for the skyrockets of the vocalist. Composition was profuse, it is true, but upon false artistic principles.
Out of all this chaos there came to pass a genius, Gioachino Rossini, who as time demonstrated, was without that indispensable attribute of genius, an infinite capacity for taking pains. It is difficult to imagine this debonair Ros sini in .the role of a reformer. He would doubtless have scouted the idea. He took things very much as he found them, content to minister to a taste diseased, but with what stimulation he infused the palsied forms! With what volup tuous beauty he hid their defects, with " just naked, ear delighting, delicious, meaningless sound," to quote Wagner, to whom to be meaningless was the worst sin in the calendar. He continued to overornament them like silly women, who would display all their jewels at once. But such jewels had never before been imagined. He did insist upon having his melodies sung as they were written, where as the Italian singers had considered it altogether proper to deck their arias with extemporized filigree work. Another of his innovations was recitative accompanied by a quartet of strings in place of 'cello and piano. To Rossini the bass singer may trace his emancipation, for until " Tancredi " he had not been granted as much as a place in the background.
The son of the town trumpeter was still young when he had become the " Swan of Pesaro," with nobles for his friends, Prince Metternich for an adviser, and all the rest of Europe at his feet. As a contemporary writes, " he had intoxicated the public." Beethoven had been forgotten for him. Schumann has tried to do his share toward making up to Beethoven for this temporary oblivion, and likens the two to an eagle and a butterfly. Alas for its permanency, the Rossinian school was based upon incorrect ideas. How ever, the world is still grateful for the masterpiece, " William Tell," in which are apparent few of Rossini's faults, while his " Barber of Seville " is an admirable piece of opera buffa, possibly the greatest ever written.
When the German critics accused him of corrupting musical art, he made the characteristic reply: " They wish that I composed like Haydn and Mozart. But if I took all the pains in the world, I should still be a wretched Haydn or Mozart. So I prefer to remain a Rossini. Whatever that may be, it is something, and, at least, I am not a bad Rossini." Although, for what reason no one has been able to conjecture, Rossini left the field at thirty-seven, to remain in obstinate retirement for more than half his life, his influ ence has added many pages to the chronicle of opera. His followers were Donizetti and Bellini, two of the strongest men of the period, who have had an enormous audience. They both were dowered with the power to touch the heart, more indeed than their master. Donizetti was arch and rather dramatic, and both were sweet, tender and senti mental. Especially is this true of Bellini. But the public grew satiated with sweetness, and tenderness, and senti mentality and discovered that under it was lacking a very desirable artistic vitality.
At this juncture, a German Jew named Giacomo Meyer beer moved from Italy to Paris in eager quest of ideas and set himself busily to the work of composition. But just previous to the appearance of the first of his works, Daniel Auber, one of the most popular of the comic opera writers, produced his " Masaniello " in 1830, and paved the way for the new epoch of grand opera. This work, " white-hot with the breath of the proletariat," was the first realistic drama in five acts to possess the attributes of a tragedy, which was especially disturbing to the Germans, who had always considered it proper to send people home in a com fortable frame of mind. " Masaniello " was in every respect more than casual and, among other things, inspired the uprising in Brussels which brought about the kingdom of Belgium.