Naples, and from 1821 about 20 for Paris. The most popular were Le solitaire (1822) and Masaniello (1827), the latter competing with Auber's masterpiece. From 1827 he lived at Paris and from 1840 was on the Conservatoire staff. His style was hasty and unoriginal, but not unattractive.
As an exaggerated instance of the operas written in collaboration, which were frequent during this period, may be cited La Marquise de Brinvilliers (1831), prepared by no less than nine composers—Auber, Batton, Berton, Blangini, Boieldieu, Carafa, Cherubini, Hérold and Paër.
Here may be inserted a note upon two composers in Portugal and Spain, whose work was loosely connected with the movements here described:—
Marcos Antonio Portogallo (d. 1830) was born in 1762 at Lisbon. After study there and at Madrid, where he was accompanist at the Opéra, he went to Italy, speedily appearing as a composer. Il molinaro and L'astuto (both 1790) gave him renown and were followed by about 25 others in quick succession, among them Il Principe di Spazzacamino, Fernando in Messico (1797) and Il filosofo seducente (1798). From 1790 he had been court-choirmaster at Lisbon, which he visited at intervals, and from 1799 he became opera-director there, continuing to write both comic and serious works. In 1810 he followed the royal family to Rio de Janeiro, where he spent most of his later life. His operas numbered about 40, many of them widely known in Europe. He also wrote extensively for the church.
Ramon Carnicer (d. 1855) was a Catalonian, trained at Barcelona, where he produced his first opera (1818). After 1820 he appeared with success at Paris and London. From 1828 he was conductor at Madrid and from 1830 professor in the conservatory. He is called the founder of the 'zarzuela' or Spanish operetta. Of his 9 operas the best was Colombo (1831). He also composed freely in other forms.
178. The Historical Opera.—While the romantic opera in Germany and the opéra comique in France were thus winning their way to perfection and acceptance, the old and severer type of opera was not wholly laid aside. It is true that the classical type of Gluck, even as perpetuated and enriched by Cherubini, was losing its hold. But a new style was being evolved which preserved the large lines, the pathetic quality and the stateliness of detail, but applied them to topics that lay close to the deep national enthusiasms now everywhere awakening, and brought into the treatment every new resource of vocal and instrumental effect. This type may be called the 'historical,' if we emphasize the class of subjects in which it found its greatest power. Technically, it is better known as the French 'grand' opera, to distinguish it from all lighter types and locate it in the country that was its favorite habitat.
