In France the grand opera was expected to consist of five acts, with
elaborate ballets in the second and fourth, and to have neither spoken
dialogue nor bare recitative, but to be orchestrally accompanied throughout.
In this sense Weber's Euryanthe was a grand opera, though it
does not belong to the dramatic class here under consideration.
The exact point at which the historical type began cannot be
stated, since it became distinct only gradually. The peculiar
quality of Spontini's genius had much to do with its definition,
and Meyerbeer became ultimately its chief promoter.
From about 1825 it proved attractive to many writers, some of
whom did not pursue it except in one or two works.
Among the most noted examples by the opera-writers already named
are Masaniello by both Carafa (1827) and Auber (1828), Guillaume Tell
by Rossini (1829), Colombo by both Morlacchi (1828) and Carnicer
(1831), Anna Bolena by Donizetti (1830), Lucrezia Borgia by Donizetti
(1833), I Puritani by Bellini (1835), etc. Hérold's Zampa (1831) was a
striking example of a grand opera upon a fanciful subject.
This type of opera had great significance. For one thing,
it was really cosmopolitan, though the historical facts used
were apparently national, since its emphasis, even in the midst
of any amount of local color, was necessarily upon the broadly
human and heroic. It afforded scope for the musical expression
of the grander and more passionate dramatic sentiments,
with the coöperation of every device of stage-setting,
vocal utterance and instrumental depiction. In its appeal to the
imagination and the heart it was profoundly serious and valuable,
while at the same time it might be universally entertaining.
It had all the sincerity of the German romantic opera with
more reality in its materials and with a far greater chance for
tragic appeal. Its relation with literature was obvious; but
with a literature based upon facts rather than pure fancy. Yet
its genesis and its popularity arose not from a conscious intention
to use the musical drama didactically, but from a growing
recognition of the imaginative and symbolic aspect that all
history wears.
Gasparo Spontini (d. 1851) is as hard to classify absolutely as Cherubini.
Both were Italians (see sec. 175), but attained their artistic eminence under
German influence and in France. When Spontini first came to France in
1803 his style was not well received. But he at once made such careful
studies of Mozart and Gluck that his Milton (1804), though short, was felt to
