Heidegger and the management of the Haymarket Opera, 1713-17

Early Music

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 65-84

  Milhous, Judith ^a   Hume, Robert D ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 60949707746     PISSN: 03061078     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/em/27.1.65     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. See K. Sasse, 'Opera register from 1712 to 1734 (Colman-Register)', Händel-Jahrbuch, v (1959), pp.199-223; quotation from p.202. This unique calendar-with-commentary (British Library Add. Ms. 11,258) is still nominally associated with Francis Colman, though entries written when Colman was out of England and after his death prove that he did not write it
2. O. E. Deutsch, Handel: a documentary biography (New York, 1955), p.53
3. See D. Burrows and R. D. Hume, 'George I, the Haymarket Opera Company and Handel's Water Music', Early music, xix (1991), pp.323-41
4. London, Public Record Office [henceforth PRO] E 112/976, no.48. Quotations otherwise unidentified are from this source. In our transcriptions some abbreviations are expanded, dates are expressed in numerals, and some missing periods have been silently added in the interest of clarity. Exchequer records have rarely been used by literary and musicological scholars, but by the mid-17th century virtually any case that could be brought in Chancery could equally well be filed in Exchequer. See J. Milhous and R. D. Hume, 'Eighteenth-century equity lawsuits in the Court of Exchequer as a source for historical research', Historical research lxx (1997), pp.231-46
5. PRO LC 7/2, f.1. For what little is known of Swiney's life, see P. H. Highfill, Jr., K. A. Burnim and E. A. Langhans, A biographical dictionary of actors, actresses, musicians, dancers, managers & other stage personnel in London, 1660-1800, 16 vols. (Carbondale, 1973-93), xiv, pp.348-55
6. For some 80 pages of documentation, see Vice Chamberlain Coke's theatrical papers, 1706-1715, ed. J. Milhous and R. D. Hume (Carbondale, 1982)
7. See PRO C7/668/31 (Swiney v. Wilks, et al., 12 Jan 1711), C8/621/30 (Wilks et al. v. Swiney, 10 Feb 1711), and related documents. For summaries, see J. Milhous and R. D. Hume, A register of English theatrical documents, 1660-1737, 2 vols. (Carbondale, 1991), nos.2120, 2123, 2173
8. Biographical dictionary of actors ..., vii, pp.233-41
9. Coke Papers, no.19 (contract with Littleton Ramondon)
10. New letters to the Tatler and the Spectator, ed. R. P. Bond (Austin, TX, 1959), pp.96-98
11. See J. Milhous and R. D. Hume, 'The Haymarket Opera in 1711', Early music, xvii (1989), pp.523-37
12. The new Grove dictionary of opera, ed. S. Sadie, 4 vols. (London, 1992), ii, pp.684-5
13. See The Spectator, ed. D. F. Bond, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1965), i, pp.35-37, 62n, and 132n, nos. 8, 14, and 31. No.14 includes a letter allegedly from 'the Undertaker of the Masquerade', whom Bond identifies in the note as Heidegger, with a reference to no.31. But that essay is about the efforts of a 'Projector' who is noted for 'the Extravagance of his Conceptions'. He reportedly hopes to drum up support for an opera that would unite 'all the remarkable Shows about Town' - puppets, dancing monkies, posture makers, and so on. At the end the Projector claims to have 'heard of a very extraordinary Genius for Musick that lives in Switzerland' - hardly famous for its musicians - a swipe at Heidegger, but masquerades are not mentioned in no.31 at all
14. See plate 24b in Surrey of London, xxix-xxx: The Parish of St. James Westminster, South of Piccadilly (London, 1960). The Survey reports that by 1719 Heidegger was 'in possession' of two houses south of the opera, which he used for overflow from masquerades (xxix, p.226), but offers no evidence to link him with those buildings as early as 1711
15. The London stage, 1660-1800, part 2: 1700-1729, ed. E. L. Avery, 2 vols. (Carbondale, 1960)
16. PRO C33/318, f.227 (see Document register, no.2123). For Swiney's testimony, see n.7 above
17. Folger Ms. W.b. 486, no.30
18. For signs of trouble, see Coke Papers, nos.106, 112
19. Coke Papers, no.74
20. Document Register, no.2203
21. Coke Papers, no.123
22. Coke Papers, no.122
23. PRO LC 7/3, f.129 (printed in the Coke Papers, pp.198-9). This order is dated 13 February 1713. Coke adds that because Valentini and Signora Pilotti have already received payments from Swiney, they are not to be paid more money until other performers have received equal proportions of their contracted salaries
24. Exactly what he meant by 'managing' the 'former opera' is not clear - perhaps that Heidegger handled the staging of Teseo
25. For complete figures, see J. Milhous and R. D. Hume, 'Opera salaries in eighteenth-century London', Journal of the American Musicological Society, xlvi (1993). pp.26-83, esp. p.31
26. See Coke Papers, no.62, and the 'Opera Account Book' discussed in n.47 below
27. On Swiney's later career, see E. Gibson, 'Owen Swiney and the Italian Opera in London', Musical times, cxxv (1984), pp.82-6
28. and The Royal Academy of Music, 1719-1728 (New York, 1989), esp. app. C
29. PRO LC 5/155, f.97v (17 April 1712)
30. Opera titles present intractable problems. After early 1710 the company performed in Italian but almost always advertised English titles. Consequently one cannot be both logical and consistent. Our choice has been to follow direct sources (which usually means English forms of titles) but to use the Italian titles post-1710 when not drawing directly on a source that employs the English version. On the attribution of the operas we have followed W. Dean and J. M. Knapp, Handel's operas, 1704-1726 (Oxford, 1987)
31. Account book now at the Borthwick Institute of Historical Research, University of York. Transcribed in K. Downes, Vanbrugh (London, 1977); quotation from p.180
32. A sign of Heidegger's tenuous position is that the order of the benefits was left 'by contract' to the decision of the Vice Chamberlain (Coke Papers, no.134). The terms this season are unknown
33. In fact, it may have freed him from dependence on theatrical writing. See G. Beeks, 'Handel and Queen Anne', Newsletter of the American Handel Society, x/3 (Dec 1995), pp.1, 6
34. PRO LC 7/2, f.9; Coke Papers, no.143
35. Burrows and Hume, 'George I, the Haymarket Opera Company and Handel's Water Music', table 1
36. The scene painters were already at work on Amadigi (25 May) during the period covered by the lawsuit. On 26 March the company advertised 'several new Scenes not seen yet, (design'd for a New Opera)'. Dean and Knapp (Handel's operas, p.287, n.13) point out that this was apparently Amadigi. Heidegger probably exposed the scenery to view in order to be able to charge Swiney with half the cost: his bill specifies 'The Scenes hitherto Shown', not 'The Scenes for Lucio Vero'
37. Coke Papers, no.146 (undated). The opera is not named, but from the persons mentioned the season must be 1714/15 and the total given (£811) proves that the opera at issue was not Lucio Vero (for which the total received on a four-night subscription was £539)
38. Downes, Vanbrugh, p.181
39. See R. D. Hume, 'The sponsorship of opera in London, 1704-1720', Modern philology, lxxxv (1988), pp.420-32
40. The longstanding view that Anne had no interest in culture is challenged in R. O. Bucholz, The Augustan court: Queen Anne and the decline of court culture (Stanford, 1993), esp. chap. 7. For her birthday in 1712 she ordered a concert by Nicolini and other opera singers (p.234)
41. Burrows and Hume, 'George I, the Haymarket Opera Company and Handel's Water Music', table 1. George I attended at least 22 of 40 or 42 performances in 1714/15; 17 of 29 in 1715/16; 13 or 14 of 25 while in town during 1716/17
42. This 'Opera Account Book' is 15M50/127 in the Essex Record Office (formerly in the Hampshire Record Office under the same number). It was described and summarized in S. Rosenfeld, 'An opera house account book', Theatre notebook, xvi (1962), pp.83-8
43. For an analysis of its implications, see J. Milhous, 'Opera finances in London, 1674-1738', Journal of the American Musicological Society, xxxvii (1984), pp.567-92, esp. pp.577-82
44. Dean and Knapp (Handel's operas) point out that Silla was written for the Haymarket company of 1712/13, and their analysis of roles and voices suggests that Heidegger could have mounted it in 1715/16 or 1716/17 (p.270). Possibly Heidegger shared their caustic view of the work ('the worst libretto Handel ever set ... Handel emerges from the enterprise with scarcely more credit than [the librettist] Rossi' - pp.263-64). They suggest the possibility of private performance in June 1713 (p.269)
45. See Milhous, 'Opera finances in London', pp.580-81
46. PRO LC 7/3, ff.46-7