Censorship Operas in Rome

7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome

1/34

Social Control and the Censorship of Giuseppe Verdi's Operas in Rome (1844-1859)Author(s): Andreas GigerSource: Cambridge Opera Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Nov., 1999), pp. 233-265Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/823611.

Accessed: 21/10/2014 11:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Cambridge

Opera Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/823611?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/823611?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup


2/34

Cambridge

pera

ournal,

11, 3,

233-266

?

1999

CambridgeUniversity

Press

Social control

and the

censorship

of

Giuseppe

Verdi's

operas

in Rome

(1844-1859)1

ANDREAS GIGER

In the

1840s

and

1850s,

four

operas

by

Giuseppe

Verdi

(I

dueFoscari,La

battaglia

di

Legnano,

I

trovatore,

nd Un

ballo

n

maschera)

remiered

at the

theaters

Argentina

and

Apollo

in Rome.

Two of

these works

(I

dueFoscari

and Un

ballo

n

maschera)

ad

been

rejected

at other theaters

because the

authorities

did

not

consider

them

concordant

with the

censorial

requirements,

and

none

of

the

four would

have been

permitted

in

Rome had

the

authorities

applied

the

usual criteria.

That

they

accepted

them

anyway suggests the process of censorship did not follow strict rules but was

handled

arbitrarily.

These

premieres

are

even

more

astonishing

when we

take into

account

that

Rome,

in

contrast to most

other

cities

on

the

peninsula,

had

very

rigorous

standards of

censorship.2

The

Vatican's concern

with

censorship

is

evident in an

1853 article

published

in

the

Jesuit

semimonthly journal

Civilta

Cattolica,

which

strongly

denounced contem-

porary

operatic

compositions

and

consistently

referred

to

works

by

Verdi

as bad

examples

of

taste

in

matters of

politics,

religion,

or

morality:3

Where

do we

find,

for

example,

a

pair

of

brothers like Carlo

and

Francesco

in I

masnadieri?

Where a

humor so

festive,

so

cruel,

so

amorous,

and

so

wicked as

depicted

in

[the

character

of]

Rigoletto,

on

some

stages

renamed

Viscardello?

Where do we

find a

woman's

dissimulation

continuing

for

such a

long

time,

such

deep

hate,

and

burning

desire

for

vengeance

as

appears

n

Azucena from I

trovatore?

he one who

invents

types

such as ...

de Silva

[in

Ernani]

[and]

the

Loredani

[in

I

due

Foscan]

certainly

did not

intend to

take his

models

from

Nature,

in

order to

present

them

in

an

embellishedand

perfectedway

to

public

contemplation.

[Rather]

he

narrated

dreams

of

sickness or the

deliriums

of a

wounded

mind.4

I

would ike

to thank

Philip

Gossett for his

helpful uggestions

n an

earlier

ersionof

this

article. wouldalso like to thank he Indiana

University

MusicologyDepartment

or a

travel

grant

allowing

me

to

conductresearch

n

the

Archiviodi

Statoand

the Archivio

Capitolino

in

Rome.

2

The

only

other

city

with

standards

omparable

o

those of

Romewas

Naples.

See David

R.

B.

Kimbell,

Verdin the

Ageof

ItalianRomanticism

Cambridge,

981),

23 and

26.

According

to

the

Eniclopedia

ello

pettacolo,

d. Silvio

d'Amicoet

al.,

9

vols.

(Rome,

1954-68),

s.v.

'Censura',

ensorship

was

particularly

igorous

during

he

reign

of

Pius

IX

(1846-78).

3

Although

he Civilta

Cattolica

as not the

official

papalnewspaper,

t

usually

ook the

role

of

defending

he state

against

political

nd

religious

ccusations.

Only

one

paper,

he

Giornalei

Roma,

ppeared aily,

but

it

contained

nly

announcements.ee

Raffaele

De

Cesare,

Roma

lo

stato

del

Papa

dal

ritornoi Pio IX

alXX

settembre,

vols.

(Rome,

1907),

I:

311-13.

4

'Dovetrovare, eresempio,unacoppiadi fratelli omeCarloe Francesco eiMasnadieri?

Dove un

umoresi

festoso,

si

crudele,

i

amoroso

e

si

scellerato

ome

e

depintoRigoletto

che

fu

poi

ribattezzato

u

qualche

cena

per

Viscardello? ove

dissimulazionei

donna

tanto a

lungo protratta,

dio tanto

profondo,

desiderio

anto

pungente

di

vendetta

quanto

appare

nell'

Azucenadel

Trovatore?

hi

imagino

tipi

...

dei

de

Silva,

dei

Loredani,

on

intendeva

erto di

prendere

suoi

modelli

dalla

natura,

d

abbelliti

perfezionati

orgerli

lia

comune

contemplazione.

arro

sogni

d'infermo,

delirii

di

menteoffesa.'

Del

teatro

italiano',

Civiltd

Cattolica,

(1853),

261.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/34

Andreas

Giger

The

Civilta Cattolica

complains

about

the

consistent

portrayal

of rulers as wicked

(citing

Rigoletto,

Macbeth,

I

trovatore,

masnadieri,

Al/ira,

and

I

lombardi)

and the

fact

that the

operas

instruct

listeners

how to commit crimes

cleverly,

even

placing

the

criminals in a good light (citing I masnadieri nd Rigoletto).5The journal draws three

conclusions

from the

character

of

such

operas:

(1)

society

needs

censorship

in

order

to

prevent

moral,

political,

and

religious

decadence;

(2)

the

promoters

of

evil, i.e.,

the authors

(not

necessarily

the

theaters

themselves),

have to be

banned;

and

(3)

audiences

should

stay away

from

such

pernicious

works.6

Even

Verdi,

who since the 1840s had

enjoyed

a

reputation

as the

greatest

Italian

opera composer,

faced the

rigors

of

censorship.

The effect of

his

operas

on

audiences

of

the time was

generally

not

diminished,

however,

because Verdi

usually

managed

to

maintain his essential dramatic

concept,

even with the

numerous

changes required by the censors. Nevertheless, it was exactly these fundamental

dramatic

concepts

to which the

Civilta

Cattolica

objected

because

they

were

incompatible

with the

ideology

defended

by

the censorial

system.7

Why,

then,

did

Rome

premiere

several

of

the most

important

Verdi

operas?

And how could the

Teatro

Apollo stage

the first

performance

of

Un

ballo

in

maschera,

which

had

been

completely

rejected by

the

Neapolitan

authorities? This article will

place

the reasons

in

a

broad

context,

introducing

new sources

concerning

the

censorship

of

Verdi's

operas.

We can

advance several

possible explanations

for

the

inconsistencies

of

Roman

censorship.

First,

opera

was an essential element of Italian culture, and its

outright

suppression

would have caused

protests

or

riots.

Second,

Verdi

was the

most

famous Italian

composer

and

opera

houses

eagerly sought

to

premiere

his

works.

Third,

most

government

officials themselves loved to

attend

operatic

performances

and did not want to be

deprived

of

their

most

important

cultural

pleasure.

In

addition,

censorship

itself

was

inconsistently

regulated:

on the one

hand,

the

censors

enjoyed

considerable

freedom;

on the

other,

their

arbitrary

decisions were influ-

enced

by

higher

officials.

Finally,

the

opera

house served as

a

meeting

place

where

the

authorities could observe

intellectual

circles

in

a

carefully

controlled

environ-

ment:

the

seating arrangement,

which reflected the

hierarchical social

order

from

aristocracy

to middle

class,

effectively

worked

toward a mental

consolidation of the

status

quo,

thus

serving

as a

powerful political

tool

in

the

hands of

any

government.

John

Rosselli

first

suggested

such a

function,

but

without

analyzing

this

process

and

without

explaining

how a

famous

composer

such as

Verdi

contributed

to

this

5

Ibid.,

266-9.

6

Ibid.,276-7.

7

For

a document with

guidelines

for the

censorial

system,

see,

for

example, Luigi

Vannicelli,

'Osservazioni sulla revisione

delle

produzioni

teatrali

(1842)',

published

in

Elvira

Grantaliano,

'La

censura nella Roma

pontificia

dell'ottocento:

Tipologie

ed

esempi',

in La

musica

a

Roma attraverso

lefonti

d'archivio:Atti

del

convegno

nternationale

Roma

4-7

giugno

1992,

ed.

Bianca Maria

Antolini,

Arnaldo

Morelli,

and

Vera Vita

Spagnuolo

(Lucca,

1994),

287-97,

331-3.

Alessandra

Campana

will

publish

a

study

of

this document

in

a

forthcoming

issue

of

the Verdi

Newsletter.

234



4/34

Social control and the

censorship

of Verdi's

operas

in Rome

system.8

I will show that in

nineteenth-century Italy,

the

opera

house

emerged

as

the

link

between

famous

composers

such as

Verdi,

who

guaranteed

that

citizens

attended

operas,

and

the

government,

which used the institution of

opera

as

an

effective tool to consolidate the social hierarchy. Of particularrelevance here are (1)

the different kinds of

pressure

put

on

the

government

and its censorial

system by

Roman

opera

audiences,

who demanded

frequent performances

of

high

quality,

and

by

the

reputation

of a

composer

such

as

Verdi,

whose

works

were

needed to

satisfy

that

audience;

(2)

the

flexibility

of the

censorship

system

in

general;

and

(3)

censorial

leniency

with

respect

to Verdi's

operas.

Roman

society,

opera

audiences,

and

Verdi's

popularity

Roman

history

between

the

liberation of

Pope

Pius VII

(1800-23)

from

Napoleonic

captivity

in

1814

and the Italian

unification

in

1859 can

be

characterized

as

tending

toward

greater

control of the

government

over all

aspects

of life.9

Towards the

end of

this

period Pope

Pius

IX

(1846-78)

finally

seemed to

give

in

to

some liberal

tendencies. The Statuto

fondamentale,

he new

constitution

of

1848,

promised

some

power

to the

rich

laity,

but in

reality

it

secured

full

ecclesiastic

control.10

Nevertheless,

during

the 1848

revolution,

Pius

lost

political

control and

fled to

Gaeta

on

24

November.

On

9

February

1849,

the

revolutionaries

proclaimed

the Roman

Republic,

but it lasted

only

until 4

July

when the French

helped

the

Pope

reconquer

the

city.

Pius did not

immediately

return to

Rome but left

the

restoration

of

order

to

three

conservative

cardinals,

who

proceeded

so

rigorously

that the

population

nicknamed them

'triumvirato

rosso'.

Upon

his return

on 12

April

1850,

the

Pope

embarked on a

very

conservative

course,

abolishing

the

Statuto

fondamentale

and

extending

artistic

censorship,

which hitherto

had concen-

trated

on

religious

and moral

issues,

to

political

matters.

Thus,

the

Papal

States

entered a

state of

'pre-agony'

in

which the

population

was

interested

mainly

in

entertainment.

1

Roman

society

of the time can be described as

consisting

of ecclesiastic and

lay

pillars,

each

comprised

of three

levels.

At

the

top

were the

College

of

Cardinals and

8 John

Rosselli,

The

Opera

ndustry

n

Italy

rom

Cimarosao

Verdi:TheRole

of

theImpresario

(Cambridge,

1984),

40.

The

following

sources

provide

a historical

background

of

Roman

history

for the

period

under

consideration:

Luigi

Pompili

Olivieri,

II

senato

omano

elle ette

epoche

i svariato

governo

da Romolo

fino

a noicolla erie

cronologica-ragionata

ei senatori ell'anno 1143

fino

al

1870,

3 vols.

(Rome,

1886);

Alfred von

Reumont,

Geschichteer

Stadt

Rom,

vol.

3,

part

2

(Berlin,

1870);

Giuliano

Friz,

Consumi,

enore i vita e

prezi

a Roma

dal 1770 al

1900

(Rome,

1980);

Raffaele

De

Cesare,

The

Last

Days

of

Papal

Rome,

1850-1870,

abridged

with the

assistance of

the

author

and

translated

by

Helen

Zimmern

(London,

1909);

and Mario

Caravale,

Lo

Stato

pontificio

a Martino

V a Pio IX

(Turin,

1978).

See Pius

IX,

Lo

Statuto

fondamentaleelgoverno

egli

tati di S. Chiesa

Rome,

1848).

11

Friz,

Consumi

see

n.

9),

211

and

216.

235



5/34

Andreas

Giger

the

aristocracy

respectively,

followed

by

the

prelacy

and

the

citizens

(la

borghesia),

with the third

social stratum

for

the inferior

clergy

and 'the

people'.

The

ecclesiastic

pillar

was considered

superior

to the

lay

at

all

levels.l2

Although

the two sides

as

wholes had little interaction, the corresponding levels on each side remained in close

contact. Cardinals

frequently

honored

noble

families with their

presence

at social

events,

whereas

they

would have no

direct contact

with the rich

bourgeoisie.13

Where

the

aristocracy

was

concerned,

the

church tried to

maintain

ideological

control. Private

tutors,

usually

descendants of

Popes

and

cardinals,

often

instructed

noble

youths,

who

accordingly

had little

interest

in

the

liberal movement that led to

the 1848 revolution.14

Dependent

on a

politically

apathetic nobility,

the

Pope

could

not

very

well

deprive

this

important

social

group

of

opera,

its most

important

entertainment.

Various forms of theatrical entertainment existed in Rome during this period: the

lowest forms included

equestrian spectacles,

acrobats,

and

performing

monkeys;

the

mid-level ones

consisted of

spoken

plays;

and the

most

prestigious

forms included

the

various forms

of

opera,

which

belonged

mainly

to

the

upper

classes.15

Opera

eria

was

performed

in

the

two most

prestigious

Roman

theaters,

the

Teatro

Apollo

and

the Teatro

Argentina,

with the

government

assuring

the

aristocracy

and

diplomatic

corps

of

the

best

seats.16 Members of

the

upper

classes

occasionally

attended

12

De

Cesare,

The

Last

Days

of

Papal

Rome

(see

n.

9),

85. Prelates are

ecclesiastical

dignitaries

who

can

occupy

various ranks between

the cardinaland

the

priest.

The

prelacy governed

the

temporal

aspects

of

church and state. See

RaffaeleDe

Cesare,

Romae lo

Statodel

Papa,

2

vols.

(Rome, 1907),

I:

102-5;

and

Rosselli,

Opera

ndustry

n. 8),

45. The

account of the

lay

hierarchy

as

reported by

the French

ambassador

n

Rome,

the Count of

Harcourt,

matches

De

Cesare's

description.

See

Friz,

Consumi

n. 9),

217.

Leopold

G.

Glueckert

(Between

Two

Amnesties: ormerPolitical

Prisoners

nd Exiles in

the Roman

Revolution

f

1848

[New

York,

1991], 3)

subdivides the

society

of

the

Papal

States

(not

just

of the

city

of

Rome)

according

to

profession:

Clergy (all levels) 2%

Nobility

and untitled

landowners

10.2%

Professionals

(doctors,

magistrates, eachers)

1.8%

Commercial

people

4.5%

Artisans,

tradesmen,

and

skilled workers

13.0%

Servants,

unskilled

workers,

and

unemployed

16.2%

Peasant-owners,

sharecroppers,

and tenants

50.0%

Soldiers

1.0%

Students

1.3%

Of the

lay

pillar,

the

'untitled

landowners'

(mercanti

i

campagna)

ade

up

the

only

group

of

the

borghesia

hat could

become

rich. The

'people',

from

the

artisans

downward,

and even

some

members of the

lower

borghesia,

epended

to various

degrees

on

charity.

13

De Cesare, TheLastDays of PapalRome(see n. 9), 85.

14

Calls

for

liberal

reforms came

mainly

from the

middle

class,

which

according

to

the French

ambassador n

Rome,

the

Count of

Harcourt,

was

influenced

by 'dangerous

foreign

elements'.

See the

report

of the

Count of

Harcourt to his

government,

quoted

in

Friz,

Consumi

see

n.

9),

217.

As we will

see in the

last

part

of

this

study,

the

government

had

a

great

interest in

having

the middle

class

represented

in

the

opera

house as well.

15 RosseUi,

Opera

ndustry

see

n.

8),

40.

16

For detailed

information

on this

process,

see

'Controlling

the audience'

below.

236



6/34


censorship

of Verdi's

operas

in Rome

productions

at second-rank

theaters for

amusement,

but

night

after

night,

they

went

to the

opera.

The

opening

of

the Teatro

Apollo

for the Carnival season

(26

December

through

Shrove Tuesday) was the most important social event of the year.17 During

Carnival,

the

government

required performances

on

every

day

except

Fridays.18

In

spite

of the

Jesuits'

condemnation

of

opera's

moral,

religious

and

political

decadence,

the

impresario's

contract with the

city

of Rome

required

a

minimum

number of

performances

per

season.

If

an

impresario

did not meet the

minimum,

he had

to lower

the

ticket

prices,

and his theater would receive a

smaller

subsidy.

If it

was his

negligence

that caused the reduction

of

the

performances,

he had to

pay

a

fine.19

Every

season,

the contract

also called for at

least one

opera

by

a

major

composer

newly

written

specifically

for

a

theater

in

Rome. These circumstances put Verdi in a powerful negotiating position. By the end

of the

1840s,

he had achieved a

reputation

that

allowed

him

to choose the theater

for which he

would write a new work. And with

Bellini

and Donizetti

dead,

Rossini

no

longer writing

operas,

and Mercadante

past

his

peak,

Verdi

no

longer

had

any

serious

competition

in

Italy.20

In

addition,

taking

into account both the

large

number

of

opera

houses

in

Italy

in

the nineteenth

century

-

Rome alone had two

first-rate

opera

houses

-

and Verdi's transcendent

popularity,

we can

imagine

the

impresarios'

efforts

in

convincing

Verdi to

choose their theaters

for

first

performances.

In a

position

to

ignore

offers of the Teatro alla Scala in

Milan,

one of the most

reputable

houses,

to

premiere

his

operas,

as he did

between

1845

and

1869,

Verdi

could

also

influence terms

in

the contracts

with

his

publisher

Ricordi.

Publication

17

De

Cesare,

Roma

lo

Stato el

Papa see

n.

12),

301. The

Carnival as

of enormous

importance

or the

Roman

population.

Even

during

imesof

political

unrest,

he

government uaranteed

he

celebration

n

order

not to

irritate he inhabitants

ven

more.

See Friz, Consumi(n. 9), 211.

18

'Prodotto he

sia lo

spettacolo

dovra

proseguire

ompleto,

senza

alcuna

nterruzione

ino

al

termine

di

Carnevale,

sclusi

soltanto

venerdi,

gli

altri

giorni

nei

quali

n Romasono

vietate

e

rappresentenze

eatrali.'

Once

he

work

s

produced,

t must

proceedcomplete

and without

any nterruption

ntil

the end of the

Carnival,

ith the

exception

of

Fridays

and the other

days

during

which n

Rome

theatrical

epresentations

re

forbidden.]

'Capitolato

iguardante

'appalto rivativo

elle

opere

seriee deiballidi Romanelle

stagioni

di Carnevale elle

opere

n

musicadadarsisenza

privativa

elle

stagioni

di

primavera

d

autunno

1853-56]',

Rome,

Archiviodi

Stato,

Direzione

generale

i

polizia,

ordine

pubblico,

busta

33,

no. 884.

19

'Capitolato1856]per

l'appalto

e' teatri

regj

di Roma

[Specification

f the Contract

Concerning

he

Royal

Theaters

n

Rome

(between

he

City

of Romeand the

Impresario)]',

reprintedn Tirincanti,

/

Teatrorgentina

Rome,

1971),following230.

20

Paragraph

of

the

'Capitolato',

eprinted

n

Tirincanti,

rgentina,

ollowing

30.

This

contract

dates from

1856,

but contracts f the sametitleexisted

or

the

completeperiod

n

consideration ere.See

Alberto

Cametti,

1

Teatroi

Tordinona

oi

di

Apollo,

vols.

(Tivoli,

1938),

I:

248,

251, 254,

and

257.

The Teatro

San

Carlon

Naplesspecified

Verdi,

Saverio

Mercadante,

nd GiovanniPacini

as

maestriprimari.

ee

'II

maestroVerdie la

impresa

del

teatroS.

Carlo'.

Rome,

Archiviodi

Stato,

Miscellanea

arte

politiche

riservate,

usta

140,

fasc.

5111,

no.

1582.

237



7/34

Andreas

Giger

was

an

important

matter because after the

premiere

of an

opera,

the

composer

normally

lost

control over its

performances, especially

with

regard

to

censorship.21

In

order to

discourage

censorial

distortions

in

subsequent performances,

Verdi

specified an additional paragraph in the contract for La battaglia di Legnano,

prohibiting

even the

smallest

changes

in

the

score;

for

every performance

at

any

theater in

which the

censors

required changes,

Ricordi

would have to

pay

Verdi

a

fine of

1,000

francs.22

The

history

of the

theaters

Apollo

and

Argentina gives ample

evidence of

the

struggle

for

compositions by

renowned

masters.

In

order to

reduce such

compe-

tition,

the

impresario

Vincenzo

Jacovacci

controlled as

many

as three Roman

opera

houses

(the

Apollo,

Argentina,

and

Valle)

by

1846.

Although

this

accumulation of

positions

did not

eliminate

competition

altogether,

it

at least

allowed

him to

reduce

expenses by sharing productions among the institutions.23

Impresarios

were also

under

pressure

from

the

audience,

for

if

it

did

not

like the

performance

or the

piece,

it

expressed

its

dissatisfaction,

and

such

manifestations

could

escalate

into

violence.24

When,

for

example,

the

Neapolitan

censors

required

drastic

changes

in

Verdi's

Un ballo in

maschera,

he

composer

withdrew the

piece.

After

the

opera

disappeared

from

the

announced

schedule,

the

public

began

to

protest.

The

government

intervened,

urging

a

review of the

agreements

between

theater and

composer,

but

Verdi

remained firm.25

As a

consequence,

the

theater

involved

him

in a

lawsuit,

referring

to

the 'horror

of an

awful libretto'

(1'

orrore

del

pessimo libretto').26 The court conceded that the numerous censorial emendations

might negatively

affect the

music,

and

the

composer

was released from

the

contract,

providing

he

returned

with Simon

Boccanegrafirst

performed

1857

in

Venice)

in

the

fall.

Censorship

notwithstanding,

the

government

never

considered

closing

an

opera

house

in

order

to

protect

its

audiences from the

decadence of

operatic

plots;27

opera

was too

essential

to

those social

segments upon

which

the

government

relied.

The

expectations

of the

opera

audience and the

meaning

of

opera

to the

culture

enabled

a

composer

such

as Verdi to

put pressure

on the

censorial

system.

21

Luke

Jensen,

Giuseppe

Verdi

&

Giovanni

RicordiwithNotes on

Francesco

ucca:From

'Oberto'o

'La traviata'

(New

York,

1989),

182.

22

Paragraph

8 of the

contract

concerning

La

battaglia

i

Legnano.

Gaetano

Cesari and

Alessandro

Luzio,

eds.,

I

Copialettere

i

Giuseppe

Verdi

Milan,

1913;

repr., Bologna, 1963),

39.

23

Cametti,

Tordinona

(see

n.

20),

I: 251.

24

Rosselli,

Opera

ndustry

see

n.

8),

87.

25

Franco

Abbiati,

'Gli

Anni del

Ballo

n

maschera',

erdi,

1

(1960),

15.

26

Ibid.,

16.

27

The

closing

of the

Teatro

Apollo

in

1849

resulted from

a

shortage

of

money

and

staff,

as

well as

'French

hostilities'

during

this

revolutionary

period,

not from a

papal

decree.

See

Cametti,

Tordinona

n. 20),

I:

256.

238



8/34

Social

control and the

censorship

of

Verdi's

operas

in Rome

The

organization

of the Roman

censura

Censorship

has

usually

been treated

as

a black

box,28

the

content

of which

has

only

recently received some attention.29 The documents reveal that the organization of

this

system

was neither

simple

nor clear. Under

normal

circumstances,

censorship

functioned on

two levels.

First,

the censors

examined

the

scenario,

the

libretto,

costumes,

and

staging, largely disregarding

the

music,

which did not

seem

to

have

much

potential

to harm the

people.30

Then,

representatives

of the

government

frequented

the

theaters and checked

whether the artists followed the directions of

the censors and other

authorities. This

controlling

body

consisted

of

a hetero-

geneous

group

of

people

with

very

different

degrees

of

power.

On

the

political

side,

the director of the

police

headed the

so-called

Deputation

of

Public

Performances

(deputazionedeipubblicispettacoli)and oversaw various other police officials

respon-

sible

for

matters of

security;

on

the

ecclesiastic side these

duties

belonged

to the

domains of

the

luogotenente

el tribunale

criminale

(a

lawyer)

and the

ecclesiastical

censor,

both

representing

the Cardinal Vicar

(see

Tables

1

and

2).

The

division of

spheres

of influence

was

not

always

clear and

occasionally

led to

disputes.31

The

tendency

toward

decentralization and

greater

participation

of the

municipal-

ity

initiated

by

Pius IX's

assumption

of

power

led to a

reorganization

of the

Deputation

in

1847.

Its

members were elected

from within the

Communal

Council

with

the

mayor

(senatore)

as their

chair.32This

emphasis

on

the

municipality

gave

the

illusion of balance with the ecclesiastical

side,

thereby

diverting

audience

hostility

from

the

Pope

and

his

cardinals without

significantly reducing

their

control.33 The

28

The

term

'black box' is used

by

cyberneticians

to

denote

a

system

of

processes

too

complex

to be

understood,

usually

indicated in

diagrams

by

a

simple

box,

of

which

only

the

input

and

output

are considered. Bruno

Latour,

Science n

Action:

How to Follow Scientists

and

Engineers

through

Society

Cambridge,

Mass.,

1987),

2-3.

29

The

short articles

covering

some

of

the

organization

and

function of Roman

censorship

include

Maria

Calzolari,

'La

censura nella Roma

pontificia

dell'ottocento:

il

ruolo

predominante della Direzione Generale di Polizia', in La musica a Roma attraversoefonti d'

archivio

(see

n.

7),

287-97;

Renata

Cataldi,

'La censura

sugli

spettacoli

nella Roma

pontificia

dell'ottocento: Le

licenze del cardinal

vicario',

in

ibid.,

299-320;

Paola Pavan and Michele

Franceschini,

'La

deputazione

dei

pubblici spettacoli

e il

suo

archivio',

Architettura

storica

e

documenti,

(1986),

97-100;

and

Angela

Montano,

'Introduzione

[to

the

catalog

of the

documents

in

Rome,

Archivio

Capitolino,

titolo 15

(1848-1870)]'

(typescript,

1997).

Luigia

Rivelli's

study

'G.

Gioacchino Belli

"censore" e il

suo

spirito

liberale',

Rassegna

storica del

Risorgimento

1923),

318-93,

did not

approach

the

topic systematically

and includes mistakes.

Other

studies,

such

as Rosselli

(Opera

Industry

[see

n.

8])

and Di

Stefano

(La

censura

eatrale

in

Italia

1600-1962

[Bologna, 1964]) only

refer

to isolated

aspects

of the Roman

system.

30

Philip

Gossett,

'Becoming

a Citizen: The

Chorus

in

Risorgimento

Opera',

this

journal,

2

(1990),

46-7

discusses this

curiosity,

referring

to an

instance

in

Rossini's L'

Italiana in

Algeri

where

an obvious occurrence of the Marseillaiseeither

escaped

the censors or did not bother them.

31

See Antonio

Somai's letter

to his successor

Antonio

Ruggieri

(quoted

in

Cataldi,

'La

censura'

(n.

29), 308),

in

which

he reminds him of

his

rights

vis-a-visthe

luogotenente.

32

The

Communal Council

was

appointed by

the

Pope.

The

members elected

the nine

conservatori

ho made

up

the

magistratura

omana

(i.e.,

the Roman

Senate).

From the

first

three

elected,

the

Pope

chose the senatore.

Pompili

Olivieri,

II

senato

romano

(see

n.

9),

II:

56-62.

33

See

Rivelli,

'Belli'

(n. 29),

337.

239



9/34

Table 1. Political

censorship

in

Rome

before the

Reform of October

1847*

Direttore

generale

di

polizia

and

Governatore

di

Romat

Deputazione

dei

pubblici

spettacoli

6

Deputies

('cavalieri'

appointed

by

the

Segreteria

di

Stato)

1.

Accounting

2.

Machines,

3.

Ballet,

with

(contabilita

e

illumination,

corresponding

cassa)

security,

and

attributions in

cleanliness of terms of cos-

the

theaters,

tumes,

decora-

especially

the

tons,

and

stage

political censor-

ship

Personne

4.

Operas,

with

corresponding

attributions

5.

Spoken

theaterand

sign-

ing

of the mani-

festos

6.

Supervision

of

the archive

Legal

co

Secretar

Archivist

Employe

3 Doctor

3

Surgeo

Architect

2 Censor

Painter f

Notary

*Based on

Rome,

Archivio

Capitolino, Deputazione

dei

pubblici spettacoli,

busta

6,

no.

XXVII/211;

Pavan and

Franceschini,

'La

d

Montano, 'Introduzione',

4n.

tPro-governatore

ince the

appointment

of

Giuseppe

Morandi on 19

July

1847.



10/34


censorship

of Verdi's

operas

in Rome

241

Table 2. Ecclesiastic

censorship*

CardinalVicario

represented

by:

Luogotenente

del tribunale

riminale

a

lawyer)

Deputato

revisore

ecclesiastico

Functions are

mainly

administrative:

Functions

mainly

concern

censorship (revisione):

(1)

Authorization or

public performances licenZa)

(1)

Preventive

censorship

of

all

aspects

of

performances

in terms of

time and

place

(2)

Enforcementof the

'Regolamento'

(2)

Ordering

arrests

and

imprisonments

(3)

Attending

dress

rehearsals

o

censor

aspects

other than

printed

exts

*Basedon

Cataldi,

La

censura',

301-3.

reorganization

led to

considerable

confusion as to

who controlled the

Deputation.

With the

papal

motu

proprio

of

12

June

1847,

the

governatore

i

Roma,

who

also

functioned

as

president

of the

Deputation,

lost his

judiciary

powers

while

retaining

control

over the

capital's

government

and the

police

of

the entire

state,

now

under

the

designation

pro-governatore.

n 29

December,

Domenico

Savelli,

who had

held

the office since

13

November,

became

minister of the

police,

losing

both title and

position

ofpro-governatore.34

he

Pope

transferred control

over Rome to the

presidente

di Roma

e

Comarca,

appointing

Cardinal Ludovico

Altieri.

Although

this

change

was

supposed

to be

complete

by

31

October,

it

remains unclear

when

exactly

the

pro-governatore

elinquished

the

presidency

of the

Deputation;35

the

papers

were not

actually

moved to their

new location on

the

Campidoglio

until 24

January

1848,36

and the

duties of the

various authorities were

poorly

delineated.

Only

in

1850 did

a

regolamento

larify

the

respective

competencies

of the

presidente

and the senatore:

control over the

police

and thus

law

and

order

in

the

opera

house

fell into the

hands

of the

presidente,

.e.,

once

again

a

prelate

(see

Table

3).37

Both before and

after the

reorganization,

Rome's

censorship

was

preventive,

which meant

that librettos

had to be

approved prior

to

performance.

The

composer

or

librettist

sent

copies

of the

programma

prose

outline)

and the

libretto

(usually

through

the

impresario)

to

the

president

of the

Deputation,

who then

normally

transferred them

first to the

ecclesiastic

censor and

then to a

political

one,

both of

whom

made

appropriate

emendations.38 After

the final

decision,

the

president

returned the

documents to the

impresario,

who

either

handed them

back to the

34

Nicolo

del

Re,

Monsignorgovernatore

i Roma

(Rome, 1972),

57.

Nevertheless,

Savelli

kept

using

the

tite

pro-governatore.

35

See

Pompili

Olivieri,

I

senato

romano

(n.

9),

II: 45.

36

Calzolari,

'La

censura'

(see

n.

29),

292.

37

See the

'Progetto

di

regolamento

da

osservarsi nella

citta di Roma

per gli

spettacoli,

rappresentanze

e

giuochi compilato

con

superiore

autorizzazione

dagli

incaricati

dell'Autorita

Ecclesiastica,

Governativa e

Municipale',

Rome,

Archivio

di

Stato,

Ministero

dell'Interno,

busta

1025,

no. 18980.

38

Rivelli,

'Belli'

(see

n.

29),

383-7.



11/34

Table 3. Political censorship since 1848*

Control over Public

Performances

Before

16

January

1855 After 1

Presidente

di Roma

e Comarca

(law

and

order)t

President:

Direttore

Gen

President:

Senatore

di Roma

(administration)

Vice-President:

Conservatore del

Deputazione

dei

pubblici

spettacoli

9

Deputies

(Communal Councilors)

One

deputy

in

turn

presides

as

'Inspection

Deputy

for

the

Evening'

over

each

performance

in

the first order

5

Special

Deputies

elected

from within

the

Deputation (according

to the

regolamento

f

1856)

1.

Deputy

for

proper

be- 2.

Deputy

for the

ballets

3.

Deputy

for the

operas

4.

Deputy

for

the

spoken

5.

Deputy

fo

havior on

stage,

illumina-

theater

tion,

and

safety

and

cleanliness

of

the theaters

*This excludes the

period

of

the short-lived

Roman

republic

(24

November 1848-4

July

1849)

and

the

period

of the commissione

spe

The information contained

in the

table

is

based on

Montano,

'Introduzione',

and the

'Regolamento

sulla

parte

d'ordine e di esecuzio

[6

December

1856]',

Rome,

Archivio

di

Stato,

Direzione

generale

di

polizia,

ordine

pubblico,

busta

33,

no. 80662.

tThe

competencies

of the various authorities

(presidente,

enatore,

nd even the director of the

police)

were not

always clearly distingui

dell'interno, teatri e spettacoli, busta 1025, fols. 155 and 167. See also Montano, 'Introduzione', 8-10.



12/34

Social

control

and

the

censorship

of Verdi's

operas

in

Rome

Table

4.

Stamps

in

Verdi's

librettos

printed

in Rome 1850-6

Opera

Date

Stamps

[with

date of

publ.]

[stamps]

Ecclesiastic

Political

Municipal

Guglielmo

ellingrode

[Stiffelio];

ome:

Puccinelli,

1851)

1850-1

Ruggieri

Doria

Viscardello

Rome:

Olivieri,

1851]

1851

Ruggieri

Macbeth

Rome:

Menicanti,

n.d.]

1852

Ruggieri

ll

trovatore

Rome:

Olivieri,

1853]

No dates

Ruggieri

Doria

Pulieri

Violetta

Rome:

Olivieri,

1854]

No dates

Ruggieri

Doria Cardelli

Giovannae

Gugman

Rome:

Olivieri,

1856]

1856

Ruggieri

Doria Cardelli

librettist or composer for revisions or submitted them for examination to the

printing

censorship.39

Rome

employed

three

censors,

one

ecclesiastic

(controlling

aspects

of

religion,

good

customs,

and

public

morals),

one

political (controlling

aspects

of

politics

and

proper

respect

toward other

people

and the

laws),

and

one

representing

the

Deputation.

All

of them

in

theory

had to

approve

the

texts

and confirm the

approval

with a

stamp

(visto),

but

in

practice

the

three censors

had

very

different

weight.

The

ecclesiastic and

political

representatives occupied

much

higher

posi-

tions than

the

representative

of the

Deputation,

who

remained

very

much

in

the

background. Questions about the number and precise function of the various

Roman

censors

have

repeatedly

led to

misleading

explanations.

Several sources

mention that

by

1851,

Rome

employed

a third

censor,

municipal

or

communal,

who

controlled

'philological

and artistic'

aspects

of the

performances.'40

It

seems,

however,

that this

third

censor was

none other

than

a

representative

of

the

Deputation

whose

stamp

had

already

appeared

on

librettos

predating

the

period

of

reforms,

for

example,

the

manuscript

libretto

of

Filippo

Meucci's

Gusmano

di

Medina

(1846)

and the

original printed

libretto

of Verdi's

I

due Foscari

(1844).41 Only

the

affiliation

of this third censor

had

changed,

however: before the reforms he had

to

respond to the Segreteria di Stato, after the reforms to the municipality.42

The attributes

'philological

and

artistic'

for

the

municipal

censor

perfectly

reflect

the

vagueness

of his

function,

and some

documents

even

neglect

to

mention

him,

39

Calzolari,

'La

censura'

(see

n.

29),

296n. For a short discussion

of the

printing

censorship,

see

ibid.,

291-2.

40

'.

. .

ci6

che si riferisce

alla

parte

filologica

ed

artistica

degli

spettacoli.'

See,

for

example,

Calzolari,

'La

censura',

294;

and

Rivelli, 'Belli',

331

(both

n.

29).

For

a

short

description

of the

three

levels

of

censorship,

see Art. 17

of the

'Regolamento

da

osservarsi nella

citta di Roma

per

gli spettacoli,

rappresentanze

e

giuochi

compilato dagli

incaricati dall'autorita

ecclesiastica,

governativa e

comunale',

Rome,

Archivio

Capitolino,

titolo

15,

busta

14,

fasc. 3

(1851).

41

Manoscritto del dramma lirico

Gusmano

di

Medina di

Filippo

Meucci

(1846)',

Rome,

Archivio

Capitolino,

Pubblici

spettacoli,

busta

7,

no.

XXXI/309;

and

Francesco

Maria

Piave,

I

due

Foscari,

Tragedia

irica

osta

in

musica

al

Maestro

Giuseppe

Verdi

el

teatro

di

Torre

rgentina

l'autunno

del 1844

(Rome,

[1844]),

38. The

responsible deputy

was in both cases L.

Duca

Bonelli.

42

See

Rome,

Archivio

di

Stato,

Ministero

del

interno,

titolo

152,

busta

1025,

fol.

155;

and

par.

4

of

the

'Regolamento

da osservarsi

nella citta di

Roma

per gli

spettacoli',

Rome,

Archivio

Storico

Capitolino,

titolo

15,

busta

14,

fasc.

3

(1851).

243



13/34

Andreas

Giger

thus

hinting

at his irrelevance.43

Furthermore,

Verdi's librettos

printed

in

Rome

during

the

years

following

the Roman

Republic occasionally

lack

the

stamp

of

the

municipal

censor

and,

surprisingly,

sometimes even that

of

the

political

one.44

(See

Table 4.)

Not

only

missing

stamps

of

approval

but also

instances

of

high

officials

circumventing

the censorial

process

show the

system's

flexibility.

On 22

December

1850,

for

example,

the Minister of the

Interior,

Domenico

Savelli,

instructed the

Director of the Police as follows: 'For the

best

outcome,

the

undersigned

Minister

of the Interior does not

omit

repeating

in

writing

to

Monsignor

Direttore

Generale

di

Polizia what he

has

already

told

him

orally,

that if at

any

time the musical score

of Ernani is submitted

for

approval by

the

impresarios

of

the

capital,

[the

approval]

must be

absolutely

denied'.45 As we will see

later,

high

officials could also intervene

in favor of a work, especially if the premiere of a Verdi opera was at stake.

Verdi's

struggle

with the

censors in Rome

How Verdi's

operas

came to

satisfy

censorial standards

in Rome

is a

question

that

remains

largely

unanswered. Censored

librettos

cannot

provide

all the

answers,

since

they

document

only

the

censors' emendations and not the

means

by

which

fundamentally

objectionable

librettos

eventually

managed

to

pass

the censorial

hurdles.

Documents that could

shed

light

on

this

question

-

namely

correspon-

dence

of

the

personnel

involved

in

the

decision-making

process

-

are

either rare

or

have not

yet

come to

light.

However,

some

newly

discovered sources of

this kind

concerning

La

battaglia

di

Legnano

and Un ballo in

maschera,

ogether

with

a

new

reading

of

previously

known

documents,

support

the

picture

of a

censorial

system

that could

turn

a blind

eye

when it suited the interest

of its officials.

Verdi's first

work for

Rome,

I

due Foscari

(3

November

1844),

is a case

in

point.

The

composer originally

intended the

opera

for the

Teatro

La Fenice in

Venice,

while

waiting

for Rome

to

accept

a more

daring subject

entitled

Lorengino

de' Medici.

Although

enthusiastic about the latter

subject,

Verdi

anticipated

difficulties with the

43

Paragraph

11 of

the 1856

Capitolato,

for

example, requires

the visti

only

of the ecclesiastical

and

political

censors:

'The

impresario

must

present

.

.

.

the

opera

librettos furnished with

the ecclesiastic

and

political

stamps

. . .'

'Capitolato',

reprinted

in

Tirincanti,

Argentina,

(n.

19)

following

230.

Another document

requires

the

stamp

of the

'deputato

per

la

prosa' only

for

printed

materials. See

[Matteucci's]

letter

of 24

December 1857

[with

no

addressee],

quoted

in

Rivelli,

'Belli'

(n. 29),

370-2. This observation

would

agree

with Calzolari's

('La

censura'

[see

n.

29],

292)

listing

of

the 'censore

filologo'

under the

printing censorship.

44

I

would like to thank

Professor

Matin

Chusid

(director)

and

Francesco

Izzo

(archivist)

of

the American

Institute

for

Verdi Studies at New York

University

for

generously

making

these librettos available.

45

'Per ogni buon fine il sottoscritto Ministro dell'interno non lascia di ripetere in scritto a

Monsignor

Direttore Generale di

polizia

quanto

gia

verbalmente

gli

accenno,

e

cioe

che

qualora

dagl'Impresari

Teatrali nella

Capitale

si

presentasse per

l'approvazione

lo

spartito

Musicale

l'Ernani

deve

questa

venire

assolutamente

negata.'

Rome,

Archivio di

Stato,

Ministero

dell'interno,

busta

1025,

no.

36060,

fols. 49 and 50. Fol. 49 shows the

draft

(probably by

Savelli

himself)

and fol. 50 a clean

copy

by

a

scribe.

The

clean

copy

has

subsequently

been modified

by

a third

hand

to the effect of a

qualified permission.

For a

similar

letter

concerning

Rigoletto,

see

Rivelli,

'Belli'

(n.

29),

366-7.

244



14/34

Social

control and the

censorship

of Verdi's

operas

in Rome

Roman

police,

which

proved

to be

justified.46

As the

programma

of

I

due Foscari

awaited

approval

from the

censorship

in

Venice,

Verdi

asked Francesco Maria

Piave,

his

librettist,

to withdraw the

piece

in

order to

offer it to Rome as a

substitute

for Lorengino,now rejected.47As it happened, Venice refused to accept I due Foscari

because it made

reference to

Venetian

noble families such as the Foscari and the

Loredani;

the

authorities feared

that even

though

the

story

dated

from

the fifteenth

century,

it would incite

gossip

and

political

unrest since these names still existed

among

Venetian

aristocracy.48

Venice's refusal was not an

insignificant

matter:

Piave,

who lived

in

Venice

(an

Austrian

territory),

informed

Ricordi on 9

September

1844 that the Austrian

government

would not allow its citizens to

publish anything

abroad

if it

had not received

approval

from one

of

the

censors

in Austrian-

controlled

territory.

Upon

Verdi's

suggestion,

Piave therefore asked Ricordi to have

the libretto approved in Milan (which was also under Austrian control), in order to

make

a

publication

in Rome

possible.49

The

progress

of events

suggests

that

Milan

approved

the libretto.

In

May

1844,

the

impresario

of the Teatro

Argentina,

Antonio

Lanari,

accepted

I

due

Foscari,

and the Roman

censorship

also

gave

its

permission

-

without

requesting

any

changes, according

to Piave.50 The

original

libretto includes the

printed approval

of Antonio

Ruggieri

(the

ecclesiastical

censor)

in the name of the

Cardinal Vicar

and

of

L.

Duca

Bonelli in

the

name of

the

Deputation.

The

political

censor

(Giovanni

Carlo Doria or

Giuseppe

Berardi)

either never saw the libretto

or

his name was omitted in the

production

of the

printed

version. In this

case,

Verdi

did not

worry

too much

about the

Roman

rejection

of Loren-ino since he could

immediately

offer

an

adequate

substitute.

He had not

yet

written

any

of the music

of

LorenZino

nd was not

pressured

for time.

Furthermore,

giving

it

up

for

the

time

being

did not mean

giving

it

up altogether;

Verdi

hoped

to

save

it

for better

political

times.51

That

Rome

objected

to

Lorengino

because of

the

portrayal

of

tyrannicide

on

46

It is interestingthat Verdi here does not refer to the 'censors' but to the 'police'. This

observation

reinforces the fact

that the

composer

knew that at this time the director

of the

police

(who

at the

same time was

the director of the

Deputation)

and

not the censor

gave

the final

approval.

See letter to

Francesco

MariaPiave

(Verdi's

librettist

for

I

due

Foscari)

of

18

April

1844,

quoted

in Franco

Abbiati,

Giuseppe

Verdi,4 vols.

(Milan,

1959),

I:

513.

47

The

programma

efers to the detailed

plot summary,

not the

libretto.

Not until

14

May

in a

letter

to

Piave does Verdi

say:

'At this moment

I

receive

I

dueFoscari.

A

nice,

a

very

nice,

a

beautiful drama 'Letter

quoted

in

ibid.,

I:

514.

48

Rosselli,

Operandustry

see

n.

8),

94.

49

Piave's

letter

to Ricordi of 9

September

1844;

quoted

in

Abbiati,

Verdi

see

n.

46),

I:

521.

50

Letter

of

9

September

1844.

Piave writes: 'The Roman

censorship

has licensed

the whole

[libretto]

without

changing

a comma'.

Quoted

in

ibid.,

I:

521.

The sentence

'Cedi, cedi,

rinunzia al poter' (Give in, give in, renounce the throne) in Act III scene 11 had to be

changed

only

when in

1859

the survivalof the Vatican State became

endangered.

Di

Stefano,

Censuraeatrale

see

n.

29),

59.

51

Piave's

Lorenzino as

eventually

accepted

in

Venice and set

to

music

by

Giovanni

Pacini.

See

George

Martin,

Verdi:

His

Music,

Life

and

Times,

th ed.

(New

York,

1992),

118.

The

fact

that each

city,

Rome

and

Venice,

refused a libretto

accepted

in

the other

one is not

indicative of the

standards

of

censorship.

Venice

rejected

I

dueFoscari

because the

opera

portrayed

the

city's

own

nobility

on

stage

but

accepted

a much more

daring

subject

instead.

245



15/34

Andreas

Giger

stage

is not

surprising;52

however,

it

raises

questions

about a censorial

procedure

that

would

permit

I

due

Foscari,

an

opera

featuring

both

a

plot

in

which

a leader

is

forced to

renounce

the

throne and

evil

prevailing

in

the form of a

corrupt political

figure who triumphs over a good-natured one. Moreover, in 1843, the year before

the

premiere

of

I

due

Foscari,

Giuseppe

Mazzini and his

revolutionary

movement had

staged

an

unsuccessful

uprising

in

Bologna

(one

of the

principal

Vatican

cities),

and

it

is

astonishing

that the

opera

was

permitted

during

the

Risorgimento

without

emendations.

Two

explanations,

perhaps

related,

are

possible.

First,

the Piave

family

could

count

Pope

Gregory

XVI

(1831-46)

among

its

friends,

a

connection that

may

have

facilitated

the

approval process.53

Second,

the

printed

libretto does not include the

permission

of a

political

censor but

only

that of

Antonio

Ruggieri

and the final

nihil

obstatof the Deputation.54 Of course, the political censors may have examined the

programma

nd an

earlier

copy

of the

libretto.

But

it

is

possible

that

Piave, Verdi,

and

Lanari

managed

to

push

a

libretto

through

the

censorial

system

with the

help

of

connections to

ecclesiastical officials

and

perhaps

even the

Pope

himself,

despite

the

failure

of the libretto to

meet

the

moral or the

political

standards

of

the state.

The

revolutions

of 1848

inspired

Salvadore

Cammarano and

Verdi to collaborate

on a

deliberately

patriotic

work,

La

battaglia

di

Legnano.

The librettist

decided

to

use

as a

foundation

Joseph Mery's

La

battaillede

Toulouse nd

graft upon

it the historical

events

of

Barbarossa's defeat

by

the

Lombard

League

at

Legnano

in

1176. The

new

opera

not

only promoted

an

independent

Italy

but

conjured up

religious

sentiments

through

the

inclusion of

settings

of

verses from

Psalm

82

and the Te

Deum.

Verdi

seems to have

expected production

of his

opera

in a

more

liberal

or

even

unified

Italy,

but with the events

taking

a turn

for

the

worse since

July

1848,

he could

no

longer realistically

sustain such

hopes.

Considering

the

political

turmoil in much

of

Italy,

Verdi

decided to write the

opera

for Ricordi and

not as

a

commission.55

Ricordi would then

arrange

for a

performance

in

whatever theater he

deemed

appropriate.

Verdi must have had enormous confidence in his ability to have the opera

approved by

the

censors,

wherever

the

premiere

would take

place.

Rome

certainly

did not lend itself

to a

premiere

of La

battaglia

di

Legnano:

n

his allocution of 29

April

1848,

the

Pope

refused

to

take

any part

in

the

Risorgimento,

in

spite

of his

possible

personal sympathy

for the

cause,

and

urged

all Italians

to remain

loyal

to

their

princes.56

Verdi's common

sense

led him

to

consider

possible

changes

in

case

of a

censorial veto.

To Cammarano he

wrote:

'if

by

chance

the

censorships

do

not

permit

[the

opera],

do

you

think we

could,

by

changing

the

title,

the

locality,

etc....

52

Accordingo Budden TheOperasf Verdi,: 175)Loren#inoeaturedyrannicide.

53

See

Mary ane

Phillips-Matz,

erdi

Oxford,

1993),

153.

54

Piave,

dueFoscari

see

n.

41),

38.

55

See

Verdi's etter

o

Cammaranof 31

May

1848.

Copialetteren. 22),

53n.

56

Martin,

Verdi: is

Music,

ife

and

Times

see

n.

51),

186. The

Pope's

official

opposition

o

the

Risorgimento

oes not

preclude personal

ympathy

or the

cause,

but it

does indicate

his

priority

f

securing

he

papacy

ver

Italian

unity.

See

Giulio

Andreotti,

Ore

13:

II

ministro

deve

morire

Milan,

1974),

40;

and

Glueckert,

etween

wo

Amnesties

n. 12),

55.

246



16/34


censorship

of Verdi's

operas

in

Rome

retain all

or

nearly

all the

poetry?

For the moment

we had better

go

ahead

and

agree

on it the

way

it

is.'57

Cammarano did

not

send

Verdi,

who was

living

in

Paris at the

time,

the

fourth

act of La battagliadi Legnanountil 29 October.58 Sometime during the first half of

November,

several

days

-

if

not

weeks

-

before the

Pope

fled to

Gaeta,

Tommaso

Corsini

(the

president

of the

Deputation

and

Mayor

of

Rome)

accepted

the 'score'.

Vincenzo

Luccardi,

a Roman

sculptor

and

friend of

Verdi's,

conveyed

the news

to

the

composer,

who

responded

indignantly:

You tell me

that the

[Roman]

Senate

has

accepted

y

score

Accepted?

.. but

who offered

[it]?

...

No no:

I

cannot and

must not

yield

to

so much.

In

accordancewith an old

contract,

I

owe

Ricordi a

score: once

[it

is]

written,

my

obligations

are fulfilled.At

his

request,

I

agreed

to

come to

Rome,

taking

a

personal

loss,

since the

thousand francs

I

asked for are

certainly

not

enough

for the

trip

from Paris to Rome and from Rome to Paris.... I am indebtedto

the

good

intentions

of

all

my

friends,

but

I

cannot

yield

gladly

to this

kindness,

to this

favor

shown

me

of

accepting

ne of

my

scores.59

It

seems that Luccardi

did not have the

actual

score

in

mind since Verdi

did not

complete

it

until

December. He

probably

meant the

production

as a

whole,

the

libretto,

or

both,

especially

since no

opera

could be

produced

without

approval

of

the

libretto

first

by

the

censors and then

by

the

Deputation.60

In

light

of

the

Pope's

allocution,

it

hardly

seems

possible

that the

political

censor would

have

approved

the libretto's

spirit

of the

Risorgimento.

How, then, could the

Deputation

have

acted as it

did?

Several

possibilities

may

be

advanced.

In

mid-September,

Pius

IX

appointed

the liberal count

Pellegrino

Rossi minister

of the

interior and

finance,

and

Rossi made financial

and

democratic reforms

his first

priorities.61

He

undoubtedly

knew

of

the

Pope's continuing

weakness for the

Risorgimento

movement and

the

Deputation may

not

have

had to fear later

reprimand

by

ecclesiastical

authorities.

It

is

also

possible

that

Giovanni Carlo

Doria

(the

political

censor)

never

received

the

libretto,

which therefore

would not

have been

examined

from

a

political

stand-

point.62

And even if

the

minister was

consulted,

he

would

hardly

have forbidden the

57

'[C]aso

mai le Censurenol

permettessero

redetevoi che si

potra

cambiando

itolo,

ocalita

etc.... ritenere

uttao

quasi

utta a

verseggiatura?

l

momentoconviene

andare

vanti

fissarlo osi.'Verdi n an

undated etter o

Cammarano,

opialettere

see

n.

22),

56.

58

Abbiati,

Verdi

see

n.

46),

I:

772.

59

'Tu mi

dici che

il

Senato

di

Roma]

ha

accettato

l

mio

spartito

ccettato?.. Ma

chi

ha

offerto? .. No no: io non

posso

ne

devo

sottomettermi

anto.

A

Ricordi

n

forzadi

vecchio contrattodevo

uno

spartito:

na volta

scritto ono

finiti miei

obblighi.

Dietro sua

preghiera

o

accondiscendeva

enirea

Romacon mio

sacrifizio

erche

mille

franchi he

ho chiestonon

bastano

ertamente

el

viaggio

da

Parigi

Roma,

e

da Romaa

Parigi

...

Sonoobbligatissimoellebuone ntenzionidi tutti mieiamici,ma nonposso

sottomettermi

i buon

grado

a

questo

favore,

a

questa

grazia

he mi si

vuol faredi

accettare

un mio

spartito.'

Verdi o

Luccardi,

1

November

1848;

quoted

n

Abbiati,

Verdi

see

n.

46),

I:

775.

60 Luccardi'statement hat

the scorewas

acceptedby

the

senatecannotbe

entirely

orrect.

Such decisionshad to

be made

by

the

Deputation,

he head of

whichwasthe

senatore.

61

Andreotti,

Ore13

(see

n.

56),

39-41.

62

Ruggieri,

n

the other

hand,

did,

as becomes

clear rom

his letter

o Corsini

quoted

below.

247



17/34

Andreas

Giger

libretto;

he

must

have known that

in

times

of

great

political

unrest,

it would

have

been detrimental to

the

state's interest

not to

allow

a

production

that

would

surely

have

been

the

climax of the

upcoming

Carnival season.

With the Pope's escape to Gaeta, the censorial system changed only in part.

Although

on

the level

of the

state,

the

Pope gave

way

to a new

government

(consisting

of

Carlo

Armellini,

Giuseppe

Mazzini,

and Aurelio

Saffi),

the

municipal

council and

thus the

personnel

of the

Deputation

was

not

replaced

until

after the

premiere

of

La

battaglia

di

Legnano.63

n

addition,

Doria and

Ruggieri

remained

in

their

positions

as

political

and

ecclesiastical

censors

respectively.64

With Rome

transformed

into a

republic,

ideas

reflecting

the

Risorgimento

no

longer

offended

the

government,

and

any

objection

from Doria's

side would not have

received

a

favorable

hearing.

Violation

of

religious

standards,

however,

still concerned

some

members of the Deputation. In the case of La battagliadi Legnano,one of the

inspectors,

Vincenzo

Jacovacci,

brought

attention to

the final scene

in

the

cathedral

of

Milan,

whose text included without mention some

verses of the

Te

Deum.

On

23

January,

four

days

before

opening night, Jacovacci

wrote to Ottavio

Scaramucci,

member of

the Senate and

the

Deputation:65

I

forewarnYour

Excellency

to be

informed

that

in

the

final scene of Maestro

Verdi's new

opera,

which will be

performed

at

the

[Teatro]

Argentina

this

Saturday

or the

first

time,

they

want

to

depict

the altarof the

Milanese cathedral

n

the

middle,

and that

Censorship Operas in Rome

Documents

Transcript of Censorship Operas in Rome