The Birth of the Regno di Napoli

The present inquiry focuses on the Cappella Reale during the initiation and long reign of the Bourbon dynasty, namely Carlo di Borbone (r. 1734–59) and his heir Ferdinando (r. 1759–98; 1799–1806; 1815–16).Footnote ⁵ In particular, it places the focus on the second half of the eighteenth century (1750–1800), a time which has been characterized as an età d’oro (or “golden age”), occasioned by political stability and peace, economic prosperity, a rising profile within continental affairs, and above all, artistic, especially musical, excellence. The renown of Naples as a capital of music took flight in the prior century, and by the time that the eighteen-year-old Carlo di Borbone ascended the throne of the newly established and independent kingdom in 1734, musical practices had already achieved European renown.Footnote ⁶ Nevertheless, fundamental questions remain about the continued artistic, political, and social roles of the Cappella Reale as well as its enduring constitution, membership, and artistic responsibilities in the second half of the eighteenth century. Of particular interest is how Carlo di Borbone (and his range of advisors) maintained continuity to, or selectively jettisoned past administrative structures and policies (of his Spanish and Austrian predecessors) to suit not only his myriad agendas, but also the highest artistic standards. In addition, a consideration of how the founding of the orchestra of the Teatro di San Carlo (1737), newly established in the early years of Carlo’s reign, impacted the operation and status of the ensemble as well as its membership. Following Carlo’s departure for Madrid to inherit the Spanish throne,Footnote ⁷ the Neapolitan Kingdom entered a period of regency (1759–67), which hosted the transition to Ferdinand’s rule. Scant attention has been given to this episode in the history of the Cappella Reale, and one scholar has indeed asserted that the ensemble all but ceased to exist during this phase of manifest change within Neapolitan political life and culture.

The broad span of Bourbon rule in the eighteenth century witnessed significant change and marked differences in philosophy, priorities, and orientation between father and son. Nevertheless, the foundation of the independent monarchy addressed the longstanding, inherent issues of foreign rule from afar and evident liabilities of appointing a viceroy. Carlo di Borbone immediately centralized power in the capital city and transparently challenged the autonomy of the vast feudal institutions as well as barons in the surrounding paesi that had exercised substantial sway over economic affairs.Footnote ⁸ The extensive moral, social, and financial influence of the Catholic Church, its vast network among local institutions and nobility (local and foreign, especially Carlo’s mother Elisabetta Farnese) and dispensation from taxation presented complex considerations for the crown and its advisors. These competing forces, both internal and external, endured throughout the century and, for both Carlo and Ferdinando, they remained inherently linked. An evident continuity between their respective tenures emerges in the expressed objective to consolidate then extend the independence of the kingdom, to modernize the physical, political, and social infrastructures, and to affirm then assert Naples as a principal stakeholder in European affairs. The latter coincided with the expansion of commerce and trade as well as the building of a naval fleet and professional army. In regard to local affairs, there were significant challenges to the fiscal freedoms long accorded to the church and the feudal barons. In particular, both father and son reduced the financial privileges (marked by a highly controversial suspension of the Chinea)Footnote ⁹ and authorized the expulsion of the Jesuits. The Bourbons reduced the jurisdictional reach of the feudal barons, in favor of fostering entrepreneurial systems and even founded the silk colony of San Leucio, which promoted individual and equal rights.Footnote ¹⁰ The longstanding and broad-based collaboration with local intellectuals bore significant results for cultural reforms. Advisors such as the Count of Santo Stefano, Marchese Montealegre, Bernardo Tanucci, Celestino Galiani, Gaetano Filangieri, and Antonio Genovesi (to name only a select few) were attuned to modern, contemporary society as well as progress. Within their respective sectors of expertise, they engaged in constructing systems beneficial to the kingdom, designed to achieve the initiatives of Carlo and Ferdinando, albeit transparently grounded in Anglo-French “enlightened despotism.” One evident outcome occurred in 1752, when the University of Naples, Federico II became the first institution in Europe to establish a chair in economics and commerce, occupied by Genovesi. The physical transformation of the capital and immediately adjacent areas remained a priority beginning with the expansion of the Palazzo Reale, the construction of the Teatro di San Carlo, as well as the residences of Portici, Capodimonte, and Caserta. The rediscovery of Pompeii and Herculaneum fueled tourism and the visits of foreign intellectuals undertaking the Grand Tour.Footnote ¹¹ Their respective dynastic marriages also imparted tangible impacts, albeit differing in political, social, and artistic outcomes, for Carlo and Ferdinando. The arrival of Maria Amalia in 1738 marked a period of cohesion in which past traditions of mere representation became transformed into concrete acts. For Ferdinando, his long union to Maria Carolina proved to be politically disastrous, but also occasioned an unprecedented and sustained phase of broad artistic patronage.Footnote ¹²

An Emblem of Power and Musical Excellence

For Carlo di Borbone, the Palazzo Reale became the gravitational center of the city and by extension of the kingdom itself, at whose foundation remained the “material spaces of the palace, theater, and cappella.”Footnote ¹³ These physical areas created a synergy, providing crucial and longstanding continuity among ceremonial, artistic, and religious spheres of interest, policy, and governance. At the center of these activities and initiatives promulgated by the court (as well as their intrinsic functions) remained the ensemble and musicians of the Cappella Reale. In the early years of his reign, Carlo preserved continuity to administrative mechanisms and artistic standards established by both his Spanish and Austrian predecessors. In addition, he had inherited a Cappella whose personnel had been largely assembled by Alessandro Scarlatti and Francesco Mancini.Footnote ¹⁴ Nevertheless, he did not hesitate either to impart change or to express dissatisfaction when issues occurred with the ensembles.Footnote ¹⁵ Insights into Carlo’s engagement with the Cappella are expressed within surviving materials spanning diverse fondi in the Archivio di Stato di Napoli.Footnote ¹⁶ The correlation of such documents provides detailed insights into the administrative policies of governance, compensation, and personnel, often intersecting with professional standards, values, and the larger purposes of the ensemble. For the musicians of the Cappella Reale, many of the past frameworks remained in place. Providing leadership (both artistic and often administrative) at the head of the Cappella remained the primo maestro and his second the vice-maestro. The ensemble continued, moreover, to be organized according to regular “Plans” (referenced as either pianta or planta) noting the specific constitution of voices and instruments. Ordinary members held a piazza awarded either through a concorso (e.g. public competition) or direct appointment by officials, signifying their full-time, permanent status, while part-time members or supernumeraries were often times unpaid and longstanding adjunct musicians. The latter served as substitutes for missing members, often for reasons of health or specific needs of the ensemble. The passage from unpaid supernumerary to ordinary status did occur, but involved a lengthy, frequently unguaranteed process that occurred only when a position was rendered available, customarily through the death of a full-time member. The aforementioned organizational norms can be extrapolated from a range of primary archival sources. Table 1 presents the organico for the Cappella Reale from 1737, which also coincides (later in the year) with the inauguration of the Teatro di San Carlo.Footnote ¹⁷

The mere existence of this register confirms, as asserted elsewhere, that Carlo di Borbone had indeed mandated a detailed accounting of musicians each month and, as such, verification of their continuous engagement within the ensemble. This roster provides no more than the month of service, followed by the entire listing of members and a declaration of accuracy. This affirmation specifies, “I the undersigned with trustworthiness as First Governor and Treasurer of the Monte of Musicians of the Royal Chapel of the Royal Palace [declare] that in the past month of April of the current year 1737 that the underwritten virtuosi have served with complete compliance in all events occurring in said Royal Chapel and such musicians are as noted.”Footnote ¹⁸ Differing from a pianta, it does not provide the specific role, compensation, or status (as ordinary or supernumerary) for the musicians listed. Nevertheless, it does confirm that in 1737, the Cappella consisted of fifty-two members led by Mancini and Domenico Sarro as primo and vice-maestro respectively. More importantly, it reveals that under Bourbon rule, the Cappella continued to be conceptualized as four “choirs” embodying four distinct components: voices (soprano, alto, tenor, and bass, with a clear emphasis on the soprano), strings (violins, violas, cellos, and basses), winds (oboe and bassoon), and brass (corni da caccia and trumpets).Footnote ¹⁹ The musicians that performed on the aforementioned wind and brass instruments undoubtedly doubled when necessary. The presence of the bassoon section (led by long-term member Salvatore Lizio) typically took its place as part of the continuo group. Taken altogether, this folio (and those that follow) confirm that the Bourbon court had retained the organization of the ensemble as had been expressed in earlier piante crafted by either the Spanish or Austrian administrations.Footnote ²⁰

By 1750 and continuing further into Carlo’s reign, these folios reveal that the Cappella Reale sustained constant change, not simply replacing older members but also demonstrating a clear awareness and sensitivity to internal balance and practical needs. Table 2 presents the organico from January 1750,Footnote ²¹ noting a slight expansion in numbers within the ensemble (fifty-three in total, albeit with two noted as absent).

Even more noteworthy is that the core of the ensemble remained consistent with twenty-eight members from 1737 still active in the Cappella. There had also been a change in leadership with Giuseppe di Majo serving as primo maestro and Giuseppe Marchitti as vice-maestro.Footnote ²² Two of the most famous castrato voices of the eighteenth century continued to serve the Cappella, namely Domenico Gizzi and Gaetano Majorano, the latter better known by his stage name of “Caffarelli.”Footnote ²³ The ensemble displays consistent numbers of strings (albeit some noted as “violin” undoubtedly played viola), winds, and brass. Although these data provide basic statistics and demonstrate continuity in the ensemble, it is in correlative primary sources that specifics emerge about administrative policies. In particular, volumes within the Fondo Ministero degli affari ecclesiastici, emanating from the office of the Cappellano Maggiore, contain a broad array of information. For example, even prior to di Majo’s ascension, one entry from 1742 reads:

This entry highlights Salernitano’s generous compensation,Footnote ²⁵ while also outlining that a noteworthy eleven supplicants had requested his position within the ensemble. Even more interesting is that the primo maestro Sarro had been consulted as to whether Salernitano’s piazza should be assigned to another violinist or vocalist (by custom via concorso) or whether the post had become superfluous. The artistic authority of the primo maestro is clearly articulated in this process, while also underlining a pragmatism about the evolving needs of the ensemble; namely, whether another instrument, whose type is not specified, or voice, will best address prevailing requirements. This entry also initiated a series of subsequent comments documenting the varied deliberations and stakeholders involved in the replacement of Salernitano. The next entry (within the same volume of the Ministero) notes,

By the time of this entry, the number of candidates appeared to have narrowed to the son of Salernitano (Gaetano) and Antonio Infantes, both of whom would be admitted to the Cappella. This supplication raises immediate questions: whether a concorso had been organized, the prior service of these musicians as supernumeraries, and the potential role of nepotism? It is also evident from these materials that newly admitted musicians did not receive the same level of compensation as the decedents. This may have been a strategy to reallocate funds by the administration of the Cappella to raise the salaries and retain key members of the ensemble, especially instrumentalists, who made notably less than their vocal counterparts. It may also have been a manner of imposing a probationary period upon the newly admitted musicians too. Nevertheless, and once again in the aftermath of the death of Salernitano, there is record that:

This carefully crafted statement on one hand affirms the longstanding hierarchy of compensation (with its favorable predilection toward vocalists) by virtue of Bisucci having received almost half of the funds, while his instrumental colleagues divide the remainder, receiving individually no more than a single ducat each per month. Nonetheless, it is significant and discerning that Fiorenza and Carcais have been cited for their long tenures as supernumeraries, justifying their receipt of an increase in salary as well as recognition of their value.

The role of primo maestro remained a crucial and highly prized position, given its status, authority, generous compensation, and position as interlocutor between the administration and musicians of the Cappella Reale. The death of Domenico Sarro in April 1744 initiated a lengthy process and search for his successor. Evidence of the deliberations emerges in the proceedings of the Ministero degli affari ecclesiatici as follows:

Once again, the death of an ordinary member within the ensemble initiated not only petitions for the specific position, but also salary increases by existing members as referenced in the cited record. This entry also refers to the recently revised pianta of the ensemble (from July 1742), which delineated not only current members, but also the division of voices and instruments.Footnote ²⁹ In subsequent records (and documented in the same volume of the Ministero), there is a further discussion on the ongoing process of determining Sarro’s replacement. It reads as follows:

Broschi, the first supplicant, was the older brother of the famed castrato, and one would imagine given his limited reputation (beyond the aforementioned familial connection) remained an outlier for the position. Both Carcais and Bisucci were current members of the ensemble, the former a long-time violinist and the latter a treble vocalist. In terms of a compositional profile, there is no surviving evidence of music by either individual, rendering the possibility of appointment as virtually nil.Footnote ³¹ Nevertheless, the longstanding administrative mechanisms of the Cappella articulated that the standing vice-maestro would attain primo status, while the primo organista was also elevated to the second position in leadership. These practices are confirmed in a subsequent record, noting that:

Leo had been a longstanding member of the Cappella, whose desire to ascend to its leadership, had been finally fulfilled. Tragically, he suffered a fatal stroke only nine months into his tenure and once again the position of primo maestro lay vacant. The subsequent concorso, ultimately won by di Majo and surprisingly with Giuseppe Marchitti as vice-maestro, initiated “a palace intrigue” by virtue of Maria Amalia’s attempt to influence the outcome by signaling her preference for di Majo to her countryman and friend Johann Adolph Hasse, one of the four outside evaluators of the concorso.Footnote ³³

The ascent of Giuseppe di Majo (appointed in September 1745) ushered in a long period of stability for the Cappella Reale, which spanned the end of Carlo’s reign, the Regency and the early stirrings related to Ferdinando’s inheritance of the throne. This constancy derived not only from well-established policies and procedures, but also from an evident respect demonstrated towards members of the ensemble. In terms of the former, entries of recompense for di Majo note that his level of renumeration and associated benefits continued “to follow the new plan for music for this Royal Chapel from July 6, 1742.”Footnote ³⁴ This continuity ensured that key principles remained intact, in both essential and minor matters. The primary intention of the aforementioned plan continued to place emphasis on maintaining personnel and in turn addressing related musical needs. In terms of the rapport between the Cappella’s administration and its members, there is an evident and ongoing sense of equanimity at work. For example, financial registers note,

The retention of full salary by a retiring member of the Cappella Reale occurred with regular frequency and Babbi’s successful petition represented the norm rather than an exception. The administration proved to be equally generous with family relations, often siblings and children of current members, who sought employment with the ensemble, in some cases under extenuating circumstances. One of the most interesting episodes unfolded within the Besozzi family of renowned wind players. A payment registry regarding Gaetano Besozzi details his employment history with the Cappella, recounting:

Although one could allege that this process had been animated by a clear sense of nepotism, the Besozzi family were renowned as virtuosi oboists. Roughly at the same time, the request of Giuseppe Besozzi also appears in the same volume of Tesoreria, detailing that:

This compassionate concession of retirement with the lion’s share of his salary intact extended to the appointment of Besozzi’s son in his place. It underlined, moreover, a transparent esteem for the service and abilities of this family of musicians.

A New Theatrical Ideal

At the initiation of Carlo’s reign, a broad program of urban and civic renewal occurred at an unprecedented pace. This process of revival stemmed from clear political objectives, notably the status of Naples as the capital of a newly established, independent state, one eager to be recognized as a continental stakeholder. The King’s advisors prioritized the royal palace, directing significant resources to its renovation and expansion, which included the construction of a new, eponymous royal theater. Realized in an astonishing seven months, the Teatro di San Carlo cultivated opera seria exclusively and through these dramas projected metaphorical representations of Bourbon power, authority, and sovereignty. The establishment of the San Carlo also raised practical questions regarding personnel.Footnote ³⁸ Specifically, whether the musicians of the Cappella Reale would be offered membership in the ensemble of the opera orchestra.Footnote ³⁹ Prior to its construction, the Bourbon court had continued to stage operas primarily at the Teatro San Bartolomeo and the orchestra of that ensemble had also retained members of the Cappella.Footnote ⁴⁰ Given that the San Carlo formed a physical adjunct to the royal palace and the opera orchestra would now be expanded, the understanding of shared personnel represents a salient inquiry.Footnote ⁴¹ In regard to these fundamental questions, the scholar Ulisse Prota-Giurleo stated plainly that the San Carlo inherited the musicians associated with its predecessor, implying that members of the Cappella would be included, yet “integrated by new and choice members.”Footnote ⁴² Table 3 provides a snapshot of a single year (1750), well within the reign of Carlo, at a time when administrative policies and procedures had been fine-tuned for both the Cappella and the San Carlo.

A noteworthy thirteen members of the Cappella (out of the thirty listed) served in both ensembles. Although on the surface this may not appear significant given the size of the opera orchestra, the musicians from the Cappella engaged in key roles for this ensemble. In particular, the violin virtuoso Domenico de Matteis also served as primo violino at the San Carlo. He was joined by his colleagues Paciotti, Fabio, Santangelo, and Romano, all of whom would hold these dual positions for extended terms. This core of violinists undoubtedly provided a sense of continuity from one ensemble to the other as well as establishing an essential sound and texture. Francesco Giampriano shared the cello stand with Vittozzi in both groups and Andrea de Florio provided leadership for the large contingent of contrabasses in the opera orchestra. Both Salvatore and Ferdinando Lizio served each ensemble as bassoonists, while PianoFootnote ⁴³ and de Muro also performed on the tromba de caccia in either group. Taken altogether, this essential nucleus of musicians between the leading ensembles of the capital ensured that high standards and a sense of internal continuity remained in place. There is also the question of whether the San Carlo became an avenue for a position within the Cappella Reale. Although there are no specific documentary materials, there is evidence of long-term connections in shared personnel between the ensembles in the eighteenth century suggesting this possibility. In reference to Table 3, one such example is the case of Carlo Camerino, who will ascend to leadership in both ensembles during his storied career in Naples, which spanned the better part of the second half of the century.

A new primo maestro

The selection of Cafaro is meticulously documented in surviving materials noting, “His Majesty by means of the Royal Order of August 25, 1768 has appointed Pasquale Cafaro as Maestro di Cappella supernumerary of this Royal Chapel, with compensation of twenty ducats per month.”Footnote ⁶⁶ His evident and rising favor with Maria Carolina is referenced not only by the allocation of a generous salary despite supernumerary status, equal to that of the ordinary vice-maestro Marchitti, but also in detailed correlative sources emerging from the Ministero degli affari ecclesiatici in January 1772.Footnote ⁶⁷ Issued by the Secretary of State Bernardo Tanucci, the long missive notes:

This transparent mandate appointing Cafaro as primo maestro of the ensemble also underlines, albeit tacitly, that his ascension first as a supernumerary then as an ordinary holder of the most-coveted piazza in the Cappella Reale occurred without a public concorso as had often been the case for his predecessors. Nevertheless, Cafaro’s career trajectory may well have eventually placed him in this role without the benefit of the queen’s favor. Since 1759, he had served as the secondo maestro at the Turchini conservatory, establishing himself as a composer of stage drama and related genres as well as a gifted pedagogue. Tanucci’s directive also underlines the longstanding mechanisms of the Cappella, that musicians often entered with supernumerary status (for the most part without compensation) and they were eventually accorded the opportunity to earn ordinary status. Regarding Cafaro’s role at the Turchini conservatory, a second directive issued by Tanucci and sent to the Cappellano Maggiore in the same month addresses these responsibilities, noting:

The unequivocal support provided by the Crown placed Cafaro in an enviable position of favor and even of authority within Neapolitan artistic circles given his status as primo maestro of the Cappella Reale, personal maestro of the Queen (which evidently seems to have continued despite the first missive from Tanucci), and secondo maestro (with leave, albeit ostensibly choosing his substitute) at the Turchini conservatory. Indeed, Cafaro’s enduring service to the Queen is confirmed the following month, as Tanucci writes, once again to the Cappellano Maggiore:

As had occurred in the past, the administration of the Cappella acted swiftly and often pre-emptively to raise the salaries of deserving members simultaneously to the privileges accorded to Cafaro. As early as 1771, there are indications of these intentions especially with regard to Giuseppe Marchitti. In a memorandum dated December 21, 1771, it is noted that

In the aforementioned letter of Tanucci cited previously and dated January 1772, a paragraph is once again addressed to the compensation of Marchitti, (underlining his status as the long-serving vice-maestro of the Cappella Reale), which reads as follows:

This acknowledgement of Marchitti’s services is tempered by the fact that he was in reality being passed over for the role of primo maestro in favor of Cafaro and his salary would not in fact be equivalent to that of his younger colleague. Nevertheless, Cafaro’s credentials as a composer and pedagogue were impeccable. His appointment provided continuity to the past in maintaining high standards and it also initiated a long period of stability for the Cappella Reale.

The Era of Maria Carolina and Ferdinando: 1770–79

In the midst of these larger administrative decisions concerning leadership and their implementation, the personnel of the Cappella endured a series of fluid, ongoing changes characteristic to its administrative profile in the ensuing decade. Bolstering the leadership of the ensemble was the admission of Francesco Corbisiero and Niccolò Piccinni, respectively as first and second organists of the ensemble, in February 1771. Piccinni was the much better known of the pair, whether as an alumnus of the Neapolitan conservatory system or the fact that he had already established himself as an acclaimed composer of stage drama on the continent. The official appointment reads, “Niccolò Piccinni, second organist of the Royal Chapel with eight ducats per month, in place of the deceased GianFrancesco di Majo.”Footnote ⁷³ Perhaps even more significantly, a series of deaths impacted the string contingent of the ensemble in the coming months. In particular, the passing (in rapid succession) of the violinists Francesco Piscina (September 1771), Saverio Carcais (November 1771), and Aniello Santangelo (December 1771) initiated the entrance of new virtuosi as documented in the sources. These decisions are rendered transparently in an entry from the proceedings of the Ministero degli affari ecclesiastici as follows:

The fact that these decisions occurred at the same moment as larger changes in leadership (whether Cafaro or the addition of Corbisiero and Piccinni) underlines the integrity and effectiveness of organizational structures and policies that had been developed and implemented since the ascension of Carlo di Borbone. Piscina, who had served the Cappella as violinist supernumerary since 1766,Footnote ⁷⁵ would be replaced by his colleague Giuseppe Pagliarulo. This change is also noted in archival sources:

The decision to fill these piazze internally as well as reorganize the associated personnel underlines the primacy and significance of the string corps within the ensemble and its larger artistic mission. In the past (as illustrated in Section 1), solo voices or continuo musicians would not have been necessarily replaced by the same element (voice or instrument), whereas an apparent premium can be suggested that prevails in the cited documents in regard to the string corps and personnel, representing a noteworthy transformation from the past.

The period of Carnevale (December 26 to Shrove Tuesday) also occasioned changes in personnel within the Cappella, often of a temporary nature, for the vocal virtuosi as well as select maestri di cappella. In terms of the latter, one of the most frequent supplicants for leave remained the newly appointed Piccinni. For example, at the initiation of 1772 (not long after his appointment to the Cappella), the records of the Cappellano Maggiore document that “I have pointed out to the Crown the consultation of Your Excellency on the appeal of Niccolò Piccinni first organist of the Royal Chapel, who requests leave for a month and a half to go to Rome to compose an opera.”Footnote ⁷⁷

Further in the same volume, the response of the King (and Cappellano Maggiore) is dutifully noted as follows:

Despite his reputation as a composer and longstanding ties to Naples (as well as rapid elevation to “first organist”), Piccinni had to forfeit his salary from the Cappella (similar to other colleagues in the ensemble) until his return the following March. The succeeding middle years of the decade reveal that the core personnel of the ensemble remained stable underlining continuity in performance and administration. Despite the seasonal absence of select voices (most often the soprano and alto soloists, especially Consorti and Santi respectively), an evident emphasis on enlisting new members of the wind and continuo sections emerged at the same time. In the successive years of 1772–73, the Cappella admitted a new pair of tromba virtuosi, namely Pasquale Giuliani (November 1772) and Onofrio Lorello (February 1773). Both Giuliani and Lorello were admitted with supernumerary status with both actions conveyed in almost identical language. In the case of Lorello, the documents note, “being vacated in the Royal Chapel the piazza of tromba supernumerary with the salary of fifteen carlini per month; His Majesty has filled it in the person of Onofrio Lorello.”Footnote ⁷⁹ As had also occurred in the past, members of the Cappella could and often did request salary increases at the passing, retirement, or departure of a colleague. Lorello’s and Giuliani’s names appear in correlative documents in the Cappellano Maggiore in succeeding years requesting further increases in compensation, and the sources do reveal a steady stream of raises.Footnote ⁸⁰ In the year following their appointments, Giuliani and Lorello were joined by the bassoonist and composer Francesco Ricupero (September 1774) and the contrabassist Francesco Piccinni (September 1774). The appointment of Piccinni to the ensemble followed the death of Andrea de Florio and the allocation of the decedent appears to have been a benefit to all of the aforementioned musicians, regardless of whether they were string or winds. In particular, Piccinni’s nomination notes,

The details of Piccinni’s elevation to ordinary status and with it the affiliated piazza of contrabass reveal the intricate administrative mechanisms of the ensemble. His appointment after the noted many years of unpaid service and disbursement of his predecessor de Florio’s salary also benefit Pagliarulo, whose entrance had occurred three years prior. By extension both Giuliani and Lorello were accorded modest increases, while Ricupero had finally been recognized for his long, uncompensated contributions to the Cappella. The allocation of only half of de Florio’s salary to Piccinni initially confirms the enduring managerial custom that newly established ordinary members of the ensemble served a type of probationary period to be followed by periodic increases to bring their compensation in line with peers. The death of the violinist Costantino Roberto in 1773, also provided the opportunity to realign the violin sections. The related materials recount:

Montoro’s tenure in the ensemble lasted until the end of the century and proved to be among the most productive in the Cappella. As the decade of the 1770s continued to wind toward its close, beginning in 1776, the violin corps once again endured a series of transformations in personnel, recruiting some of the finest virtuosi of the eighteenth century. As had been custom, that year (1776) began with the seasonal departure of the vocal soloists for performance outside of Naples. As expected, Piccinni had been lured away and dispatches reveal a change in his status among the administration of the Cappella. In particular, one folio notes the following:

This decision to allow the composer to retain the lion’s share of his annual salary had undoubtedly been conditioned by Piccinni’s rising status on the continent. In the following year, he would petition once again (successfully) for another leave to travel to Paris, and through these absences Paolo Orgitano solidified his own position within the Cappella as first organist.Footnote ⁸⁴ In the coming months of 1776 and extending into 1777, however, the Cappella suffered a succession of significant losses, beginning with the passing of the string virtuosi Giacomo VittozziFootnote ⁸⁵ (September 1776), Emanuele Barbella (February 1777), Crescenzo Pepe (July 1777), and Nicola Fabio (December 1777) as well as that of Antonio Calogero (bass voice; August 1777). As has already been noted, the piazza of Vittozzi eventually passed to Valerio, while those of Barbella, Pepe, and Fabio triggered fundamental changes among the violin stands and engendered a veritable tsunami of requests for either salary increases, advancement, or entrance into the Cappella. The documentation of these supplications was organized under a general heading, then registered with correlative indications in sources affiliated with the Cappellano Maggiore. The typical heading, in this case related to Crescenzo Pepe, reads as “Royal Chapel for the disbursement of the funds associated with the piazza of first violin vacated because of the death of Crescenzo Pepe, and the respective applicants [as follows].”Footnote ⁸⁶ In the long list is included the entry “Filippo Pepe [requests] to be admitted as violinist supernumerary of the Royal Chapel.”Footnote ⁸⁷ In a similar manner, Pepe and his brother Carlo also requested, “the customary two months of their father’s salary” as a post-mortem benefit.Footnote ⁸⁸

Given the considerable interest generated in Crescenzo Pepe’s piazza, a consolidated, yet detailed as well as comprehensive rendering of these deliberations (in the form of an extended summary) emanated from the Cappellano Maggiore in mid-July. Addressed to the musicians of the ensemble, it reads:

It is apparent from the introductory preamble that the death of Pepe occasioned significant interest in the first violin stand as evidenced through the supplications of numerous long-serving musicians. This document also confirms the wealth of emerging talent, including Michele Nasci, who would eventually be accorded ordinary status. Perhaps most importantly, it is clear that Pasquale Cafaro, in view of his role as primo maestro and underlined through the virtue of royal intervention, has been accorded the determinant voice, befitting his status (and past precedent). The memorandum continues, stating:

With the replacement of Pepe rendered in a transparent manner as well as the cumulative organization of each piazza, Cafaro turned his attention to the question of the supplications for supernumerary status, which had already been narrowed to Filippo Pepe, Nasci, Valerio, and Aguilar. His memorandum continues,

Cafaro’s acknowledgement and moreover appreciation for the long service of Crescenzo Pepe manifested itself in deciding that Filippo, who undoubtedly possessed the requisite skills and qualifications, be admitted to the ensemble. The noteworthy praise accorded to Nasci is a harbinger for the future success of this musician, who continued to rise rapidly through the ranks of official musical circles of the capital.Footnote ⁹² In regard to Valerio (and as noted earlier), although his supplication is referenced in a terse manner, an appointment loomed in the immediate future. For Aguilar, a member of a family of military musicians, Cafaro deemed that he simply could not fulfill a potential role, underlining the regular activities of the Cappella.

Cafaro’s extended reflection concludes with a succinct summary and supplication for approval by the sovereign. It reads:

This extended document offers an unprecedented insight into the administrative policies and practices of the Cappella at a decisive moment in its history. First and foremost, it underlines the continuing authority of the primo maestro in all artistic decisions regarding the ensemble. It also illustrates the careful collaboration with the Crown and office of the Cappellano Maggiore as well as adherence to well-established norms. This document represents in effect an affirmation of, and continued commitment to the highest standards with a decidedly human touch in regard to the supplication of Filippo Pepe. It also provides a clear framework for the future administration and direction of the Cappella. In fact, the death of Nicola Fabio in December 1777 resulted in another further recalibration and reorganization of the string core of the ensemble, once again meticulously expressed in the folios belonging to the Cappellano Maggiore.Footnote ⁹⁴

In the final calendar year of the first decade of Ferdinando and Maria Carolina’s reign (1779), the Cappella suffered the loss of the venerable vice-maestro Giuseppe Marchitti (December), contrabassist Francesco Piccinni (January), the violinist Giuseppe Pagliarulo (April), and cellist Giuseppe Valerio (April), the last of whom had attained his desired entrance into this elite cadre of musicians. In their place would be admitted a trio of musicians, who became synonymous with the Cappella in the following decade: Carlo Camerino (violin), Domenico Francescone (cello), and Pasquale Pumpo (contrabass). Camerino’s name surfaces first in notes following the death of Barbella (1777), specifically “it has been ordered that Carlo Camerino be admitted as violinist supernumerary without compensation.”Footnote ⁹⁵ In regard to Francescone, his name first appears earlier in the decade, specifically in May 1773, as “supernumerary without compensation serving as cellist.”Footnote ⁹⁶ In 1779, both assumed ordinary piazze (as also indicated by the presence of their names on the monthly rosters), referenced in the same source as “four ducats to Domenico Francescone, who passes to second ordinary cello; three ducats to Pasquale Pumpo ordinary contrabassist, four ducats to Carlo Camerino, who passes to ordinary violinist.”Footnote ⁹⁷ Pumpo had been admitted with ordinary status as second contrabassist in March 1779 to replace the deceased Francesco Piccinni.Footnote ⁹⁸ In the coming years, their names frequently appear as the beneficiaries of periodic increases in compensation. These raises represented a clear affirmation and appreciation of the abilities and impact on the string contingent of the Cappella. As noted earlier, the passing of Giuseppe Marchitti occurred at the end of 1779. His death represented one of the longest standing and final links to the past history of the Cappella, especially to the rule of Carlo di Borbone. As part of the customary disbursement of his salary, it is noted, “In view of the death of Don Giuseppe Marchitti, the King has promoted to vice-maestro in the Royal Chapel, Francesco Corbisiero, to first organist, Paolo Orgitano and in place of the last, Giuseppe de Magistris.”Footnote ⁹⁹ The elevation of Corbisiero and de Magistris seems to have been a nod to the past emphasis on sacred genres. Although the former had indeed composed three comic operas, he and his colleague de Magistris maintained an almost exclusive focus on religious genres. The ensuing decade of the 1780s would prove to be an intensive phase of engagement between the monarchs and the Cappella Reale as well as increasing ties (in terms of personnel) to the royal theater.

The Golden Age: 1780–89

The (so-called) Golden Age of Naples traced its initiation to several key personal and political events, unfolding in fact several years before the initiation of the new decade. On January 4, 1775, Maria Carolina gave birth to her first male child, Carlo Tito Francesco Giuseppe di Borbone, at the Reggia di Caserta. Carlo was given the title of Duke of Calabria as the heir to the throne of his father.Footnote ¹⁰⁰ His birth, as stipulated by their marriage accords, provided the queen with a place on the Consiglio di Stato, the king’s council. Albeit presided over by Ferdinando, given its charge to oversee all affairs of the vast kingdom, Maria Carolina dominated this body and she did not hesitate to impart swiftly her political, social, artistic, and personal agendas. For Bernardo Tanucci, the presiding Secretary of State and close ally as well as channel of information to Carlo di Borbone (King of Spain), it signified a coming end to his long career. Tanucci’s dismissal occurred in the following year (1776), setting the stage for Maria Carolina’s central role in the kingdom. Despite her well-documented personal and political shortcomings, Maria Carolina established a formidable presence within contemporary cultural and artistic life. She was a capable, even talented musician, who demonstrated evident and often astute cultural sensibilities regarding music, dance, art, and even literature. These abilities manifested themselves in the ceremonial life of the court, elevating instrumental music and dance soirees (both intimate ones and large-scale ones referenced as feste di ballo) to a significant level of cultivation and status.Footnote ¹⁰¹ In the last year of his tenure, Tanucci had lamented in a letter to Carlo di Borbone that, “The king did not hold the Council of War, [it was replaced] by a particular cantata, and instrumental music in the apartment of the queen.”Footnote ¹⁰² And, as has been gleaned from her surviving personal diaries, Maria Carolina often remained dispassionate about her obligation to attend opera performances in the royal Teatro di San Carlo.Footnote ¹⁰³ For the numerous ceremonial events sponsored by, and often held at court, the Cappella Reale served as the de facto ensemble in residence. The core ensemble had been often augmented by the large cadre of supernumerary musicians and for the more elaborate feste di ballo (held both in the city and the siti reali outside the confines of the capital), it drew upon musicians of the royal theater. In fact, the overlap in personnel between the Cappella and San Carlo only continued to increase through the decade of the 1770s and 1780s. In regard to the Cappella, the 1780s (for the most part) represented a moment of considerable stability in personnel and constitution under the continued direction of Cafaro. The respect for his artistic direction also extended to the orchestra of the royal theater San Carlo. In 1780, Cafaro had been tasked with the reorganization and codification of standards for the opera orchestra. In an extended evaluation published that year, he outlined the specific instrumentation, constitution, and associated standards designed to reinforce and raise the commitment of its members and the quality of their performance.Footnote ¹⁰⁴

The initial years of the new decade reflected a similar pattern of past fluctuations in personnel. At the turn of the calendar year, vocal virtuosi often departed the city, especially given the growing preference for feste di ballo during Carnevale at the royal theater and palace. Nevertheless, new members of the vocal corps continued to be recruited, especially with the death of the tenor Francesco Tolve in January 1780 and “whose piazza has passed [to] Francescantonio Ferrari” (son of the long-serving Litterio), who had been appointed a supernumerary in that same month.Footnote ¹⁰⁵ The division of Tolve’s salary also notes that the majority of it had been accorded to instrumentalists of the ensembles, no less than Camerino, Francescone, and the recently arrived oboist Giuseppe Prota.Footnote ¹⁰⁶ In the succeeding year, 1781, the vocal corps lost another venerable member, the contralto Santi Barbieri. His passing was followed by that of two other longstanding members, Gennaro Piano (tromba) and Giovanni Battista Bergantino (violin). The death of Barbieri and vacancy of his piazza set in motion a realignment of the voices, documented later in the year. In particular, it is noted that:

This adroit arrangement allowed the aging Agresta a more comfortable and perhaps more feasible role, not to mention one more musically suited, in his continuing service in the ensemble, while adding new, younger members for the taxing roles of soprano and contralto respectively. The death of Piano is also referenced in this same document, naming his replacement as Costantino Cardillo, followed by the customary reallocations to other members of the ensemble. The death of Bergantino, who had served in the Cappella since 1769 and also as a member of the so-called violinisti di corte occurred in March 1781. The related sources note that, “The King has deigned to assign to Filippo Pepe professor of violin, who has served as supernumerary in the Royal Chapel of Naples the ordinary piazza of violin vacant in the aforementioned [ensemble due to the] death of Giovanni Battista Bergantino.”Footnote ¹⁰⁸ Perhaps the most significant loss to the Cappella in the early years of the decade occurred with the death of the famed opera soprano Gaetano Majorano, who had enjoyed unprecedented privileges in the ensemble (as noted in Section 1) as well as one of the highest salaries of the group. Majorano had actually been accorded retirement status several years earlier in 1776 and was even granted the privilege of living outside of the capital.Footnote ¹⁰⁹ As with his colleagues, the response of the administration came quickly, noting:

The laudatory note, underlining the long tenure, distinction, and achievements of Majorano’s career and affiliation with the Cappella (especially the phrase “extraordinary order”) undoubtedly cast a long shadow. For his part, Aprile had an extended affiliation with the ensemble reaching back to 1752. His initial appointment is noted as “Giuseppe Aprile Musico of the Royal Chapel of His Majesty two ducats per month of the ten ducats which were vacated by the death of Francesco Guardia.”Footnote ¹¹¹ The modest compensation suggests a status as supernumerary, not to mention his youth, and these disbursements continued for roughly one year. As to be expected for a rising star, the same payment register includes the following annotation:

In the middle years of the decade, the Cappella endured the retirement of the multi-instrumentalist Francesco Gottlieb Reispacher, while welcoming a rising star to its ranks, none other than Domenico Cimarosa. Reispacher had entered the plan of the Cappella in 1769 and his initial appointment underlines the versatility of his abilities, noting:

Although his principal instrument is listed as oboe, there is evidence that Reispacher also performed on the other wind instruments as required by the music performed, namely bassoon, flute, and clarinet. This broad skill set undoubtedly led to his recruitment from the Royal Swiss Guard and translated into the generous salary for a supernumerary musician. The continued respect for his abilities and satisfaction with his service also emerges in a subsequent request of Reispacher. Sources note that “The King having deigned to grant to Francesco Gottlieb Reispacher, musician of the Royal Chapel permission for six-month’s leave to return to his homeland with the enjoyment of his salary, which he earns as a musician of the Royal Chapel.”Footnote ¹¹⁴ This liberal allocation and permission, as noted earlier, had been selectively granted by the Cappella, often reserved for the vocal virtuosi of the ensemble and namely, those with a continental reputation. Interestingly, he is also listed as timpanist and harpist for the orchestra of the San Carlo theater in these same years.Footnote ¹¹⁵ This same period also occasioned a more prominent role for Domenico Cimarosa, who had entered the ranks of supernumeraries earlier in 1779.Footnote ¹¹⁶ Specifically, the sources note that:

Cimarosa’s professional profile with the ensemble continued to grow in the immediate future, parallel to his significant success as an operatic composer.Footnote ¹¹⁸ The final years of the decade (1787–89) witnessed a considerable transformation of the Cappella that involved changes in leadership and the entrance of new core members. The death of Pasquale Cafaro in late October 1787 ended one of the most significant chapters in the history of the Cappella. As early as 1782, the Crown had begun to prepare for this eventuality. In that year, a folio recounts:

The elevation of Orgitano had in reality paralleled that of his predecessor Cafaro, whose own service initiated as the personal maestro of the queen Maria Carolina. Often overlooked, nevertheless, is that another significant move in personnel for the Crown had also occurred at this moment. In correlative documents, it is noted,

Although Paisiello had been in the service of Catherine II for the better part of the decade, he had been adroitly lobbying Ferdinando and Maria Carolina, albeit through their intermediary, the court minister Ferdinando Galiani, for a return to Naples and an associated position. Indeed, he wrote explicitly to Galiani, claiming:

This same brief period (1787–89) also witnessed the retirement or death of several distinguished members of the vocal choirs, namely Salvatore Consorti, Giovanni Tedeschi Amadori, and Piero Santi. In the case of Consorti, the documentation provides interesting details, noting:

Despite the rather direct and somewhat brusque summary of Consorti’s abilities by this point in his career, the forced retirement had been mitigated by the generous retention of his full salary. Giovanni Tedeschi, the famed contralto who sang under the moniker of “Amadori,” had already officially retired from the Cappella in 1784 and returned to his home of Ronciglione for health reasons. His stage career, moreover, had long since been succeeded by two stints as impresario of the Teatro di San Carlo (1764–67 and 1769–72). Amadori’s death in 1787 led to the elevation within the Cappella of his younger colleague Giuseppe Millico as noted in sources:

Millico, who had arrived in Naples in 1780, lured by the return of and collaboration with Raniero Calzabigi, developed an intimate relationship with Ferdinando and Maria Carolina in these years. He would eventually assume a role as voice teacher and composer, creating dramatic works performed in private for the monarchs.Footnote ¹²⁴ Despite the passing of Consorti and Amadori, the vocal ranks of the Cappella had been well supported, whether through the ascension of virtuosi such as Millico or the numerous supernumerary musicians annotated in the sources. In contrast, the violin section experienced substantial changes by virtue of the deaths of four members, one-third of the string complement: Carlo Camerino (1788), Francesco Lecce (1788), Pietro Antonacci (1789), and Gaetano Salernitano (1789). Each event caused not only a redistribution of funds, but also the reorganization of the associated piazza. The passing of Salernitano (who had been appointed primo violino in 1777) and Camerino (who had also held the aforementioned stand) in rapid succession initiated a burst of deliberation within the associated sources as well as the entrance of five new violinists: Chiapparelli, Ansaldi, Remer, Origo, and Corvo (see Table 5) into the fold of the Cappella. Chiapparelli rapidly advanced from his status as a supernumerary to assume the piazza of Lecce as fourth violinist.Footnote ¹²⁵ Spano, who had been a supernumerary since 1779,Footnote ¹²⁶ is noted as receiving the lion’s share of the disbursement of funds from the piazza associated with Camerino. In particular, he is noted as:

Given the immediacy of the death of Camerino, the fact that Spano had been accorded the majority of Camerino’s salary (one-half), and the repeated affirmation of Spano’s status as an ordinary violinist, it seems likely that he also assumed the piazza of his predecessor. The entrance of Ansaldi, Remer, Origo, and Corvo as a veritable unit in 1788 reveals fascinating details about the ensemble as well as the larger musical establishment of the Crown. In regard to Ansaldi, his notice of appointment on November 16, 1788, declares:

This extraordinary entry underlines not only the value of Ansaldi to the Cappella, but also his esteemed status as a musician. It also reaffirms that the administration of the Cappella went to extraordinary lengths to recruit and to compensate appropriately its members, given the note that his appointment would exceed the approved budget of the ensemble. Corvo is added to the roster of violinists in 1789 and he is identified as “ordinary violinist” signifying a permanent position in the ensemble.Footnote ¹²⁹ His modest initial salary of thirty carlini rises quickly to three ducats per month and taken together (language of appointment and rapid increase), Corvo had been accepted as a permanent member in the Cappella. The entrance of Remer and Origo occurred in rapid succession as documented on November 24 and December 22, 1788 respectively. The details of their individual appointments bear identical language and facts of service (such as compensation), identifying each as members of both the Royal Chapel and the Royal Chamber. Indeed, in correlative archival sources, Ansaldi, Remer, and Origo (as well as Montoro, Compagnone, Salernitano, and others) form an ensemble that seems to have traveled with the monarchs on an annual basis to the more modest, yet favored royal palace and retreat of Portici, located on the slopes of Vesuvius.Footnote ¹³⁰ This small group also expanded to include the cellist Domenico Francescone and maestro di musica Vincenzo Orgitano (later Giovanni Paisiello) as well as select vocalists such as the soprano Giuseppe Millico and the maestro di ballo Francesco Montano. The surviving evidence suggests that this group, denoted by the appellation “Real Camera” constituted the so-called violinisti di corte, the more intimate and personal “band” of the king. This group of musicians had been the topic of considerable controversy in the same decade, largely generated by the cultural mediator, amateur musician, impresario, and diplomat Norbert Hadrava.

Violinisti di corte

In the last quarter of the eighteenth century, Hadrava had served as secretary for the Austrian Ambassador to the Neapolitan kingdom, while also cultivating a highly intimate relationship with Ferdinando and Maria Carolina.Footnote ¹³¹ A cachet of nineteen letters penned by Hadrava survive from the period 1783–99, and reveal details about music-making at court, often involving the aforementioned violinisti di corte (his turn of phrase). In one of the most (in)famous epistles, Hadrava recounts the performance of a Haydn symphony by this group, noting that after several attempts on successive evenings, the outcome was disastrous, as “they played in an unbearable manner.”Footnote ¹³² According to Hadrava, the king remained so displeased that he subsequently had the entire orchestra held under guard for several hours in order to cajole a more attentive rendition of the symphonies. Nevertheless, several weeks thereafter, in a concert organized and directed by the castrato Giuseppe Millico, “the court musicians were arrested as a result of their poor performance.”Footnote ¹³³ Despite such critical and even censorious comments by Hadrava, who had been (presumably) an eyewitness, further evidence seems to contradict his recollections. In fact, the Gazzetta Universale documented with regularity these events at PorticiFootnote ¹³⁴ (and other siti reali) providing indications that dispute Hadrava’s assessments of musical performance as well as ability. A sense of the premium placed on these occasions and larger contexts in the frequent notices about Portici is also evident, as the queen, having recently given birth, “traveled to the Royal Retreat of Portici, where there was a gran gala and baciamano with the participation of the entirety of the Political Ministers, Military, Nobility, and Foreign Ministers, etc.”Footnote ¹³⁵ The mingling of political and social contexts, as had been long established in Neapolitan circles, would have been the opportunity for Hadrava to attend as a member of the diplomatic corps. An even more specific occasion occurred when “His Royal Highness, the Archduke Maximillian continued his holiday in Portici in the company of the sovereigns.”Footnote ¹³⁶ Assessments of these events are transparently presented in the Gazzetta, such as the account that:

The former account (one of many in the Gazzetta) provides more specific information about the typical celebration in Portici, namely, the exclusive nature of these events, the presence of local and foreign dignitaries, and the direct participation of the Crown and their heirs. In terms of the former, it is also noted that “every Sunday there will be [a gathering] in royal quarters, and dancing, to which events, guests will be specifically invited.”Footnote ¹³⁸ The regularity of these concerts and feste di ballo is noteworthy. A sense of how these events impacted the environs of Portici, moreover, also emerges, notably,

Given these details provided by the Gazzetta and further evidence found within related archival sources, the accounts of Hadrava lose their critical edge and can be transparently contested. Rather this ensemble seems to have been an elite group drawn from the Cappella and often accorded generous compensation and related privileges. As illustrated in Table 6 and based on archival sources spanning the decade, the ensemble included the aforementioned core of the leading violinists from Cappella.

Specifically, the ensemble represented a blending of long-tenured violinists such as Bergantino, Montoro, and Compagnone with recently elevated musicians such as Remer, Ansaldi, and Origo. In terms of the latter three, their inclusion in this group explains the language of their contracts with the Cappella and the appellation of Musician of the Royal Chamber. The evidence also verifies that for the entirety of the 1780s and even well into the succeeding decade, this group traveled to Portici at the request of the Crown. Archival sources document, moreover, that each member had been accorded a lump sum of funding to rent a house in Portici (generally during or immediately following the time of Carnevale) and they were expected to perform at the request of the monarchs. The presence of Vincenzo Orgitano and Giuseppe Millico (as well as accounts in the Gazzetta Universale and Notizie del Mondo) suggest that these musicians offered a range of repertoire and concerts spanning instrumental and vocal genres as well as the inclusion of social dance, the last among the most favored pastimes of the monarchs. As the decade ended, a further premium had been established by the participation of Giovanni Paisiello, whose return to Naples from Russia and elevation within royal music circles has been well documented. It is also important to underline the clear overlap in personnel with the Cappella. All of the musicians noted in Table 6 had been at one time or another ordinary members of the Royal Chapel. In the cases of Remer, Origo, and Ansaldi, their clear favor with the monarchs and participation in the events at Portici (and elsewhere) may have helped them to secure appointments with the royal ensemble. The cumulative impact of this evidence regarding the violinisti di corte, moreover, belies any assertion of incompetence, further compromising Hadrava’s claims. At the least, this group may have not played Haydn’s symphonies to the satisfaction of Hadrava, an ardent nationalist, friend, and compatriot to the aforementioned composer. Quite to the contrary, however, this group represented the elite of the official Neapolitan musical corps and, based on the documentary evidence, found considerable favor with the royal monarchs, court, and foreign as well as local nobility.

A Rising Revolution: 1790–99

In the last decade of the eighteenth century, Neapolitan cultural and artistic life continued to endure significant changes, attributable to both social reform and, ultimately, political rebellion. Elite associations (primarily accademie or similar private societies) often promoted by the Crown, generated broad contexts for dialogue and debate. A prevalent theme within elite intellectual circles of the capital focused on the past and present responsibilities of the nobility within Neapolitan society.Footnote ¹⁴⁰ Francesco Mario Pagano (1748–99), among local academics who may be described as formed in the image of past philosophes, applied the social contract to existing conditions. Pagano (along with Genovesi, Filangieri, and others) addressed either directly or peripherally the entrenched system of feudalism in the kingdom.Footnote ¹⁴¹ The outbreak of revolution in France became closely observed by local intellectuals, and for its part the Crown utilized its vast resources to monitor every development. This keen interest reflected not only the fact that Marie Antoinette was the sister of Maria Carolina, but also how the rising tide of unrest affected the European balance of power. Nevertheless, within three years Neapolitan intellectuals (often in the guise of the aforementioned private societies) corresponded with French patriotic societies. These endeavors often joined forces with the proliferating Masonic lodges in the capital, which had ironically thrived after the arrival of Maria Carolina. An ardent supporter, Maria Carolina had been opposed in harsh language by her adversary the Prime Minister, Bernardo Tanucci; the latter had even requested the intervention of Carlo di Borbone. Despite the initial opposition, the Masonic lodges eventually took the form of conduits for the creation of secret ‘Jacobin’ societies.Footnote ¹⁴² It had been under the guise of a Masonic lodge that the ‘prelude to the revolution’ took place and the first Neapolitan Jacobins were exposed, then swiftly persecuted.Footnote ¹⁴³ These organizations had been deemed dangerous, given their mission to disseminate propaganda from France as well as to promote the ideals of liberté, fraternité, and égalité. The transparent objective of the Masonic lodges and Jacobin societies united in attempting to sway the opinions of the general public, while also preparing for the arrival of Napoleon’s armies, should the Neapolitan Kingdom enter the fray. Against the looming tides of revolution and war, the Cappella Reale continued to thrive and fulfill its core mission to the Crown, until the eventual and outright insurrection that unfolded in 1798–99.

The initial years of the new decade witnessed for the most part the characteristic organizational norms for the ensemble regarding personnel. Among the interesting supplications found within the proceedings of the Ministero degli affari ecclesiastici, there is a reference to an ongoing personal issue encountered by one of the longest serving members of the Cappella. This document reads:

As noted in this document, Montoro served both the Cappella and the violinisti di corte as well as royal theater San Carlo. The evident interest of the Crown confirms a transparent esteem for Montoro and his long service, not to mention a sense of compassion. Subsequent documents also reveal that a portion of his salary from the Cappella was set aside each month to resolve ongoing debts and continued until the end of the century. In the very same month of March, the Cappella bade farewell to another long-serving member, the tenor Litterio Ferrari, who retained his full salary, while “the ownership of the aforementioned piazza without pay is accorded to Giuseppe Valerio, tenor supernumerary of the same Royal Chapel, and it has been decided at the same time to admit to it [the Cappella] as supernumerary tenors Luigi de’ Santis, and Vincenzo Correggio and as bass supernumerary Luigi Tasca.”Footnote ¹⁴⁵ The decision to withhold compensation from Valerio remains curious in light of his status as a proven asset and moreover, to also appoint additional supernumeraries of the same voice type to the Cappella. The administration may have had concerns about potential future absences of Valerio, which indeed turned out to be true, to pursue more lucrative theatrical performances elsewhere. In the following year (1791), records reveal that the Cappella continued to expand its large pool of supernumerary musicians, who undoubtedly sought a future ordinary position. Another group is documented on July 29, 1791:

The admission of three contrabassists underlines the significant role of this section in anchoring the string complement and perhaps the inevitable changing of the guard given the long terms of Burlo and Pumpo. Perhaps even more intriguing is the promise of a piazza to the tenor Mombelli and the specification of those held by either Aprile or Millico, both virtuosi castrati. This bold promise undoubtedly and tacitly points out the waning interest and need for the male soprano voice at the end of the century. Finally, the entrance of Lecce and Orgitano note their specific familial connections to current members of the Cappella as well as evidence of a continuing policy of nepotism. A particularly active moment in the fluctuation of personnel unfolded in May 1792 with the appointment of seven new ordinary members, three for the vocal choirs and four instrumentalists. Regarding the former, the death of Leopoldo Maccozzi triggered a surprising fortification of the contralto section, given the diminishing role of castrato voices in general. Specifically, sources note that “Pietro Caldara first soprano supernumerary, assumes ownership [of Maccozzi’s piazza], according the ownership of the other contralto piazze to Nicola Lancelotti, and Domenico Costa.”Footnote ¹⁴⁷ In terms of the instrumentalists, Antonio Guida assumed the ordinary piazza of first cello vacated by the death of Nicola SantacroceFootnote ¹⁴⁸ and Giovanni UgolinoFootnote ¹⁴⁹ the ordinary piazza of lute, which had been his father’s post. Leonardi and Conti had accepted the ordinary piazze of contrabass and bassoon, respectively; however, the sources do not indicate the respective processes involved. Past practice (and speculation) suggest that Leonardi assumed the piazza vacated by the death of Burlo, while Conti’s appointment statement has not been located. Instead, they are both simply listed with the customary title of proprietario preceded by their specific instrument, beginning in 1792.

The middle years of the decade (1794–96) brought challenges to the ensemble for both personnel concerns and the deaths of core members. Giovanni Zito, who had assumed the piazza of Francesco Gottlieb Reispacher in 1784,Footnote ¹⁵⁰ became the focus of an extraordinary intervention by the Crown. In particular, sources recount that:

The significant debt accrued by Zito, the equivalent of more than eighteen-thousand USD in contemporary value, results in the extraordinary measures of garnishing two-thirds of his wages. It also suggests, moreover, that Zito’s talents were highly appreciated by the administration of the Cappella and worthy of such a generous as well as compassionate solution. In the succeeding two years, the Cappella suffered the loss of two important members of the string complement: Michele Nasci (1795) and Giovanni Remer (1796) as well as Paolo Orgitano (1796), who had served in the role of organist since 1776. Nasci had joined the ranks of the Cappella in the wave of musicians appointed in 1777. Ten more years passed before his elevation to ordinary status as noted on February 12^th, 1787, since due to “the death of the ordinary violinist of the Royal Chapel Gennaro Valente, the King has deigned to bestow the aforementioned piazza to the violinist supernumerary Michele Nasci.”Footnote ¹⁵² The official notice of his passing forms a complementary bookend to the aforementioned appointment, recounting “Having passed to the next life Michele Nasci ordinary violinist of the Royal Chapel … the King has resolved … to promote Lorenzo Moser to said piazza of ordinary violin.”Footnote ¹⁵³ Nasci had also served for many years as first violin of the royal theater, therefore his passing undoubtedly exercised an immediate impact on these two musical institutions of the city. Similar to Nasci, Remer had served the king beyond his role in the Cappella, forming part of the aforementioned violinisti di corte and progressing as well to a leading role. The existing sources do not identify the successor to Remer’s piazza in the Cappella. Nevertheless, the longstanding administrative practices of the ensemble insured that supernumerary violinists remained available to fulfill any necessary role. One noteworthy addition to the violinisti di corte whose tenure overlapped with that of Remer’s final years was the service of Antonio Lolli. His name first appears in payment registers from 1791 and remains until 1796 as part of the select group of musicians that accompanied the king and queen to the retreat of Portici.Footnote ¹⁵⁴ Little else is known, unfortunately, about the contributions and continued activities of Lolli. The death of Paolo Orgitano (as well as Onofrio Lorello and Francesco Ferrari) ended the storied career of this musician. In his place, sources note that “Domenico Cimarosa [will] pass to the post of first organist in the Royal Chapel … vacated because of the death of the first organist Paolo Orgitano.”Footnote ¹⁵⁵ Cimarosa remained with the ensemble in the coming years, which coincided with the unrest of the Parthenopean Revolution and his own career downfall.Footnote ¹⁵⁶ The final two years of the century proved to be the most tumultuous in the history of the Cappella Reale.

As early as 1793, compelled by the growing threats to the French monarchy, the Bourbon court had decided to join the first coalition opposing France. In November 1798, spurred on by the will of Maria Carolina, Ferdinando amassed a large army, which entered Rome to restore the Papacy as the French contingent evacuated. This success was short-lived, as the French launched a counterattack routing the Neapolitan forces, which retreated to Naples. Ferdinando and Maria Carolina along with their children and most trusted advisers fled to Palermo in late December on Admiral Nelson’s ship the Vanguard, leaving Naples to endure a bombardment and siege, which ultimately concluded in January 1799. The surrender of the capital followed and the Parthenopean Republic was declared, whose leaders counted a notable number of officials formerly loyal to the Bourbons. Despite the ensuing chaos after the rapid fall of the city, the Teatro di San Carlo premiered a new opera by Piccinni in January, amidst the ongoing siege (and in all likelihood out of ignorance), intended “to celebrate the birthday of Ferdinand IV, our most loved sovereign.”Footnote ¹⁵⁷ On January 27, the Republicans and their local collaborators organized “the public singing of the Te Deum in the mother church, to the firing of canons and in the presence of General Championnet.”Footnote ¹⁵⁸ While contradictory to the Jacobin elimination of organized religion, this event represented a shrewd attempt to gain the support of the populace. The “mother church” referenced had been the Cathedral with its close ties to the patron saint of the city: San Gennaro; universal protector, martyr, and miracle-worker. Later on, in the same day of January 27^th, the Teatro di San Carlo reopened and it had been renamed as the Teatro Nazionale. It featured the aforementioned Nicaboro in Jucatan, this time, reconceptualized “to celebrate the expulsion of the tyrant [with] an analogous hymn and ballet in the second act.”Footnote ¹⁵⁹ Although these events may appear to be peripheral to the Cappella, they undoubtedly involved the members of the ensemble given the overlap in personnel. The monthly rosters attesting to service in the Cappella cease in December 1798, coinciding with the departure of the Crown from the capital. The official end of the Parthenopean Republic occurred on June 19, 1799, formalized by a treaty validated by representatives of the French and Bourbon forces. The ensuing chaos in Naples unfolded swiftly, and the Bourbon court acted even more rapidly to dole out retribution. Ferdinando formed the Suprema Giunta to act as the provisional government and reconvened the Giunta di Stato (or High Court of State) with the specific mission of prosecuting citizens involved in the revolution. This extended to the artistic personnel of the Crown, whether the royal theatres (San Carlo, Fiorentini, and Fondo) or the Cappella. Archival sources reveal that the royal court prosecuted artists and administrators active during the Republic, most notably the former first organist of the Cappella, Domenico Cimarosa.Footnote ¹⁶⁰ Regarding the Cappella, as part of the vast administrative apparatus of the Crown, members would have been vetted before they could recommence royal service. Extant archival sources reveal that the Crown had reinitiated compensation to essential personnel as early as summer 1799, literally two months after the Restoration, declaring, “The King, our Sovereign, with his sacred charge, on this date of 23 August 1799, has resolved, that they continue to compensate all of the individuals of this Royal House, from subordinate leaders on down.”Footnote ¹⁶¹ In the succeeding pages, the first direct reference to the Cappella is documented. In particular, to Antonio Guida, cellist and Procuratore of the ensemble, noting, “The King orders, from the Royal Treasury of the Kingdom, to be paid the salaries from March to the individuals of the orchestra of the Royal Chapel, a total of 433.35 ducats.”Footnote ¹⁶² A series of monthly entries for the same aforementioned amount follow, confirming that the members of the ensemble had begun to draw their compensation again, at least according to this source, by March 1800. These entries continue until 1803 and also contain select annotations, providing modest increases to longstanding members of the ensemble.Footnote ¹⁶³ In mid-1803, a single monthly roster of attendance lists the complete membership of the Cappella (see Table 7). The noteworthy continuity to the past is striking, verifying that the individuals of the Cappella had been successfully returned to royal service.

The ensemble remained under the leadership of Vincenzo Orgitano and Francesco Corbisiero. The string and wind complement likewise returned to their prior numbers, along with the majority of past personnel. It is curious, however, that both Salvatore Consorti and Pietro Santi, both of advanced age and long since retired, are noted on this roster of active members. This may suggest a dearth of available singers or that vocal virtuosi had been hesitant to travel to Naples given the larger political and social unrest as well as the prevailing climate of suspicion. Neapolitan artistic life gradually resumed in the early years of the new century and along with it, a return of the Cappella Reale.

Music for the Queen

Cafaro’s modest body of dramatic works are well represented within the historical collection of music that formed the basis for the present-day Biblioteca del Conservatorio San Pietro a Majella.Footnote ¹⁶⁷ This is confirmed by the early nineteenth-century source, the Indice di tutti i libri, e spartiti di Musica che conservansi nell’Archivio del R[eal] Conservatorio della Pietà de’ Torchini.Footnote ¹⁶⁸ This volume documents the sources donated to the newly formed royal archive, which emerged at the same moment as the consolidation of the remaining music conservatories.Footnote ¹⁶⁹ The entries, which span the dramatic stage to instrumental music, dance genres, theoretical treatises (and a myriad of subgenres), are carefully organized, specifying the items donated by Maria Carolina from her personal library. Each gift by the queen has been marked with the abbreviation S. M. or Sua Maestà. Maria Carolina’s contributions represent approximately 170 items with the majority as dramatic and sacred works.Footnote ¹⁷⁰ Cafaro is well represented among this group and in particular, there are three individual volumes with arrangements of arias from his operas Ipermestra, Disfatta di Dario, Creso, and Arianna e Teseo.Footnote ¹⁷¹ In each of these volumes, there are indications of the performers, among which is frequently noted the castrato Gaetano Majorano Caffarelli, long-time soprano of the Cappella and opera divo. The instrumental accompaniment, as noted in the initial pages of each collection has been reduced from the original full orchestral accompaniment. Specifically, these accompaniments are uniformly Vl. I, Vl. II., Vla., Vlc., Cb., with winds (oboe, flute, or bassoon utilized at different times) and brass (trumpet or horn). In other words, the organico of these arrangements matches exactly that of the Cappella, strengthening the assertion of a relationship. Apart from these volumes there is also a single aria by Cafaro, whose dedication to the queen (see Figure 1) posits that the piece was intended for personal performance.Footnote ¹⁷² In particular, it is an arrangement of the aria “Dall’amore e dal timore” from Il marchese villanoFootnote ¹⁷³ by her teacher. Set for a soprano and the archetypical mezzo-carattere Vespina, the scoring of the aria includes violins I/II, viola, cello, contrabass, oboes I/II, and horns I/II.

Figure 1 Cafaro, Pasquale. Title page from “Dall’amore e dal timore,” Il marchese villano.

Reflecting the organico of the Cappella, it is not far-fetched to suggest that Maria Carolina performed the aria at one of the frequent soirees mentioned in her diaries. Indeed, the queen mentioned on several occasions that she and her family liked to sing contemporary operatic selections in the privacy of their personal apartments.Footnote ¹⁷⁴ For example, on one such occasion, she recorded in her diary (albeit in later years) that there was “music – where I sung.”Footnote ¹⁷⁵ Such events were not limited to the private, personal spheres of life, as in a subsequent entry she noted, “we went to the Academy – where we sung – danced.”Footnote ¹⁷⁶ The academy in question had been in all likelihood the Accademia dei Cavalieri, for which the sovereigns served as patrons and members of the Cappella were often engaged as part of the in-house ensemble.Footnote ¹⁷⁷

The introductory ritornello (in cut-time; G major and Larghetto tempo) of “Dall’amore e dal timore,” spans a brief eight measures (see Musical Example 1). It is marked by a lilting figure in the violins, carefully underlined by regular changes in dynamic over an alternation between tonic and dominant sonorities. The declamatory vocal entry, repeats the introduction, establishing a melancholy tone for the soliloquy, namely one of longing and desire, stressed by the inflection of appoggiature in the violin parts. The melodic line performed by the vocalist, however, notably omits the violin embellishments, suggesting that this arrangement, while created for a skilled musician, may not have been a professional (and strengthening a potential connection to the queen). The succeeding change to an Allegro tempo and common time meter underscore a shift in focus placed on the vocal part. The voice part is characterized by a flowing melodic line (doubled by the violins as customary) and discloses delicate passage work, which culminates in a broad ascent to D6 to conclude the initial strophe of poetry. (See Musical Example 1.) This alternation of declamatory and virtuosic sections prevails throughout the balance of the aria, whose cumulative structural outline presents a broad, repeated binary outline (hence, A – B – A – B). There are also ephemeral moments in which the voice is completely uncovered, rising above the instrumental accompaniment. The aria is nevertheless clearly weighted toward broader, more declamatory phrases, allowing a range of expression (and, of course, reflecting the abilities of the dedicatee). Nevertheless, the technical and expressive resources presented in this piece indicate that it was conceived for a soprano of sound musical abilities grounded in a thorough training.

Musical Example 1 Pasquale Cafaro. Aria per Vespina/nel secondo atto dell’Opera intitolata/il Marchese Villano/per/S.M. La Regina/Cafaro 1776. I-Nc, shelf-mark Rari 1.9.22.

The soliloquy also points to the skills of Cafaro, who although he had largely set aside the composition of stage drama, continued to be in tune with contemporary trends. The choice of an aria associated with the ascendant comic forms of contemporary Naples and evident compositional skill remain impressive. The survival of the aria as well as individual volumes of arrangements from his earlier operas and a contemporary cultivation of sacred genres, point directly toward the activities and engagement of the Cappella. This body of repertoire also posits a change in direction from organizational norms regarding the ensemble associated with Carlo di Borbone and Maria Amalia. In particular, a pivot toward a more wide-ranging utilization of the Cappella beyond his longstanding engagement with liturgical functions and sacred music.Footnote ¹⁷⁸ In addition, each of the selections contained in the manuscript reflect operas donated by Maria Carolina to the newly established royal archive.Footnote ¹⁷⁹ Finally, the meticulous juxtaposition of Neapolitan and Austro-German composers, above all the queen’s expressed favorites Gluck and Schuster, bolster the evident connection to the Cappella as part of their musical repertory and for the personal performance of Maria Carolina. Indeed, a second manuscript held in the Conservatory Library of Naples presents a broad collection of arias from contemporary operas performed in the city. It is not limited to those by Cafaro, albeit his contributions form the greatest number, also including soliloquies by Giovanni Paisiello, Antonio Sacchini, Giacomo Insanguine, Rutini, Christoph Gluck, and Johann Schuster. All of the selections are arranged for soprano and the same instrumental accompaniment as Cafaro’s “Dall’amore e dal timore,” once again positing a connection and potential preparation for the Cappella.

String virtuosi: Santangelo, Montoro, Nasci and Chiapparelli

From the initiation of the early modern period, the Cappella boasted of an uninterrupted line of string virtuosi, especially the leading violinists of the city.Footnote ¹⁸⁰ Among the ranks of the ensemble for more than twenty-years (1750–72), Aniello Santangelo remained a stalwart of the Cappella. Scant information survives beyond his service in the royal chapel, however, DiGiacomo records that he also fulfilled the role of maestro di violino at the Turchini conservatory in the years 1759–71.Footnote ¹⁸¹ This station of distinction undoubtedly placed him in a position to develop a network of colleagues and younger violinists, who could join the ranks of the Cappella (or other ensembles of the city). Indeed, Santangelo would be succeeded by his younger contemporary and fellow member of the Cappella, Nicola Fabio, at the Turchini.Footnote ¹⁸² Santangelo’s surviving music reflects the primary instrumental genres, including a collection of sonatas for two violins and cello; two concertos for flute and strings; and a sinfonia.Footnote ¹⁸³ The manuscript for the twelve sonatas bears the indication of Op. 1, however, no date of composition is provided.Footnote ¹⁸⁴ Specified as trii, the majority of these compositions are conceived in the four movement, S-F-S-F outline of the trio sonata. This relationship is strengthened, moreover, through the tonal unity of most of the pieces as well as the reliance on binary formal structures (although the reprise is often written out in full or bears some telescoping or overall reduction). The presence of dance movements (such as gigue) and associated tempo markings further underline the relationship to the trio sonata. Nevertheless, the cello part is limited to few or no figures suggesting, (but not confirming), a purely string texture. Of the twelve sonatas, only the third and eighth are conceived in a three-movement outline of F – S – F. These two compositions represent the most musically innovative and progressive of the group, pointing to the future.

Sonata III spans one-hundred ninety-one bars and presents a broad rounded-binary structure. The A section extends eighty bars and it is marked by a multitude of melodic ideas, introduced primarily by the first violin. Nevertheless, the second violin and cello engage often in the musical discourse, establishing themselves on an equal level and frequently filling out the essential texture of the trio. The opening gesture is characteristic to the movement, outlining an immediate octave plunge and return, followed by a scalar descent (see Musical Example 2; mm. 1–4) stressing scale degrees 7, 5, and 3. The immediate sequential continuation of the opening on the submediant posits a shift to g minor in mm. 3–4 (thus transposed down a third), again stressing the aforementioned scale degrees, and culminates in an abrupt leap upward to the new tonic. Played by all three instruments, there are clear suggestions of the Falling Thirds schema. This bold gesture also evokes a “Zweier” (a term utilized by Riepel and Koch), that is, an initial two-bar phrase, immediately transposed down by a third. Of interest is the open-ended melodic closure on scale degree three of the first pair, which then proceeds to a stronger more closed arrival in the second on scale degree one. Taken as a whole, the unison idea posits contrapuntal ideas that saturate the movement, whether the rapid octave descent, the broken octave figures, or ascending or descending scalar passages. The tapering gesture (mm. 3–4) elides with the consequent phrase, rising two octaves before cascading downward to affect a half-cadence.

Musical Example 2 Aniello Santangelo. Sonata III in Trii. I-Nc, shelf-mark 34.3.21.

The initial subsection (of A) takes flight through a series of successive melodic ideas, each with distinctive elements. The first unfolds in balanced, four-bar phrases, marked by the aforementioned angular unison figure as well as broken octaves and repetitive descending ideas. The second (mm. 14–21) offers a subtle stylistic counterpoint, initiating with a rhythmic triplet gesture followed by an octave leap then descent that includes a prominent flatted-sixth degree. The third (mm. 26–33) synthesizes prior ideas whether the repetitive scalar passages (ascending or descending), followed by broken triadic gestures punctuated by a cadential extension spanning an extra measure. The balance of the initial subsection of A (mm. 34–69) takes a similar approach, namely a series of melodic phrases, however, with a clear harmonic leaning toward the dominant harmony and key, underlined by a concluding half cadence (on C) in m. 80. Santangelo initiates the B section through a familiar compositional gambit, the return of the initial unison melodic figure (from the opening mm. 1–4), here stated in the prevailing F major. What follows are telescoped recalls of earlier material leading to bravura passages highlighting the technical prowess (featuring contrast in registers, diverse articulations, broken octaves, and rapid double stops) of the soloist in mm. 103–124. These ideas are rounded off by transitional passages that resemble earlier material (as opposed to a literal reprise), building tension to prepare for the return of the A section in m. 138. The ensuing reprise spans the final portion of the initial movement, referring to earlier melodic material, while reiterating primarily the return to the tonic harmony. Taken altogether, the initial movement of Sonata III offers an abundance of progressive features: the wealth of melodic ideas, idiomatic writing for all three instruments, balanced musical textures marked by motivic and rhythmic interplay, symmetrical melodic structures, as well as transparent and equally proportioned formal components. This composition also points to a body of repertoire composed by members of the Cappella that has been largely forgotten or overlooked in contemporary scholarship.

Among the longest tenured members of the Cappella, whose service overlapped with Santangelo and literally several generations of violinists, Antonio Montoro (as noted in Section 2) entered the ensemble in 1773 and performed until the beginning of the nineteenth century.Footnote ¹⁸⁵ Indeed, the final notice within the Neapolitan archives referencing the violinist recount “Settima Bandinelli, widow of the Chamber Violinist Antonio Montoro,” documenting the disbursement of his pension to her and dated September 23, 1815.Footnote ¹⁸⁶ His professional activities within the service of the court had initiated as early as 1769, when he is recorded as a violinist in the San Carlo orchestra. He held this position concurrently with his role within the Cappella, a common occurrence in the city among professional musicians. Montoro is also frequently documented as among the musicians who received additional compensation for composing and performing the music of the feste di ballo celebrations held each year in the royal theater (and other locations) during Carnevale.Footnote ¹⁸⁷ For example, Montoro was compensated a total of 16 ducats ($842.88), “eight for having performed as first violin … and another eight for the composition of eight minuets.”Footnote ¹⁸⁸ This dual role as performer and composer resulted in the generous compensation, a figure not unusual for the elite class of musicians that served the Crown. Montoro’s name appears frequently in surviving sources related to the musical life within the environs of the court. In fact, the feste were also often performed in private, as noted in a correlative archival source, citing Montoro as having been compensated “three ducats for his service … in having played in the eight performances of contradances that occurred during Carnevale for the enjoyment of their Royal Majesties.”Footnote ¹⁸⁹ It is also evident that Montoro maintained a recognized profile as a composer; however, only a small portion of his music has survived to the present. In addition to the aforementioned dance pieces, there is the cantata Ninna, per il Santissimo Natale, which takes as its basis the eponymous Nativity hymn.Footnote ¹⁹⁰ Presented within a modest volume of sacred music alongside single works by Cafaro and Hasse respectively (both devoted to the Nativity), this collection is among the manuscripts donated to the royal archive by Maria Carolina, bolstering Montoro’s importance to the court as an instrumentalist and composer.Footnote ¹⁹¹ Spanning four movements with two vocal interludes, this setting of the Christmas hymn features two soprano soloists, SATB choir, violin I & II, viola, cello, and contrabass, clarinets, horns, and bassoon. The highly lyrical yet often declamatory recounting of the spiritual narrative distinguishes Montoro as a talented composer of vocal music. Given the provenance of this source (as among those donated to the royal archive by Maria Carolina) and a scoring easily rendered by the Cappella, this piece may have been intended for private performance for the monarchs. In addition to this cantata, Montoro is survived by a collection of seven sinfonie. These sinfonie bear the inscription “Dedicated to His Most Royal Highness, the Hereditary Prince,”Footnote ¹⁹² suggesting another intimate connection to the Crown. Although the manuscript does not bear a date, given the emphasis that the queen placed on musical performance and instruction with her children, one can suggest that this piece had been dedicated to Francesco di Borbone (1777–1830), the second male issue of Ferdinando and Maria Carolina.Footnote ¹⁹³ These modest compositions, similar to the aforementioned cantata, bear a similar scoring (violin I & II, viola, cello, contrabass, pairs of oboes and horns) that point to the Cappella as well as the instrumental tradition of the sinfonia in Naples. Indeed, the limited history of the sinfonia in Naples has largely been confined to its operatic function in the eighteenth century.Footnote ¹⁹⁴ Nevertheless, there is evidence of interest and cultivation within the inner circle of the Crown. In addition to the Montoro manuscript, a compilation of sinfonie exists in the Biblioteca del Conservatorio San Pietro a Majella, whose provenance points toward the Cappella. The volume contains bound orchestral parts and bears the handwritten inscription “Sinfonie di Cimarosa, Sterckel [sic], Tritta [sic], Cimarosa, Gabellone, Naumann, Schusther [sic], e Guglielmi.”Footnote ¹⁹⁵ The contents reflect, once again, a juxtaposition of Austro-German and Neapolitan musicians, all of whom had been within the orbit of the court and reflect the tastes of Ferdinand and Maria Carolina. The uniform orchestration of these works as two violins, two violas, cello, contrabass, two oboes, two flutes, and two horns is consistent to both the instrumental core of the Cappella Reale and Montoro’s sinfonia, establishing potential links to the cultivation of the genre.

Each of Montoro’s seven sinfonie present a single movement, marked in a rapid tempo and spanning modest dimensions (anywhere from seventy-seven to one-hundred forty-nine bars in length). The harmonic compass of these works is equally unpretentious, not exceeding three accidentals. From the perspective of formal structure, Montoro opts for transparent rounded binary outlines and melodic material grounded in the schemata of the partimento tradition. The seventh sinfonia offers a typical representation of this collection. Scored for the full instrumental component noted earlier, the movement presents an E-flat major tonality and Allegro non tanto tempo in common time. The formal parameters have been rendered as a rounded binary structure distinguished by a transparent harmonic progression. The opening gesture alludes to characteristic melodic ideas of the Neapolitan sinfonia tradition and posits suggestions of diverse schemata. In particular, the first violin presents the melody, which, after the initial octave fall, (outlining a Triadic Descent) rises a fifth before returning to the tonic in a simple, lyrical gesture. The first oboe doubles this line (an octave higher), and its continuation at first proposes a Do-Re-Mi, but continues to ascend to the fifth scale degree on the downbeat of measure 10, effecting a half-cadence (or medial caesura) rather than continuing to develop into an Overture schema (see Musical Example 3; mm. 1–16).Footnote ¹⁹⁶

Musical Example 3 Antonio Montoro. Sette sinfonie con due violini, due oboi, corni, e basso. Biblioteca del Conservatorio di Milano Fondo Noseda M 29–9.

This introductory gambit is underlined by rapid changes in dynamic (from forte to dolce), octave displacement, and aggressive tremolos. The suggestion of schemata, from the initial Triadic Descent to the Do-Re-Mi, (and even a nascent Overture schema), ground this sinfonia in the Neapolitan tradition. Beginning in m. 11, a Do-Re-Mi emerges now in the dominant key of B-flat, precipitating another half cadence in mm. 15–16 with the tenor clausula in the bass. This concluding element of the opening appears as part of a trimodular block. The oboes also occupy an important role in the presentation of the thematic material. As the initial figure culminates in a half-cadence marked forte, the oboes enter in thirds to solidify the dominant key with a lyrical descending melody. In a similar manner to the Santangelo trio, the dominant key is ultimately affirmed by the reprise of the opening gesture in B-flat, slightly telescoped to a single phrase, then succeeded by a digression to g minor. The foray to g minor (the dominant minor) builds harmonic tension, underlined by string tremolos and changes of volume, leading to the reprise of the A section as well as its thematic material. Montoro’s sinfonia is an excellent representation of the Neapolitan cultivation of this genre and the composer himself. Given the larger social contexts of a potential performance, within either the private spheres of the siti reali, the (physical) Cappella itself, or even an organization such as the Accademia dei Cavalieri,Footnote ¹⁹⁷ these works are perfectly tailored to expectations. Namely they offer restraint in length, conception, and content, while also displaying an evident and expert compositional craft, indicative of both the milieu of music-making within the Cappella and the class of maestri-strumentisti active in this context.

In comparison to his colleagues within the Cappella, there is a remarkable amount of surviving information about the career of Michele Nasci. Trained at the Conservatorio di San Onofrio, Nasci entered this institution on June 19, 1758, according to DiGiacomo’s chronicle and extant documents.Footnote ¹⁹⁸ The latter materials, moreover, claim “he graduated as a virtuoso from the conservatory on June 19, 1766 and as a token of appreciation for his contributions was awarded his bed.”Footnote ¹⁹⁹ At the San Onofrio, Nasci had been a student of Saverio Carcais, maestro di violino and long-term member of the Cappella. This relationship undoubtedly helped the younger musician establish himself first as a supernumerary in the Cappella, then obtain an ordinary position. Nasci had also studied, in all likelihood, composition with either Carlo Cotumacci or Giuseppe Dol, who served as the maestri di cappella.Footnote ²⁰⁰ Charles Burney’s chronicle of his visit to Naples in 1771 has provided a wealth of information about Nasci’s activities and career. In particular, Burney recounted: “Signor Nasci, who leads the band at the comic opera in the theatre de Fiorentini, played on the violin in the Dominican’s performance, and afterward in some of his own trios, which are extremely pretty, with a very uncommon degree of grace and facility.”Footnote ²⁰¹

It has also been assumed that since this performance occurred in the residence of Sir William Hamilton, Ambassador to Great Britain, it led to the publication of Nasci’s early sonatas in London the same year.Footnote ²⁰² Nevertheless, surviving archival documents in Naples dispute Burney’s assertion about Nasci’s employment at the Fiorentini. These sources verify that by at least 1769, Nasci had been retained within the artistic personnel of the royal court. His name appears on a list of musicians who performed for the six feste di ballo organized at the Reggia di Caserta during Carnevale in 1769.Footnote ²⁰³ Two years later, Nasci is cited as primo violino for the orchestra of the Teatro Nuovo, not the Fiorentini, who performed at Caserta for Carnevale in 1771.Footnote ²⁰⁴ Two years further on in 1773, Nasci is still listed as primo violino at the Nuovo with Carlo Camerino remaining in the position of primo violino for the Fiorentini ensemble.Footnote ²⁰⁵ In all likelihood, this arrangement held until 1778, the year in which Camerino assumed leadership of the orchestra at the Teatro di San Carlo.Footnote ²⁰⁶ What remains unclear is whether Nasci then took the leadership of the Fiorentini? It is known that in 1779, he is cited as primo violino for the ensemble at the newly opened Teatro del Fondo.Footnote ²⁰⁷ One could speculate that he remained in this role until he joined the San Carlo orchestra in 1788 as primo violino, a position he held until 1793. In the interim, Nasci also joined the ranks of the Cappella as supernumerary violinist in 1777 (see Section 2) and eventually earned a piazza. Nasci also remained active as a pedagogue, serving as maestro di violino at the Conservatorio di S. Onofrio. Although payment records survive only for the period of 1780–83, Di Giacomo lists his service over the span of 1771–95 and that he succeeded his teacher Carcais.Footnote ²⁰⁸ The violinist earned an annual salary of 54 ducats, a considerable sum in the eighteenth century.Footnote ²⁰⁹ Nasci is also listed by Di Giacomo as maestro di violino, succeeding his colleague Camerino, at the Pietà dei Turchini conservatory.Footnote ²¹⁰ There is also evidence that he substituted for Camerino as concert master of the ensemble at the Accademia dei Cavalieri for a single season.Footnote ²¹¹ This engagement with multiple ensembles (the Cappella and local theaters) and institutions (such as the conservatories and Accademia) throughout the capital city formed the characteristic narrative for Nasci and his contemporaries. It was also complemented by his activities as a composer.

Although his surviving compositions are not numerous, they do reflect the larger cultivation in Naples of instrumental chamber music (sonatas, trios, and dance pieces, the last of these genres conceived as a collection of “corrente”) and orchestral genres (almost exclusively concertos). Marked Allegro in the meter of two-four and key of G major, the third corrente for violin and cello departs from the typical binary construct of most dances.Footnote ²¹² Instead, Nasci opts for an expansive sonata form spanning 361 bars and reflecting contemporary formal protocols. The solo part requires impeccable technical and interpretative skills, undoubtedly pointing toward the abilities of the composer himself. The lyrical opening expresses the initial thematic idea unfolding in three four-bar phrases (the typical “sentence presentation”) taking the shape of an a b b outline (or antecedent – consequent – consequent). These phrases disclose a triadic ascent schema, nested with an Overture schema, eventually reaching a ninth (or A6) before cascading downward to affect a Meyer (expressed as an imperfect authentic cadence) in measure 8, followed by an immediate repetition of the consequent phrase and schema (mm. 9–12; see Musical Example 4).

Musical Example 4 Michele Nasci, Corrente III in Dieci correnti per violino. I-Nc, shelf-mark MS 6273; 22.6.19.

The reprise of the initial figure of the antecedent phrase (in m. 13) is joined to that of the consequent then subjected to immediate embellishment, extension, and development. This establishes the focus of the entire Exposition section as a series of adaptations on the primary motivic ideas from the “a” and “b” phrases. The careful articulations (detaché alternating with legato) highlight a series of melodic variations that unfold across the full range of the instrument. The melodic lines alternate at times with more contrapuntal episodes engaging the accompaniment in a playful back-and-forth. In terms of the latter, the frequent presence of treble clef and an entire absence of bass figures strongly suggests the cello as the preferred accompaniment. Similar to the violin, the cello requires a noteworthy technique and exploits the outlines of the instrument’s range. The utilization of a keyboard, however, cannot be definitively ruled out in the sonata. The harmonic compass of this corrente, like most of the others, passes through a series of closely related modulations arriving at the dominant tonality as the Exposition closes.

The Development section ensues after the customary double bar, immediately referencing the appoggiatura of the “a” motive that opens the sonata. This section opts for a more playful, engaged style between the two parts, marked by contrapuntal exchanges of a descending figure and harmonic instability, albeit a well-proportioned length to balance the Exposition. As this section winds toward a close, the dominant tonality (D major) emerges again to prepare for the Recapitulation. The concluding section matches in content and length that of the Exposition. There is also an evident expansion to highlight the drama of the conclusion. The third corrente is an excellent representative of Nasci’s compositional skill and characteristic abilities as well as the larger cultivation of instrumental forms in Naples. The careful balance between the soloist and accompaniment underlined by the calculated formal and harmonic architecture, while also requiring rigorous technical abilities for both the soloist and accompaniment, speak to a mature style and command of genre. The choice of a mature sonata form in this movement (and select others) illustrate the continued advance and vibrancy of Neapolitan instrumental music.

A younger contemporary of Nasci, Saverio Chiapparelli’s entrance to the Cappella can be traced to sources in the Tesoreria antica. Specifically, his admission ties to the notice of a colleague’s death. In particular, the document recounts:

For Chiapparelli, his appointment began a long tenure with the ensemble that continued until the end of the eighteenth and into the early part of the nineteenth century. Similar to his contemporaries, Chiapparelli also maintained a profile as a composer, leaving a small quantity of compositions including an instrumental serenata and sinfonia. The serenata is scored for violins I, II, & III, pairs of oboes, clarinets, horns, cello, and bass.Footnote ²¹⁴ This designation, in the eighteenth century, posited music most often for social occasions, and, as noted in an earlier section, Naples hosted a vibrant social life, especially among the elite classes within the orbit of the court. This also included the frequent private concerts sponsored by Maria Carolina, making this composition appropriate for such an event. Chiapparelli’s serenata can be allocated into three movements, each with further sectional divisions, distinguished by essential changes in tempo, meter, key, and character. The third movement represents the culmination of this serenata, outlining seven individual units with minimal sectional repetition. The essential musical discourse unfolds in the three violin parts as a contrast between the stately Largo sections and the more playful Allegretto units that serve as melodic and rhythmic counterpoints. Each of the Largo segments of the third movement presents a series of melodic strains in cut-time, grounded (for the most part) in the tonic, E-flat major. Nevertheless, these strains unfold as asymmetrical units. For example, the initial Largo spans fifty-five measures that progress as strains of 10, 8, 13, and 24 bars of music respectively. Although the basic phrase unit is two measures, each is subject to extension and/or internal repetition. The three framing Allegretto sections provide contrast in key (for the most part the dominant and secondary dominant tonalities), meter (2/4), and a singular reliance upon the same brisk, running figure for each statement. In contrast, the Largo sections offer an abundance of melodic material (once again as successive asymmetrical strains) to provide contrast. The winds in the serenata, whether the clarinet or oboe, provide a contrast in color and texture. Each group contributes to the essential musical texture, whether through interjecting brief solos or reinforcing the cadential passages. The horns remain relegated to punctuation (as to be expected in light of contemporary performance practices), while the lower strings round out and bolster the harmonic textures. Chiapparelli’s serenata presents the characteristic features of the instrumental genre: light-hearted, lyrical melodies underpinned by simplistic harmonic progressions. For the most part, the melodic strains resemble those of contemporary social dances, especially the contradance. In particular, the repetitive gestures, the fundamental two-bar phrases shifts in meter (especially from duple to triple) and the profusion of new, successive melodic ideas. Even the asymmetrical organization of the strains finds a connection to the myriad and often irregular movements of the groupings and patterned steps of the contradance. These features distinguish this serenata as an ideal accompaniment to the typical social event often entrusted to the Cappella in the private or more public spheres of the Palazzo Reale or any of the siti reali.

Maestri da Fiato

The lion’s share of attention in scholarship regarding the compositional activities of the maestri strumentisti has been justifiably placed upon the string virtuosi of the ensemble. The higher professional profile of these artists and greater diffusion of their music has been the basis for this recognition. The membership of the Cappella included a broad range of musicians, who also contributed works for winds, none more prominent than Ferdinando Lizio and Francesco Ricupero. Both of these maestri had long tenures with the Cappella and their activities also extended to membership in the orchestra of the San Carlo. Lizio and Ricupero distinguished themselves, moreover, as pedagogues, whether through service to the Neapolitan conservatory system or the composition of didactic compositions designed to benefit the formation of developing musicians. Ricupero achieved a distinguished career within the Cappella and music circles of the capital. Ricupero’s composition profile, however, displayed a significantly greater breadth and quantity of surviving music. The first mention of Ricupero stems from records pertaining to the Cappella from both the Ministero degli affari ecclesiastici and Tesoreria antica. The first source notes, “To Francesco Ricupero, professor of bassoon, who has served for a long time without compensation, ten carlini per month.”Footnote ²¹⁵ Under the same date, however, listed in the Tesoreria antica, he is cited as “bassoonist of the Royal Chapel with a salary of one ducat per month.”Footnote ²¹⁶ By 1779, Ricupero had been admitted to another local ensemble of distinction, cited for “having performed as bassoonist in the Royal Theater of San Carlo.”Footnote ²¹⁷ It is evident that his reputation continued to grow in subsequent years as one notice recounts:

Ricupero’s recognition as maestro di cappella itself is significant and underlines his growing reputation in the field of composition. The payment specifies that he had led the performance of music for the aforementioned profession of vows, and one can assert that in all likelihood had contributed his own work. Finally, the commission came from Barone Antonio Ricciulli del Fosso, placing the composer within rarified aristocratic circles and the associated network of ceremonial events often requiring the creation of new music. Ricupero’s surviving catalogue of music represents a significant body of works numbering in the hundreds, spanning sacred and secular, vocal and instrumental genres, as well as public and private contexts.Footnote ²¹⁹ Within the contemporary holdings of the Biblioteca del Conservatorio San Pietro a Majella resides a collection of autograph manuscripts providing an excellent representation of the composer’s music.Footnote ²²⁰ The contents are exclusively instrumental genres and include sonatas, concertos, and orchestral works. There are also small-scale chamber pieces (primarily duos), and even compositions labeled as didactic works, including contrapuntal exercises as well as some bearing the descriptive label of “studio.” Taken altogether, this music demonstrates the breadth and skill of Ricupero.

The Concerto per flauto traverso con violini, corni da caccia, e basso (1797) can be viewed as a representative work of the composer.Footnote ²²¹ Conceived in the traditional three-movement outline and alternation of fast-slow-fast tempi, each is a substantive statement with the finale providing a thrilling close to the concerto. The Allegro finale spans two-hundred seventy-one measures, cast in the tonic G major, and in 2/4 meter. The formal outline of this movement reflects the characteristic sonata-concerto concept of the late eighteenth century. Table 8 summarizes its formal dimensions.

As illustrated earlier, an evident symmetry emerges in the rendering of the sectional division within the sonata-concerto structure. The lengthy Exposition sets into motion the musical discourse of the concerto with the initial ritornello introducing an assortment of schemata from which the primary thematic material is derived. Musical Example 5 (mm. 1–15) presents the declarative opening of the first ritornello, in which several schemata appear transparently. The opening gesture by the violins presents a nascent Triadic Ascent (over the tonic pedal), which is succeeded by a Do-Re-Mi (mm. 7–8), that flows seamlessly into a Prinner Riposte (mm. 10–11) and rounded off by a closed Meyer (mm. 11–12). The entrance of the soloist overlaps with the prior Meyer schema and immediately offers a reiteration of the Triadic Ascent. The flute’s initial gambit (the Triadic Ascent schema) is equally distinguished by a lucid contrapuntal relationship to the preliminary motive of the violins (a rising, sequential third figure; mm. 2–3). In contrast, the soloist presents a falling sequential third figure (mm. 14–15). The reiterated Triadic Ascent upon the entrance of the solo flute (mm. 12–14) is extended with the characteristic 7–2–4 melodic voice leading over the dominant seventh harmony leading (not shown), which leads directly to the cadential prolongation in the form of an Indugio schema (mm. 21–26). The winding down of the first ritornello takes the shape of a broad close (mm. 27–46) in which successive schema (a Mi-Re-Do, succeeded by reiterated Meyer schemas) leads to the expected cadence in the tonic, G major.

Musical Example 5 Francesco Ricupero. Concerto per flauto traverso con violini, corni da caccia, e basso, 1797. I-Nc: shelf-mark MS 8050.

The first solo Episode (mm. 47–65) establishes an immediate relationship to Ritornello I through its opening Triadic Descent (mm. 47–49), quickly restated in imitation by the first violin (mm. 49–51), which rebounds quickly to form a Triadic Ascent (mm. 51–53). The ensuing passages offer a sequential elaboration of the Triadic Descent before yielding to a pair of successive Prinner Ripostes to bring the initial episode to a close. Ricupero recalls only a brief motive of the Ritornello passage, an appoggiatura-like flourish in the second violin (mm. 66–71) before the soloist begins Episode 2. Preserving the conventional approach, the solo flute offers a Triadic Ascent to begin the second episode, which rapidly modulates through an extension by means of the 7–2–4 melodic voice leading as the secondary dominant pedal tonality (A major) prevails. These passages for the soloist express exposed motivic ideas over a sparse accompaniment, unfolding in the fifth and sixth octaves of the flute’s register. There is once again an evident reference to prior melodic material and schemata as Episode 2 winds toward a close, culminating in a confirmation of D major. The ensuing third ritornello initiates the Development portion of the formal structure and as such it preserves the dominant tonality unfolding primarily as a series of Meyer schemata. The repetition of the aforementioned schemata generates a latent tension preparing for the ensuing third solo episode. This section is distinguished by an abundance of idiomatic material for the soloist, recalling both prior melodic ideas and schemata. The opening gesture by the flute, clothed in perfunctory Romanesca and Prinner schemata (mm. 123–128), also recalls earlier material. Of particular importance is the harmonic progression in which the extended dominant pedal (A major) eventually culminates in reiterated dominant-seventh sonorities, concluding on a stunning B-major half-cadence (m. 164). The conclusion of the Development section sets the stage for the reprise of the tonic tonality and associated thematic material, effected in m. 165. Ricupero opts, however, to telescope the recall of prior music within both the fourth ritornello and the fourth episode. These sections remain largely faithful to their presentation earlier in the movement, while also providing tonal stability through the return to G major. The obligatory statement of the fifth ritornello (and the motive in the second violin part) sets the stage for Episode 5, which is surprisingly the longest of the concerto. This section dutifully presents earlier material and the solo flute shines once again in these idiomatic passages. These qualities also posit an emphasis on this section of the structural outline suggesting that the Recapitulation represents culmination rather than a simple reprise. This assertion is bolstered by the looming Cadenza noted in the score. After a brief recall of the ritornello motive, the Cadenza is indicated for the soloist. At its conclusion, the last ritornello provides a fitting end to the movement.

Ricupero’s Concerto for Flute is an impressive statement of compositional craft as well as contemporary performance practice standards for Neapolitan wind virtuosi. The wealth of expressive idiomatic writing and abundance of schemata underscores the provenance of the concerto and Ricupero’s training (in all likelihood) in one of the Neapolitan conservatories. Of particular importance is the formal unity and cohesion displayed in the composer’s mastery of the sonata-concerto structure. The reliance upon a discreet collection of schemata, especially the prominent utilization of the Triadic Ascent, accentuates and binds together seamlessly the established protocols of formal design. The idiomatic writing for the flute (as well as string accompaniment for that matter) prevails throughout the entirety of the concerto and requires a noteworthy technique and interpretative abilities on the part of the soloist. The bold harmonic underpinning of the finale movement, especially within the Development section, exceeded the customary outline of four accidentals and demonstrates an evident willingness to surpass established norms. Taken altogether, this concerto offers a bold testament to an often-neglected sector of Neapolitan instrumental music and encourages further exploration of Ricupero’s contemporaries.

Epilogue

The virtuosi of the Cappella, as detailed in the present section, distinguished themselves not only by their practical skills, but also by noteworthy compositional craft. The music studied represents only a small fraction and largely reflects Neapolitan provenance. There is ample evidence that the works of these individuals circulated beyond the Kingdom of Naples, and this fact merits further as well as more detailed study. This research would also expand as well as deepen existing knowledge about the diverse networks of patronage beyond the Bourbon court, especially within aristocratic and diplomatic social circles. It may also lead to greater understanding of how these musicians engaged with the religious institutions and culture of Naples. This inquiry could also shed light on the dense infrastructure of professional associations and how members of the Cappella had been affiliated with virtually every significant local music ensemble. Finally, additional study may even provide biographical details of the musicians of the Cappella, who for the most part have remained overshadowed by the divi of the dramatic stage and largely relegated to secondary interest.