Seite - 377 - in Musiktheater im höfischen Raum des frühneuzeitlichen Europa - Hof – Oper – Architektur

Farinelli’s Dream: Theatrical Space, Audience and Political Function of Italian Court Opera 377 multaneously present from its foundation in 1737.58 At the nearby Portuguese court, provenance of the Spanish Queen Maria Barbara, high court officials shared the stalls with businessmen and foreigners at the splendid Opera do Tejo, according to contem- porary descriptions of travellers, who visited the opera house just before the terrible earthquake of 1755.59 In Vienna, opera performances at court ceased to be restricted to courtiers from 1741 and the opening of the Burgtheater by Empress Maria Theresa im- plied a shift of management and financial risk from the Imperial court to an impresario or appaltatore. In addition to the restricted Cammer-musique, where the Imperial family and higher aristocracy continued to gather privately par grande distinction to hear or perform brief comedies, cantatas and ballets, the Empress occasionally financed lavish opera seria performances at the Burgtheater. There the nobility shared their space with the Publico to celebrate important dynastic events. In these performances admittance was free for everyone observing the rules of public decency60. From this European perspective, what now may be considered the proper founda- tion of a Madrid court opera in 1747 clearly reminds us—within the specific Spanish cultural and political context outlined here—of the later new foundations of exclusive court opera in Germany in the years around 1740, such as Bayreuth in 1737, Stutt- gart in the same year or Berlin in 1741.61 But even in this type of aristocratic theatre, admittance seems to have been less restricted than in Madrid. The Saxon court in Dresden, the home from 1733 onwards of a new, stable exclusive opera organized around the composer Johann Adolf Hasse, may be regarded, as it was in its own time, as an excellent example of this type of late Hofoper. Comparison between Madrid and Dresden may prove particularly instructive, since we have a detailed seating-plan from the same year 1755. In Dresden, the financing of the costly opera depended en- tirely on the king’s personal budget, and could therefore be considered the “King’s private diversion” in ambassador Keene’s apt description. Officially dependent on the King’s Chamberlain (Oberkämmerei), the opera finances were in fact controlled by the powerful statesman Count Heinrich von Brühl, who saw in opera a prestigious sign 58 See Morelli 1987, p.  36; Fabbri 1987. 59 Brito 1989, pp.  24–28. For a seating-plan of the inauguration of the Lisbon court opera theatre on 31  March 1755, see Gallash-Hall  /  Januário 2009, p.  268; to be completed with the discussion of the Lisbon audience in Gallash-Hall 2016, pp.  79–88. I’m grateful to Cristina Fernandes (Lisbon) for bringing this source to my attention. 60 Although doubts have been expressed as regards the efectiveness of the inclusion of non-noble mem- bers of the audience in Walter 2016, p.  200, the information provided by Obersthofmeister Kheven- hüller is conclusive about the inclusiveness of the opera audience at the Burgtheater, see, for instance, Khevenhüller’s remark about the pressing throng of people (“zudringenden Volck”) on 15  October 1744 to see an opera by Caldara resulting from the received instruction ‘to let everyone in’ (jedermann die Entrée frei stehen  [zu lassen]). ‘Volck’ is here taken to mean non-noble audience. See Grossegger 1985, p.  154. 61 See Strohm 1997, pp.  84–89; and riepe 2006, pp.  160–162. New opera theatres were built in Bayreuth in 1748 and in Stuttgart in 1750.