Page 97 - Weiss, Jernej, ur. 2017. Glasbene migracije: stičišče evropske glasbene raznolikosti - Musical Migrations: Crossroads of European Musical Diversity. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 1
P. 97
music mobility in the 17th and 18th centuries: croatian lands ...
this migration were to some extent already existing. The network of rela-
tives, diplomatic missions (in the case of Luca Sorgo in Vienna),40 friends of
a friend (the case of Luca Sorgo in Rome),41 a colleague from student times
(the case of Jelić being invited to Saverne), related monasteries or colleges
(like San Girolamo in Rome or Colegium Illyricum in Vienna) was careful-
ly built up in order to back and benefit the migrant person. Such networks
had to be established also in order to invite a good opera company (as tes-
tified in the letters between Antonio Sorgo and Julije/Giulio Bajamonti),42
invite a good teacher or maestro di cappella from abroad (as did envoys of
the Dubrovnik Republic in Naples and Rome), or even purchase an instru-
ment or music material. That aspect demands further research, in spite of
quite limited sources.
Some concluding remarks: musical impacts
The benefit of migrants in both directions, when dealing with Croatian
lands, was manifold: bringing new repertoire, introducing advanced per-
forming practices, more sophisticated compositional skills and techniques
that were implemented in the domestic communities – all this was most-
ly welcomed. However, it sometimes provoked certain cautiousness, most-
ly with innovations in church music (for example, lasting opposition to fig-
ural music in Franciscan communities) or by introducing opera companies
or public balls under masques in more traditional towns (testimonies on
Rugjer Bošković’s fears about female singers in Dubrovnik,43 or critiques of
masquerade tableaux vivants in Zagreb by the chronicler Adam Baltazar
Krčelić).44 The relatively balanced dialogue and competition between the
tradition and innovation, between wishes and possibilities, were more de-
pending on general economic and political situation than on artistic striv-
ings or the employees’ wishes.
40 Cf. Vjera Katalinić, “Useful Liaisons: Luka Sorkočević – Ruđer Bošković – Pietro
Metastasio,” Dubrovnik annals, 20 (2016): 149–158.
41 Luca Sorgo, when sent to his university studies to Rome, stayed in the house of the
Ragusan philosopher Benedetto Stay, who was, at that time, professor at Sapienza.
42 Ivan Bošković, “Contacts between dr. Julije Bajamonti and Luka and Antun
Sorkočević,” Luka and Antun Sorkočević, Croatian Composers, Stanislav Tuksar, ed.
(Zagreb-Osor: MIC, 1983), 247–262.
43 Katalinić, The Sorkočevićes, 19.
44 Vjera Katalinić, “Musical Culture and the „Kleinmeister“ of Central Europe in the
Period between 1750 and 1820: General Remarks Concerning the Topic and Their
Application on the Research in Croatia,” in Musical Culture and the „Kleinmeister“
in Central Europe 1750-1820, ed. Vjera Katalinić (Zagreb: HMD – HAZU, 1995), 30.
95
this migration were to some extent already existing. The network of rela-
tives, diplomatic missions (in the case of Luca Sorgo in Vienna),40 friends of
a friend (the case of Luca Sorgo in Rome),41 a colleague from student times
(the case of Jelić being invited to Saverne), related monasteries or colleges
(like San Girolamo in Rome or Colegium Illyricum in Vienna) was careful-
ly built up in order to back and benefit the migrant person. Such networks
had to be established also in order to invite a good opera company (as tes-
tified in the letters between Antonio Sorgo and Julije/Giulio Bajamonti),42
invite a good teacher or maestro di cappella from abroad (as did envoys of
the Dubrovnik Republic in Naples and Rome), or even purchase an instru-
ment or music material. That aspect demands further research, in spite of
quite limited sources.
Some concluding remarks: musical impacts
The benefit of migrants in both directions, when dealing with Croatian
lands, was manifold: bringing new repertoire, introducing advanced per-
forming practices, more sophisticated compositional skills and techniques
that were implemented in the domestic communities – all this was most-
ly welcomed. However, it sometimes provoked certain cautiousness, most-
ly with innovations in church music (for example, lasting opposition to fig-
ural music in Franciscan communities) or by introducing opera companies
or public balls under masques in more traditional towns (testimonies on
Rugjer Bošković’s fears about female singers in Dubrovnik,43 or critiques of
masquerade tableaux vivants in Zagreb by the chronicler Adam Baltazar
Krčelić).44 The relatively balanced dialogue and competition between the
tradition and innovation, between wishes and possibilities, were more de-
pending on general economic and political situation than on artistic striv-
ings or the employees’ wishes.
40 Cf. Vjera Katalinić, “Useful Liaisons: Luka Sorkočević – Ruđer Bošković – Pietro
Metastasio,” Dubrovnik annals, 20 (2016): 149–158.
41 Luca Sorgo, when sent to his university studies to Rome, stayed in the house of the
Ragusan philosopher Benedetto Stay, who was, at that time, professor at Sapienza.
42 Ivan Bošković, “Contacts between dr. Julije Bajamonti and Luka and Antun
Sorkočević,” Luka and Antun Sorkočević, Croatian Composers, Stanislav Tuksar, ed.
(Zagreb-Osor: MIC, 1983), 247–262.
43 Katalinić, The Sorkočevićes, 19.
44 Vjera Katalinić, “Musical Culture and the „Kleinmeister“ of Central Europe in the
Period between 1750 and 1820: General Remarks Concerning the Topic and Their
Application on the Research in Croatia,” in Musical Culture and the „Kleinmeister“
in Central Europe 1750-1820, ed. Vjera Katalinić (Zagreb: HMD – HAZU, 1995), 30.
95
