# A Dictionary of Music and Musicians/Rameau, Jean Philippe

From volume 3 of the work.
​RAMEAU, Jean Philippe, eminent composer, and writer on the theory of music, born at Dijon, Sept. 25, 1683, in the house now No. 5 Rue St. Michel. His father, Jean, was a musician, and organist of Dijon cathedral, in easy circumstances. He intended Jean Philippe, the eldest of his three sons, to be a magistrate, but his strong vocation for music and obstinacy of character frustrated these views. According to his biographers he played the clavecin at seven, and read at sight any piece of music put before him: music indeed absorbed him to such an extent when at the Jesuit College that he neglected his classical studies, and was altogether so refractory that his parents were requested to remove him. Henceforth he never opened a book, unless it were a musical treatise. He quickly mastered the clavecin, and studied the organ and violin with success, but there was no master in Dijon capable of teaching him to write music, and he was left to discover for himself the laws of harmony and composition.
At the age of 17 he fell in love with a young widow in the neighbourhood, who indirectly did him good service, since the shame which he felt at the bad spelling of his letters drove him to write correctly. To break off this acquaintance his father sent him, in 1701, to Italy, where however he did not remain long, a mistake which, in after life, he regretted. He liked Milan, and indeed the attractions of so great a centre of music must have been great; but for some unknown reason he soon left with a theatrical manager whom he accompanied ns first violin to Marseilles, Lyons, Nîmes, Montpellier, and ​other places in the south of France. How long the tour lasted it is impossible to ascertain, as no letters belonging to this period are to be found. From his 'Premier Livre de pièces de clavecin' (Paris, 1706) we learn that he was then living in Paris, at a wig-maker's in the Vieille Rue du Temple, as Haydn did at Keller's, though without the disastrous results which followed that connexion. Meantime he was organist of the Jesuit convent in the Rue St. Jacques, and of the chapel of the Pères de la Merci. No particulars, however, of the length of his stay in Paris are known, nor how he occupied the interval between this first visit and his return about 1717. In that year a competition took place for the post of organist of the church of St. Paul, and Rameau was among the candidates. Marchand, then at the head of the organists in Paris, was naturally one of the examiners; and either from fear of being outshone by one whom he had formerly patronised, or for some other reason, he used his whole influence in favour of Daquin, who obtained the post. Mortified at the unjust preference thus shown to a man in all points his inferior, Rameau again left Paris for Lille, and became for a short time organist of St. Etienne. Thence he went to Clermont in Auvergne, where his brother Claude resigned the post of organist of the cathedral in his favour. In this secluded mountain town, with a harsh climate predisposing to indoor life, he had plenty of time for thought and study. The defects of his education drove him to find out everything for himself. From the works of Descartes, Mersenne, Zarlino, and Kircher he gained some general knowledge of the science of sound, and taking the equal division of the monochord as the starting-point of his system of harmony, soon conceived the possibility of placing the theory of music on a sound basis. Henceforth he devoted all his energies to drawing up his 'Treatise on Harmony reduced to its natural principles,' and as soon as that important work was finished he determined to go to Paris and publish it. His engagement with the chapter of Clermont had however several years to run, and there was great opposition to his leaving, owing to the popularity of his improvisations on the organ, in which, contrary to the usual course, his theoretical studies, instead of hampering his ideas, seemed to give them greater freshness and fertility.
Once free he started immediately for Paris, and brought out his 'Traité de l'Harmonie' (Ballard, 1722, 4to, 432 pp.). The work did not at first attract much attention among French musicians, and yet, as Fétis observes, it laid he foundation for a philosophical science of harmony. Rameau's style is prolix and obscure, often calculated rather to repel than attract the reader, and the very boldness and novelty of his theories excited surprise and provoked criticism. His discovery of the law of inversion in chords was a stroke of genius, and led to very important results, although in founding his system of harmony on the sounds of the common chord, with the addition of thirds above or thirds below, he put both himself and others on a wrong track. In the application of his principle to all the chords he found himself compelled to give up all idea of tonality, since, on the principles of tonality he could not make the thirds for the discords fall on the notes that his system required. Fétis justly accuses him of having abandoned the tonal successions and resolutions prescribed in the old treatises on harmony, accompaniment, and composition, and the rules for connecting the chords based on the ear, for a fixed order of generation, attractive from its apparent regularity, but with the serious inconvenience of leaving each chord disconnected from the rest.
Having rejected the received rules for the succession and resolution of chords which were contrary to his system, Rameau perceived the necessity of formulating new ones, and drew up a method for composing a fundamental bass for every species of music. The principles he laid down for forming a bass different from the real bass of the music, and for verifying the right use of the chords, are arbitrary, insufficient in a large number of cases, and, as regards many of the successions, contrary to the judgment of the ear. Finally, he did not perceive that by using the chord of the 6-5-3 both as a fundamental chord and an inversion he destroyed his whole system, as in the former case it is impossible to derive it from the third above or below. After more study, however, particularly on the subject of harmonics, Rameau gave up many of his earlier notions, and corrected some of his most essential mistakes. The development and modification of his ideas may be seen by consulting his works, of which the following is a list:—'Nouveau systeme de musique théorique … pour servir d'Introduction au traité d'Harmonie' (1726, 4to); 'Génération harmonique' etc. (1713, 8vo); 'Démonstration du principe de l'harmonie' (1750, 8vo); 'Nouvelles réflexions sur la demonstration du principe de l'harmonie' (1752, 8vo); 'Extrait d'une réponse de M. Rameau à M. Euler sur l'identité des octaves,' etc. (1753, 8vo)—all published in Paris. To these specific works, all dealing with the science of harmony, should be added the 'Dissertation sur les différentes méthodes d'accompagnement pour le clavecin ou pour l'orgue' (Paris, Boivin, 1732, 4to), and some articles which appeared in the 'Mercure de France,' and in the 'Mémoires de Trevoux.'
The mere titles of these works are a proof of the research and invention which Rameau brought to bear on the theory of music; but what was ​most remarkable in his case is that he succeeded in lines which are generally opposed to each other, and throughout life occupied the first rank not only as a theorist, but as a player and composer. Just when his 'Traité de l'Harmonie' was beginning to attract attention he arranged to make music for the little pieces which his fellow-countryman, Alexis Piron, was writing for the Théâtre de la Foire, and accordingly, on Feb. 3, 1723, they produced 'L'Endriague,' in 3 acts, with dances, divertissements, and grand airs, as stated in the title. In Jan. 1724 he obtained the privilege of publishing his cantatas, and various instrumental compositions, amongst others his 'Pièces de clavecin, avec une Méthode pour la mécanique des doigts,' etc., republished as 'Pieces de Clavecin, avec une table pour les agréments' (Paris, 1731 and 1736, oblong folio).
As the favourite music-master among ladies of rank, and organist of the church of Ste. Croix de la Bretonnerie, Rameau's position and prospects now warranted his taking a wife, and on Feb. 25, 1726, he was united to Marie Louise Mangot, a good musician with a pretty voice. The disparity of their ages was considerable, the bride being only 18, but her loving and gentle disposition made the marriage a very happy one.
A few days later, on Feb. 29, Rameau produced at the Théâtre de la Foire a 1-act piece called L'Enrôlement d'Arlequin,' followed in the autumn by 'Le faux Prodigue,' 2 acts, both written by Piron. Such small comic pieces as these were obviously composed, by a man of his age and attainments (he was now 42), solely with the view of gaining access to a stage of higher rank, but there was no hope of admission to the theatre of the Académie without a good libretto, and this it was as difficult for a beginner to obtain then as it is now. There is a remarkable letter still extant from Rameau to Houdar de Lamotte, dated Oct. 1727, asking him for a lyric tragedy, and assuring him that he was no novice, but one who had mastered the 'art of concealing his art.' The blind poet refused his request, but aid came from another quarter. La Popeliniere, the fermier général, musician, poet, and artist, whose houses in Paris and at Passy were frequented by the most celebrated artists French and foreign, had chosen Rameau as his clavecinist and conductor of the music at his fêtes, and before long placed at his disposal the organ in his chapel, his orchestra, and his theatre. He did more, for through his influence Rameau obtained from Voltaire the lyric tragedy of 'Samson,' which he promptly set to music, though the performance was prohibited on the eve of its representation at the Académie—an exceptional stroke of ill-fortune. At last the Abbé Pellegrin agreed to furnish him with an opera in 5 acts, 'Hippolyte et Aricie,' founded on Racine's 'Phèdre.' He compelled Rameau to sign a bill for 500 livres as security in case the opera failed, but showed more sagacity and more heart than might have been expected from one
Qui dinait de l'autel et soupait du théâtre, Le matin catholique et le soir idolâtre,—
for he was so delighted with the music on its first performance at La Popelinière's, that he tore up the bill at the end of the first act. The world in general was less enthusiastic, and after having overcome the ill-will or stupidity of the performers, Rameau had to encounter the astonishment of the crowd, the prejudices of routine, and the jealousy of his brother artists. Campra alone recognised his genius, and it is to his honour that when questioned by the Prince de Conti on the subject, he replied, 'There is stuff enough in Hippolyte et Aricie for ten operas; this man will eclipse us all.'
The opera was produced at the Académie on Oct. 1, 1733. Rameau was then turned 50 years of age, and the outcry with which his work was greeted suggested to him that he had possibly mistaken his career; for a time he contemplated retiring from the theatre, but was reassured by seeing his hearers gradually accustoming themselves to the novelties which at first shocked them. The success of 'Les Indes galantes' (Aug. 23, 1735), of 'Castor et Pollux,' his masterpiece (Oct. 24, 1737), and of 'Les Fêtes d'Hébé' (May 21, 1739), however, neither disarmed his critics, nor prevented Rousseau from making himself the mouthpiece of those who cried up Lully at the expense of the new composer. But Rameau was too well aware of the cost of success to be hurt by epigrams, especially when he found that he could count both on the applause of the multitude, and the genuine appreciation of the more enlightened.
His industry was immense, as the following list of his operas and ballets produced at the Académie in 20 years will show:—
Dardanus, 5 acts and prologue (Nov. 19. 1739). Les Fêtes de Polymnie, 3 acts and prologue (Oct. 12 [App. p.766 "Oct. 10"], 1745). Le Temple de la Gloire, Fête, in 3 acts and prologue (Dec. 7, 1745). Zaïs, 4 acts and prologue (Feb. 29, 1748). Pygmalion, 1 act (Aug. 27, 1748). Les Fêtes de l'Hymen et de 1'Amour, 3 acts and prologue (Nov. 6. 1748). Platée, 3 acts and prologue (Feb. 4, 1749). Naïs, 3 acts and prologue (April 22, 1749). Zoroastre, 5 acts (Dec. 5, 1749). La Guirlande, ou les Fleurs enchantées, 1 act (Sept. 21, 1751). Acanthe et Céphise, 3 acts (Nov. 18, 1751). Les Surprises de l'Amour, 3 acts (May 31, 1757). Les Paladins, 3 acts (Feb. 12. 1760).
Besides these, Rameau found time to write divertissements for 'Les Courses de Tempé,' a Pastoral (Théâtre Français, Aug. 1734), and 'La Rose' (Théâtre de la Foire, March, 1744), both by Piron. From 1740 to 1745 the director of the Opéra gave him no employment, and in this interval he published his 'Nouvelles Suites de Pièces de clavecin' and his 'Pièces de clavecin en concerts avec un violon ou une flûte' (1741), remarkable compositions which have been reprinted by Mme. Farrenc ('Le Trésor des Pianistes') and M. Poisot. He also accepted the post of conductor of the Opéra-Comique, of which Monnet was ​manager, probably in the hope of attracting public attention, and forcing the management of the Académie to alter their treatment of him. Finally he composed for the Court 'Lysis et Délie,' 'Daphnis et Eglé,' 'Les Sybarites' (Oct. and Nov. 1753); 'La Naissance d'Osiris,' and 'Anacréon' (Oct. 1754), all given at Fontainebleau. Some years previously, on the occasion of the marriage of the Dauphin with the Infanta, he had composed 'La Princesse de Navarre' to a libretto of Voltaire's (3 acts and prologue, performed with great splendour at Versailles, Feb. 23, 1/45). This was the most successful of all his opéras de circonstance, and the authors adapted from it 'Les Fêtes de Ramire' a 1-act opera-ballet, also performed at Versailles (Dec. 23, 1745).
In estimating Rameau's merits we cannot in justice compare him with the great Italian and German masters of the day, whose names and works were then equally unknown in France; we must measure him with contemporary French composers for the stage. These writers had no idea of art beyond attempting a servile copy of Lully, with overtures, recitatives, vocal pieces, and ballet airs, all cast in one stereotyped form. Rameau made use of such a variety of means as not only attracted the attention of his hearers, but retained it. For the placid and monotonous harmonies of the day, the trite modulation, insignificant accompaniments, and stereotyped ritornelles, he substituted new forms, varied and piquant rhythms, ingenious harmonies, bold modulations, and a richer and more effective orchestration. He even ventured on enharmonic changes, and instead of the time-honoured accompaniments with the strings in 5 parts, and flutes and oboes in 2, and with tuttis in which the wind simply doubled the strings, he gave each instrument a distinct part of its own, and thus imparted life and colour to the whole. Without interrupting the other instruments, he introduced interesting and unexpected passages on the flutes, oboes, and bassoons, and thus opened a path which has been followed up with ever-increasing success. He also gave importance to the orchestral pieces, introducing his operas with a well-constructed overture, instead of the meagre introduction of the period, in which the same phrases were repeated ad nauseam. Nor did he neglect the chorus; he developed it, added greatly to its musical interest, and introduced the syllabic style with considerable effect. Lastly, his ballet-music was so new in its rhythms, and so fresh and pleasing in melody, that it was at once adopted and copied in the theatres of Italy and Germany.
We have said enough to prove that Rameau was a composer of real invention and originality. His declamation was not always so just as that of Lully; his airs have not the same grace, and are occasionally marred by eccentricity and harshness, and disfigured by roulades in doubtful taste; but when inspired by his subject Rameau found appropriate expression for all sentiments, whether simple or pathetic, passionate, dramatic, or heroic. His best operas contain beauties which defy the caprices of fashion, and will command the respect of true artists for all time.
But if his music was so good, how is it that it never attained the same popularity as that of Lully? In the first place, he took the wrong line on a most important point; and in the second, he was less favoured by circumstances than his predecessor. It was his doctrine, that for a musician of genius all subjects are equally good, and hence he contented himself with uninteresting fables written in wretched style, instead of taking pains, as Lully did, to secure pieces constructed with skill and well versified. He used to say that he could set the 'Gazette de Hollande' to music. Thus he damaged his own fame, for a French audience will not listen even to good music unless it is founded on an interesting drama. His ballet-music, too, often only serves to retard the action of the piece and destroy its dramatic interest.
Much as Rameau would have gained by the cooperation of another Quinault, instead of having to employ Cahusac, there was another reason for the greater popularity of Lully. Under Louis XIV. the king's patronage was quite sufficient to ensure the success of an artist; but after the Regency, under Louis XV., other authorities asserted themselves, especially the 'philosophes.' Rameau had first to encounter the vehement opposition of the Lullists; this he had succeeded in overcoming, when a company of Italian singers arrived in Paris, and at once obtained the attention of the public, and the support of a powerful party. The partisans of French music rallied round Rameau, and the two factions carried on what is known as the 'Guerre des Bouffons,' but when the struggle was over, Rameau perceived that his victory was only an ephemeral one, and that his works would not maintain their position in the répertoire of the Académie beyond a few years. With a frankness very touching in a man of his gifts, he said one evening to the Abbé Arnaud, who had lately arrived in Paris, 'If I were 20 years younger I would go to Italy, and take Pergolesi for my model, abandon something of my harmony, and devote myself to attaining truth of declamation, which should be the sole guide of musicians. But after sixty one cannot change; experience points plainly enough the best course, but the mind refuses to obey.' No critic could have stated the truth more plainly. Not having heard Italian music in his youth, Rameau never attained to the skill in writing for the voice that he might have done; and he is in consequence only the first French musician of his time, instead of taking his rank among the great composers of European fame. But for this, he might have effected that revolution in dramatic music which Gluck accomplished some years later.
But even as it was, his life's work is one of which any man might have been proud; and in old age he enjoyed privileges accorded only to talent of the first rank. The directors of the Opéra decreed him a pension; his appearance in his box was the signal for a general burst of applause, ​and at the last performance of 'Dardanus' (Nov. 9, 1760) he received a perfect ovation from the audience. At Dijon the Académie elected him a member in 1761, and the authorities exempted himself and his family for ever from the municipal taxes. The king had named him composer of his chamber music in 1745; his patent of nobility was registered, and he was on the point of receiving the order of St. Michel, when, already suffering from the infirmities of age, he took typhoid fever, and died Sept. 12, 1764. All France mourned for him; Paris gave him a magnificent funeral, and in many other towns funeral services were held in his honour. Such marks of esteem are accorded only to the monarchs of art.
Having spoken of Rameau as a theorist and composer, we will now say a word about him as a man. If we are to believe Grimm and Diderot, he was hard, churlish, and cruel, avaricious to a degree, and the most ferocious of egotists. The evidence of these writers is however suspicious; both disliked French music, and Diderot, as the friend and collaborateur of d'Alembert, would naturally be opposed to the man who had had the audacity to declare war against the Encyclopedists. It is right to say that, though he drew a vigorous and scathing portrait of the composer, he did not publish it. As to the charge of avarice, Rameau may have been fond of money, but he supported his sister Catherine during an illness of many years, and assisted more than one of his brother artists—such as Dauvergne, and the organist Balbâtre. He was a vehement controversialist, and those whom he had offended would naturally say hard things of him. He was scrupulous in the use of his time, and detested interruptions; at the rehearsals of his operas he would sit by himself in the middle of the pit, and allow no one to speak to him; in the street he would walk straight on, and if a friend stopped him, he seemed to awake as if from a trance. Tall, and thin almost to emaciation, his sharply-marked features indicated great strength of character, while his eyes burned with the fire of genius. There was a decided resemblance between him and Voltaire, and painters have often placed their likenesses side by side. Amongst the best portraits of Rameau may be specified those of Benoist (after Restout), Caffieri, Masquelier, and Carmontelle (full length). In the fine oil-painting by Chardin in the Museum of Dijon, he is represented seated, with his fingers on the strings of his violin, the instrument he generally used in composing. The bust which stood in the foyer of the Opéra was destroyed when the theatre was burnt down in 1781; that in the library of the Conservatoire is by Destreez (1865). A bronze statue by Guillaume was erected at Dijon in 1880. The fine medal of him given to the winners of the grand prix de Rome was engraved by Gatteaux.
There are many biographies of Rameau; the most valuable are, among the older, Chabanon's 'Eloge' (1764); Maret's 'Eloge historique' (1766); and the very curious details contained in De Croix's 'L'Ami des Arts' (1776); among the more modern, the notices of Adolphe Adam, Fétis, Poisot (1864), and Pougin (1876).
Rameau had one son and two daughters, none of them musicians. He left in MS. 4 cantatas, 3 motets with chorus, and fragments of an opera 'Roland,' all which are now in the Bibliothèque Nationale in the Rue Richelieu. None of his organ pieces have survived; and some cantatas mentioned by the earlier biographers, besides two lyric tragedies 'Abaris' and 'Linus,' and a comic opera, 'Le Procureur dupé,' are lost; but they would have added nothing to his fame.
[ G. C. ]
* ↑ His mother's name was Claudine Demartinécourt.
* ↑ Claude Rameau, a man of indomitable will and capricious temper, and a clever organist, lived successively at Dijon, Lyons, Marseilles, Clermont, Orleans, Strassburg, and Autun. His son Jean François, a gifted musician, but a dissipated man, is admirably portrayed by Diderot in his 'Neveu de Rameau.' He published in 1766 a poem in 5 cantos called 'Le Raméïde,' followed in the same year by 'La nouvelle Raméïde.' a parody by his schoolfellow Jacques Cazotte. He is mentioned by Mercier in his 'Tableau de Paris.'
* ↑ The Third Part of this was translated into English 15 years later, with the title 'A Treatise of Music, containing the Principles of Composition.' London, no date, 8vo. 180 pp.
* ↑ Fétis has explained, detailed, and refuted Rameau's system in his 'Esquisse de l'Histoire de l'Harmonie,' which has been used by the writer, and to which he refers his readers.
* ↑ Both Fétis and Pougin have fallen into the mistake of considering this a separate work.
* ↑ Who dined at the altar and supped at the theatre; Catholic in the morning, and Idolater at night.
* ↑ See Monnet's 'Supplément au Roman comique,' 51. This fact seems to have escaped all Rameau's biographers.
* ↑ Rameau was asked to correct the articles on music for the Encyclopédie, but the MSS. were not submitted to him. He published in consequence: 'Erreurs sur la musique dans l'Encyclopédie' (1755); 'Suite des Erreurs etc.' (1756); 'Réponse de M. Rameau à MM. les éditeurs de l'Encyclopédie sur leur Avertissement' (1757); 'Lettre de M. d'Alembert à M. Rameau, concernant le corps sonore, avec la réponse de M. Rameau' (undated, but apparently 1759)—all printed in Paris.
* ↑ We refer to Diderot's violent satire on the morals and philosophic tendencies of the 18th century, entitled 'Le Neveu de Rameau.' It is a curious fact that this brilliantly written dialogue was only known in France through a re-translation of Goethe's German version. The first French edition, by Saur, appeared in Paris only in 1821.
* ↑ A good player on the clavecin; she lived in Dijon, and died there 1762.