Gluck, Christoph Willibald (EN)

Gluck Christoph Willibald, 2 July 1714 Erasbach (Bavaria), †15 November 1787 Vienna, German composer. Little is known about the origins of Gluck’s family. The surname Gluck was common in areas bordering the Upper Palatinate, and was spelled in various ways: Gluck, Gluckh, Gluk, Kluckh, Klug, Klueg, Glückh. The composer’s parents, Alexander (1683–1743) and Maria Walpurga (c. 1692–1740), settled in Erasbach a few years before Christoph Willibald was born. In 1717, the family moved to Reichstadt (now Liberec). In 1722, his father became a forester in the service of Count Philipp Joseph von Kinský in Böhmisch Kamnitz (České Kamenice), then in Kreibitz (Chřibská), and from 1727 he held a similar position with Prince Philipp Hyacinth von Lobkowitz in Eisenberg (Železný Brod) near Komotau (Chomutov).

Little information has survived about Gluck’s early life. He probably attended schools in Reichstadt and Kreibitz, where he presumably also received his initial musical education (singing, violin, and possibly cello).  In 1727 or 1728, he arrived in Prague. Gluck’s name appears in the list of students enrolled in 1732 at the university’s philosophy department, but he did not complete his studies. There is also no information about his music studies. Gluck was probably self-taught; during his stay in Prague, he presumably earned a living by playing in churches. It is not known whether he established contacts with local musicians, but it was undoubtedly in Prague that he first encountered large musical forms (oratorios and operas).

In 1734 or 1735, Gluck left for Vienna, where he began working at the court of Prince Ferdinand von Lobkowitz. There he met Prince Antonio Maria Melzi, who appointed him to his court chapel in Milan in early 1737. It was there that Gluck may have studied with G.B. Sammartini, as indicated by the clear influence of this composer in some of his early works. Milan is also where Gluck made his opera debut; in 1741, his Artaserse was staged at the court theatre. The success of this opera led to further commissions for opera houses in Venice, Crema, Turin and Bologna. Between 1741 and 1745, he composed eight operas, whose preparation and staging he usually directed himself. In 1745, he received an offer to write an opera for the Italian theatre in London. Gluck probably arrived in England in the autumn of that year. The pasticcios La caduta de’ giganti and Artamene, staged in London in 1746, were not particularly successful; excerpts from these works, as well as six of Gluck’s trio sonatas, were published at the time by J. Walsh. In London, Gluck became acquainted with G.F. Handel, whose works he greatly admired, especially for their clarity and simplicity. In April 1746, Gluck gave concerts in London, playing the glass harmonica. After leaving England in May of that year, he joined P. Mingotti’s Italian opera troupe as a singer and staged his opera Le nozze d’Ercole e d’Ebe with him at the court of Augustus III in Pillnitz near Dresden in 1747. It was probably there that he met J.A. Hasse. In the spring of 1748, the composer left for Vienna, where his opera La Semiramide riconosciuta was successfully performed at the court theatre. In the summer of 1748, Gluck rejoined Mingotti’s troupe and went on tour with them, serving as kapellmeister. With this ensemble, he visited Hamburg and Copenhagen, conducting performances, appearing as a harpsichordist and playing the glass harmonica. In April 1749, his next opera, La contesa de’numi, was staged at the royal theatre in Charlottenburg. At the Danish court, Gluck met the local kapellmeister, J.A. Scheibe, whose innovative views on opera may have been reflected in Gluck’s later works. Gluck may have visited Prague at the end of 1749, as his opera Ezio premiered there, staged by G.B. Locatelli’s troupe.

In the summer of 1750, Gluck arrived in Vienna, where in September he married Marianne Pergin, the daughter of a local banker and merchant, who was associated with the imperial court. In the winter of 1751/52, he presumably stayed in Prague to prepare the premiere of Issipile with Locatelli’s ensemble. In connection with a commission from the royal court in Naples in 1752, Gluck left for Italy; La clemenza di Tito, staged at the Teatro S. Carlo, was well received, although it sparked debate. After returning to Vienna at the end of 1752, Gluck was appointed concertmaster of the orchestra at the court of the imperial field marshal, Prince Joseph Friedrich Sachsen-Hildburghausen. Gluck finally found favourable conditions for creative development. The prince was interested in music and therefore supported the composer, treating him not as a servant but as a friend.  In 1754, Gluck received the title of princely kapellmeister. In that same year, the composer came to broader prominence. The prince organised a celebration at his estate in Schlosshof on the occasion of the arrival of the imperial family, during which Gluck’s short dramatic work Le cinesi was performed. The emperor took notice of the composer, rewarding him with 100 ducats and offering him the opportunity to write music for court ceremonies, but he did not grant Gluck the title of imperial composer. Gluck received only a contract to compose theatre and orchestral music for the imperial stage. Over the next two years, he wrote three Italian operas, which graced various court events. Finally, in 1755, Gluck left for Rome in connection with the premiere of the opera Antigono (1756). There, he received the title of Knight of the Golden Spur from the Pope (from then on: Ch. W. Ritter von Gluck).

In the imperial theatres, Gluck met G. Durazzo, who was then the chief director of imperial performances. Durazzo, an enthusiast of French opéra comique, which was introduced to the Viennese stage in 1752, maintained constant contact with Ch.S. Favart, director of the Paris Opéra Comique. He encouraged Gluck to take an interest in French opéra comique and to compose works of this kind. For a long time, there was no permanent Italian opera troupe in Vienna. Therefore, from 1754, Gluck wrote musical interludes for French comedies staged at the Burgtheater, where he also conducted concerts. Between 1758 and 1764, he composed eight opéras comiques, the greatest achievement of which was La rencontre imprévue. In the 1758/59 season, after J. Sturzer (the court ballet composer) left for Russia, Gluck was commissioned to write ballet music for the imperial theatres. In 1760, Italian operas returned to the Viennese stage. In 1761, Gluck began working with the Italian librettist R. Calzabigi, who believed that in ballet, the content of the libretto should be emphasised through music. In accordance with these guidelines, Gluck composed the ballet Don Juan in 1761, based on a libretto by Calzabigi and choreographed by G. Angiolini. His collaboration with Calzabigi later developed in the field of opera. This collaboration resulted in three outstanding operas based on Calzabigi’s librettos: Orfeo ed Euridice (1762), Alceste (1767) and Paride ed Elena (1770). After the success of Orfeo in Vienna, Gluck left for Bologna, where in 1763 his opera Il trionfo di Clelia graced the opening of the new Teatro Comunale. Soon afterwards (February 1764), the composer travelled to Paris in the company of Durazzo and the Italian librettist M. Coltellini. There he met leading representatives of the French artistic world: C.S. Favart, P.A. Monsigny, F.A. Philidor and F.M. Grimm. After two weeks, he set off for Frankfurt am Main for the coronation ceremony of Emperor Joseph II. In April 1764, he returned to Vienna and began composing ballets (Alessandro, Semiramis, Iphigénie, 1765). His next journey took him to Florence in 1767, where he wrote Il prologo to T. Traetta’s opera Iphigenia in Aulis on commission from the court. Gluck met Traetta in the summer of 1769 in Parma during court celebrations for which he composed La feste d’Apollo.

A turning point in Gluck’s career came in 1772. F. L. G. de Roullet, attaché at the French embassy in Vienna, encouraged Gluck to take an interest in French tragédie-lyrique and wrote the libretto for Iphigénie en Aulide, based on Racine’s play. In November 1773, Gluck arrived in Paris to stage Iphigénie, which premiered in 1774 at the Académie Royale de Musique. The opera was a huge success; the composer then wrote a French version of Orpheus (Orphée et Euridice, 1774) for this stage. In mid-October, Gluck returned to Vienna, where he finally received the position of court composer to the imperial court, but by that time he was already more closely associated with Paris. He stayed there several times: December 1774–March 1775 (on his way to France and back, he met F.G. Klopstock), February–May 1776, May 1777–February 1778, November 1778–October 1779. In Paris, Gluck’s music aroused both admiration and opposition. The staging of Iphigénie en Aulide sparked a revival of the old dispute between Buffonists and anti-Buffonists (the ‘querelle des bouffons’), this time taking the form of a polemic between Gluckists (supporters of French opera) and Piccinists (supporters of Italian opera). French writers and composers were involved in the dispute – on Gluck’s side: F. Arnaud, J.J. Rousseau, J. B. Suard, M. Grimm, on Piccini’s side: J. d’Alembert, P. L. Ginguene, J. F. Marmontel. Ultimately, victory went to Gluck, partly due to the staging in Paris of his operas Armide and Iphigénie en Tauride, considered masterpieces of dramatic music. In September 1779, Gluck’s last opera, Echo et Narcisse, was staged, which was one of the composer’s greatest failures. Disappointed by his lack of success and due to his deteriorating health, Gluck decided to leave Paris in October 1779 and return permanently to Vienna. In the last years of his life, he composed very little. He began work on the opera Hermanns Schlacht (libretto by Klopstock), which he did not complete. He prepared a German version of his Iphigénie en Tauride (Iphigenie auf Tauris), performed in Vienna in 1781 on the occasion of the visit of the Russian Grand Duke Paul. In 1782, the composer created what was probably his last work: De profundis for four-part choir and orchestra, performed under the baton of A. Salieri for the first time at Gluck’s funeral.

Gluck went down in music history as the creator of opera reform, the essence of which was to highlight the dramatic values of the libretto and which aimed to break with the dramatic and musical conventions that prevailed in opera seria at the time under the influence of Metastasio’s librettos; the dramatic structure, in which the emphasis was placed on solo parts (hence the exuberant virtuosity), with recitatives being narrative in nature and arias generally suspending the dramatic action and serving to express statically conceived emotion, led to monotony, so reformist tendencies also appeared in other composers (especially Jommelli and Traetta). However, it was with Gluck that the reform of opera seria was brought to its fullest form, carried out consciously and comprehensively; Gluck’s innovations covered two areas: ballet and opera. He drew on achievements developed in various musical genres: Italian and French opera, sacred music (primarily Handel and the Viennese school) and instrumental music, and fused them into an original artistic creation. He slowly came to realise his idea of a dramatic musical work; 20 years separate his first opera, Artaserse (1741), from works composed in the spirit of reform: the ballet Don Juan (1761) and the opera Orfeo ed Euridice (1762).

Gluck’s dramatic works can be divided into stages of the composer’s development: 1. conventional opera seria (1741–60), 2. French opéra comique (1758–64), 3. ballet reform (1761–65), 4. Italian opera reform (1762–70), 5. French opera reform (1774–79). The starting point for Gluck’s dramatic work was traditional opera, determined by the requirements of Metastasio’s libretto – by 1765, Gluck himself had written music for 17 (or 19, see list of compositions) of the poet’s texts, including those that were particularly popular among 18th-century composers (e.g. Demofoonte, Poro, Ezio, La clemenza di Tito). Only fragments of his early operas, written before 1746, have survived, with only Ipermestra surviving in its entirety, but on this basis it can be concluded that Gluck adhered to the typical combination of arias (usually da capo) and recitative typical of the so-called Neapolitan opera, giving singers the opportunity to show off their skills by introducing daring coloraturas; the instrumental parts – introductory sinfonias and ritornellos – are usually self-contained, unrelated to the dramatic action; Le nozze d’Ercole e d’Ebe is also conventional in nature, both in terms of text and music, where, as in the two works written in London (La caduta de’giganti and Artemene), the composer used arias from his earlier operas.

Beginning with La Semiramide riconosciuta, Gluck shows a tendency to free himself from the constraints of Metastasio’s texts. In order to emphasise “ardent passion,” he shortened solo and dialogue recitatives (Ezio), removed or replaced arias with texts by other poets (Semiramide), sought to dramatise arias through specific melodic and rhythmic figures (Titus), and expanded the choral sections (Tetide). Nevertheless, the orchestra largely remained an accompaniment to the voices, and the three-part sinfonias (overtures) typically followed the Neapolitan fast–slow–fast pattern, modulating to the same key in the middle section (e.g., Tetide: Allegro – A major, Andante – A minor, Grazioso – A major). Among these works, L’innocenza giustificale stands out, a piece staged at the Hofburgtheater for Emperor Francis I’s birthday and hence referred to as a festa teatrale. Einstein (Gluck) regards this one-act composition as the first step toward operatic reform, a “declaration of war” on Metastasio’s conventions, since the relatively short recitatives are imbued with strong emotional expression, and the chorus in the final scene participates in the dramatic action. On the other hand, the work still contains conventional arias set to Metastasio’s texts, from which the pleading song of the vestal Claudia departs in both character and form, serving as an intermediate type between arioso and recitative. Gluck’s last opera to a Metastasio libretto, Il trionfo di Clelia, composed after the staging of Orfeo, represents a clear concession to the expectations of the audience.

Gluck’s work in the field of French opéra comique was of great importance for the development of the concept of opera reform. Gluck, who had previously shown no interest in either opera buffa or singspiel, turned to opéra comique because of Durazzo. He first became acquainted with this genre as a conductor, but as a composer he was intrigued by the lightness and liveliness of the stage action, the vivid characterisation of the roles, the different type of melody and the freedom of musical arrangement. In his first operas, Gluck limited himself to replacing the music of the French original with his own compositions and adding new fragments (airs nouveaux), but his last work in this domain, La rencontre imprévue (Die Pilger von Mekka), consists exclusively of original musical numbers. In his opéra comique, the composer developed melody as the main means of characterisation, and also combined opera elements into larger stage arrangements.

The prerequisite for the reform was cooperation between the composer and the poet-librettist; Gluck found such a collaborator in the person of Calzabigi, who was also captivated by Metastasio’s poetic talent (he published his works in the 1750s) and at the same time wanted to break with the formulaic nature of dramaturgy. Music historians often attribute to Calzabigi the initiative to reform music, which began, after all, with the problem of the libretto. This does not diminish Gluck’s contribution to the reform, however. There was complete understanding between the two artists, Calzabigi’s ideas fell on fertile ground, and it was thanks to Gluck’s music that the new concept of musical drama was made a reality.

First, fundamental changes were made in the field of ballet, which was undergoing significant transformations at the time, initiated by the outstanding choreographers F. Hilverding and J. G. Noverre. Gluck, Calzabigi and G. Angiolini, a choreographer working with them at the Viennese court, joined in these changes, striving to dramatise ballet, which had until then been static. Instead of the traditional suite of dances, Gluck’s ballet music was subordinated to a clear stage action, with the mimetic and choreographic elements taking centre stage. Don Juan (1761), the first ballet developed under these new principles, collaboratively by Gluck, Calzabigi, and Angiolini met with mixed reactions by the Viennese audience. Gluck, however, valued his music for this ballet and later reused some of its passages in his French operas, including Iphigénie en Aulide. Noverre, in contrast, responded to Glucka and Angiolini’s works without enthusiasm and, after the staging of Semiramis (1765), referred to it as a “ballet sans danse.”

More important for the development of music, however, was the reform of opera seria, which came about in a seemingly two-stage process: the first stage concerned the Italian opera seria staged in Vienna – as a result of cooperation with Calzabigi, Orfeo ed Euridice (1762), Alceste (1767) and Paride ed Elene (1770) were created; the second stage involved operas written for the Paris stage: Iphigénie en Aulide (1774), French versions of Orfeo (1774) and Alceste (1776), Armide (1777) as well as Iphigénie en Tauride (1779). In his famous preface (perhaps written jointly with Calzabigi) to the first edition of Alceste in 1769, Gluck formulated his artistic credo to “reduce music to its proper function, that of seconding poetry by enforcing the expression of the sentiment, and the interest of the situations”. Gluck himself believed that he had most fully realised his reformist intentions in Armide, which he considered his best work. Music historians, however, maintain that his greatest achievement is Iphigénie en Tauride, in which the composer achieved a perfect balance between the individual elements of the work, between the declamatory melody typical of French opera and the lyrical cantilena characteristic of Italian opera.

The subordination of music to words brings to mind the concept of musical drama developed by the Florentine Camerata. In general, however, the aim was greater simplicity, truth and naturalness – slogans proclaimed by the rationalist aesthetics of the 18th century (Diderot, Rousseau). The librettos of operas from the reform period are characterised by a rejection of excessive detail, secondary characters and convoluted plots as the basis for the storyline – features characteristic of Metastasio’s librettos. Characters drawn from traditional ancient Greek themes in opera gained a universal dimension, becoming living people who genuinely experienced their feelings. French drama (Racine, Corneille) undoubtedly had an influence on the psychological depth of the characters.

In Gluck’s works, characters and dramatic situations are primarily shaped through musical means. He abandoned the secco recitative, employing only accompanied recitative and arioso, and although arias were still present, he sought to blur the distinction between recitative and aria, believing that a sharp separation disrupted the dramatic flow. Virtuosic display, such as coloratura, was minimised in aria-like solo passages. In his operas for the Parisian stage, recitative dominates, reflecting his aim of fully integrating text and music. Gluck frequently combined recitative with the chorus, which might engage in dialogue with the soloist, provide a dramatic backdrop, or function as a refrain. In this way, recitative and recitative-choral scenes form the central structural and expressive element of his musical drama.

Drawing on the role of the chorus in ancient drama, Gluck attached particular importance to choral parts, which in his reformed operas became one of the main factors in creating dramatic tension. His choruses can be classified into three main types: commentary choruses, reminiscent of the Greek drama chorus; dramatic choruses, which participate directly in the action; and ritual choruses, forming the core of religious ceremonies. The chorus not only interacts with solo parts and ensembles, but through its tonal qualities, it also emphasises the drama of the work (for example, in the first scene of Act II of Orfeo, the contrast between the chorus and Orfeo’s singing underscores the horror of the situation and the psychological tension of the protagonist). Such a functional treatment of the choral part represented a particular innovation compared to conventional Italian opera, where the chorus primarily had a decorative role. The sources of Gluck’s mastery of choral technique can be traced to the traditions of Handel’s oratorios, French opera (Lully, Rameau), and religious music in Vienna (Fux).

The structural foundation of Gluck’s operas lies in the construction of the scene, which is closely linked to the dramatic situation; this results in very extended scenes. For example, in Orfeo, Act I, Scene 1 comprises a sequence of formal elements: Orfeo’s aria (with chorus), recitative, pantomime, chorus, recitative, and a ritornello; whereas Act II, Scene 1 (set in Hades) includes ballet, chorus, a dialogue between Orfeo and the chorus, and Orfeo’s aria (with chorus). A. A. Abert notes that the first two acts of Orfeo form a compact, symmetrically balanced whole in which the choral sections serve as pivotal moments in the action between Orfeo and the spirits of the underworld (see the very clear architectural scheme, MGG vol. 5). At times, dramatic requirements call for the insertion of shorter scenes (for example, in Iphigénie en Aulide, Act II, Scene 2 and Act III, Scene 3).

The orchestra also gained enormous importance in Gluck’s reformed operas. Compared to his earlier works, there was a change in the treatment of the overture, as the composer sought to link it to the opera in terms of expression and even motif. Due to the emphasis on accompanied recitative and solo-choral scenes, the instrumental ensemble is used to emphasise the mood, the characters’ experiences and the dramatic climaxes. This involves the use of various colouristic effects and the introduction of timbral contrast by juxtaposing tutti with solo instruments or tutti with groups of instruments. An example of the use of the orchestra as a means of dramatic expression is the aforementioned scene 1 of Act II in Orfeo, in which the composer divided the performing forces into two ensembles. The first orchestra (cornetto or soprano trombone, three trombones, first and second violins, cello, double bass) accompanies the chorus of furies and spirits of Hades, while the second (harp, first and second violins, cello, double bass), in which the harp plays the main role, accompanies Orfeo’s singing. The colouristic contrast is intensified here by the different treatment of the rhythmic and melodic factors. The first orchestra features an ascending motif with a sharp rhythm and restless expressive character, which is contrasted with the even, triplet movement in the harp part, expressing Orfeo’s imploring attitude.

In general, Gluck employs a typically classical orchestral scoring (double woodwinds, two horns, two trumpets, three trombones, timpani, and a string quintet in which the cello and double bass share the same part). Occasionally the composer expands this ensemble with other instruments, such as cornetto, English horn, and harp (Orfeo), or piccolo flute, bass drum, cymbals, and triangle (Iphigénie en Tauride). The core of the orchestra consists of the string instruments, but for expressive purposes and to underline important dramatic moments, Gluck also makes use of brass instruments; the composer favours the sound of trombones, introducing them in particularly expressive scenes (Alceste, Orfeo). Usually, however, the wind instruments double the string quintet part, provide harmonic support, reinforce rhythm, and help increase the overall volume of sound. The accomplished, dramatically suggestive orchestration combined with simple, song-like expressiveness in the melodic writing are decisive factors in the originality of Gluck’s musical style.

Gluck’s operatic works were widely acclaimed by his contemporaries. This was undoubtedly due to the composer’s talent, but also to life circumstances; his works were staged in two central cultural centres of Europe at the time: Vienna and Paris, and his close collaboration with Durazzo, Calzabigi and Angiolini – well-known figures in the artistic world – as well as the campaign surrounding the dispute between Gluckists and Piccinists contributed to the composer’s popularity. J.F. Reichardt was also an ardent supporter of Gluck’s art. Gluck’s works were performed on various European stages during his lifetime. In Poland in the 18th century, only a few of Gluck’s operas were presented; in Warsaw, the French ensemble J. Rousselois performed L’arbre enchanté (1766), Le diable à quatre (1766) and Le cadi dupé (1768). Later, Italian opera troupes led by D. Guardasoni repeatedly staged Orfeo (1766–77 and 1789–90), which – probably at the request of Stanisław August – was used to celebrate the anniversaries of his coronation (1766, 1789). Gluck’s operas may also have been performed in court theatres: M.K. Ogiński’s in Słonim, A.A. Sapieha’s in Różana and the Sułkowski princes’ in Rydzyna.

The few sacred and instrumental works, as well as songs to texts by Klopstock, are of marginal importance in Gluck’s oeuvre; he was a composer who focused his attention exclusively on the genre of stage music and, as an opera composer, gained recognition among his contemporaries and posterity. He had no pupils, but his music was studied; Mozart wrote piano variations on the theme from Gluck’s opera Pilgrim von Mekka, entitled Unser dummer Pöbel meint (KV 455). Cherubini, Spontini and Méhul drew on his works as models of theatrical monumentalism. The Romantics fully appreciated the dramatic expressiveness of Gluck’s music. E.T.A. Hoffmann spoke of him with the utmost admiration, paying him special tribute in his novella Ritter Gluck. Berlioz, who was enamoured with the performing arts, saw in Gluck’s work the ideal musical realisation of drama; he also drew attention to Gluck’s mastery of instrumentation, quoting excerpts from his works in his Traité d’instrumentation et d’orchestration moderne. Examples from Gluck’s operas (especially from both Iphigenias, Orpheus and Alceste) appear in almost all 19th-century instrumentation textbooks as models of instrumentation that accurately convey the intended expressive effect.

Alongside Mozart, Gluck was the most outstanding opera composer of the 18th century, and his greatest works, like those of Mozart, defy classification. He was less talented than Mozart, but this does not detract from the fact that he was distinguished by his rich melodic inventiveness and dramatic flair, and that he had the ability to construct a logical dramatic and musical continuum. “The rationalistic spirit of the time, with its Purist ideal of Classical Antiquity, demanded the reform of the opera; Gluck was pre-destined to satisfy this demand” (A. Einstein Mozart).

Literature:

Documentation A. Wotquenne Catalogue thématique des oeuvres de Christoph Willibald von Gluck, German translation J. Liebeskind, Leipzig 1904, reprint Hildesheim 1967; J. Liebeskind Ergänzungen und Nachträge zu den thematischen Verzeichnis von A. Wotquenne, Leipzig 1911; W. Boetticher Über Entwicklung und gegenwärtigen Stand der Gluck-Edition, AML XXX, 1958; G. Croll Gluck-forschung und Gluck-Gesamtausgabe, in: Musik und Verlag, Festschrift for K. Vötterle, Kassel 1968; Lettres de Gluck et à propos de Gluck, ed. J. G. Prod’homme, “Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft” XIII, 1911/12; Glucks Briefe an F. Kruthoffer, ed. G. Kinsky, Vienna 1927; The Collected Correspondence and Papers of Christoph Willibald Gluck, ed. H. and E. H. Müller von Asow, transl. by S. Thomson, London 1962; J. M. Kaplan Eine Ergänzung zu Glucks Korrespondenz, “Die Musikforschung” XXX, 1978; E. Thoinan Notes bibliographiques sur guerre musicale des Gluckistes et des Piccinistes, Paris 1878; O. Keller Gluck-Bibliographie, “Die Musik” XIII, 1913/14; S. Wortsmann Die deutsche Gluck-Literatur, thesis at Leipzig University, 1914; C. Hopkinson A Bibliography of the Printed Works of Christoph Willibald von Gluck. 1714–1787, London 1959, 2nd expanded edition 1967; E. Vogel Gluck-Portraits, “Jahrbuch der Musikbibliothek Peters” IV, 1897; J. Leroux L’iconographie du Chevalier Gluck, “Bulletin français de la Société Internationale de Musique” X, 1914; J. G. Prod’homme Les portraits français de Gluck, “Rivista Musicale Italiana” XXV, 1918; R. Tenschert Christoph Willibald Gluck. Sein Leben in Bildern, Leipzig 1938.

Accounts by contemporaries: C. Burney The Present State of Music in France and Italy, London 1771; F. J. Riedel Über die Musik des Ritters Christoph von Gluck verschiedene Schriften, Vienna 1775; J. J. Rousseau Extrait d’une réponse du petit faiseur à son prête-nom, sur un morceau de 1’ “Orphée” de M. le Chevalier Gluck, in: Lettre à M. Burney sur la musique avec fragmens, Geneva 1781, reprint in: Oeuvres complètes, vol. 4, Paris 1857; J. J. Rousseau Fragmens d’observations sur l’ “Alceste” italien de M. le Chevalier Gluck, in: Projet concernant de nouveaux signes pour la musique, Geneva 1781, reprint in: J. F. Reichardt Über Gluck und dessen “Armide”, “Berlinische musikalische Zeitung” 1805–06; C. S. Favart Etwas über Glucks “Iphigenia in Tauris” und dessen “Armide”, in: Mémoires et correspondance, ed. A. P. C. Favart and H. F. Dumolard, Paris 1808; E.T.A. Hoffmann Ritter Gluck, “Allgemeine Musikzeitung” XI, 1808–09.

Biographies and monographs: A. Schmid Christoph Willibald Ritter von Gluck. Dessen Leben und tonkünstlerischen Wirken, Leipzig 1854; A. B. Marx Gluck und die Oper, 2 vols., Berlin 1863, reprint Hildesheim 1970; G. Desnoiresterres Gluck et Piccini, 1774–1800, Paris 1872, 2nd edition 1875, reprint Geneva 1971; H. Barbedette Gluck, Paris 1882; C. H. Bitter Die Reform der Oper durch Gluck und R. Wagner, Brunswick 1884; H. Welti Gluck, Leipzig 1888; E. Newman Gluck and the Opera, London 1895, reprint London 1964; J. Tiersot Gluck, Paris 1910, 4th edition 1919; M. Arend Gluck-eine Biographie, Berlin 1921; R. Haas Gluck und Durazzo im Burgtheater, Die Opéra comique in Wien, Vienna 1925; L. de La Laurencie “Orphée” de Gluck. Etude et analyse, Paris 1934; M. Cooper Gluck, London 1935; A. Einstein Gluck, London 1936, reprint 1964, Italian translation Milan 1946, German translation Zurich 1954; T. Mantovani Cristoforo Gluck, Milan 1940; R. Gerber Christoph Willibald Gluck, Potsdam 1941, 2nd edition 1950; P. Landormy Gluck, Paris 1941; A. Della Corte Gluck, Turin 1942; W. Brandi Christoph Willibald Ritter von Gluck, Wiesbaden 1948; A. Della Corte Gluck e i suoi tempi, Florence 1948; J. G. Prod’homme Gluck, Paris 1948; R. Tenschert Christoph Willibald Gluck, Olten 1951; A. A. Abert Christoph Willibald Gluck, Munich 1959; P. Howard Gluck and the Birth of Modem Opera, London 1963; W. Vetter Christoph Willibald Gluck. Ein Essay, Leipzig 1964; W. Felix Christoph Willibald Gluck, Leipzig 1965; K. Hortschansky Parodie und Entlehnung im Schaffen Christoph Willibald Glucks, Cologne 1973.

Studies and dissertations: Gluck-Jahrbuch, I–IV, ed. H. Abert, Leipzig 1913–18; “Chigiana” XXIX–XXX, 1975 (contains articles by G. C. Bailoli, L. Finscher, E. Fubini, P. Gallarati et al.); H. Welti Gluck und Calsabigi, “Vierteljahrsschrift für Musikwissenschaft” VII, 1891; H. Kretzschmar Zum Verständnis Glucks, “Jahrbuch der Musikbibliothek Peters” X, 1903; R. Rolland Gluck, une révolution dramatique, “Revue de Paris” XI, 1904, pp. 736–72, reprint titled Gluck in: Musiciens d’autrefois, Paris 1917, Polish edition Z pierwszych wieków opery, translated by J. Kozłowski, Kraków 1971; F. Piovano Un opéra inconnu de Gluck, “Sämmelbande der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft” IX, 1908; E. Kurth Die Jugendopern Glucks bis “Orfeo”, “Studien zur Musikwissenschaft”, «Beihefte Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Österreich» I, 1913; A. Heuss Gluck als Musikdramatiker, “Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft” XV, 1913/14; F. Vatielli Riflessi della lotta Gluckista in Italia, “Rivista Musicale Italiana” XXI, 1914; W. B. Squire Gluck’s London Operas, “The Musical Quarterly” I, 1915; G. Cucuel Les opéras de Gluck dans les parodies du XVIIIe siècle, “La Revue Musicale” III, 1922; R. Sondheimer Gluck in Paris, “Zeitschrft für Musikwissenschaft” V, 1922/23; R. Haas Die Wiener Ballet-Pantomime im 18. Jahrhundert und Glucks “Don Juan”, “Studien zur Musikwissenschaft” X, 1923; W. Vetter Glucks Stellung zur Tragédie lyrique und Opéra comique and Gluck und seine italienische Zeitgenossen, “Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft” VII, 1924/25, and Glucks Entwicklung zum Opernreformator, “Archiv für Musikwissenschaft” VI, 1924, reprint in: Mythos-Melos-Musica, vols. 1 and 2, Leipzig 1957, 1961; L. Holzer Die komischen Opern Glucks, “Studien zur Musikwissenschaft” XIII, 1926; H. Abert Mozart und Gluck, “Music and Letters” X, 1929; H. Abert Gluck, Mozart und der Rationalismus oraz Glucks italienische Opern bis zum “Orfeo”, in: Gesammelte Schriften, ed. F. Blume, Halle 1929; J. Tiersot Gluck and the Encyclopedists, “The Musical Quarterly” XVI, 1930; E. Istel Gluck’s Dramaturgy, “The Musical Quarterly” XVII, 1931; D.F. Tovey Christoph Willibald Gluck (1714–1787) and the Musical Revolution of the 18 Century, in: Heritage of Music vol. 2, ed. H. J. Foss, Oxford 1934, reprint in: Essays and Lectures on Music, London 1949; W. Vetter Der Glucksche Klassizismus und die Gegenwart, “Deutsche Musikkultur” 1, 1936–37, reprint in: Mythos-Melos-Musica, vol. 1, Leipzig 1957; A. Loewenberg Glucks “Orfeo” on the Stage with Some Notes on Other Orpheus Operas, “The Musical Quarterly” XXVI, 1940; R. Gerber Neue Beiträge zur Gluckschen Familiengeschichte, “Archiv für Musikforschung” VI, 1941; D. Hussey Gluck and the Reform of the Ballet, “Dancing Times” December 1948, January 1949; R. Gerber Unbekannte Instrumentalwerke von Christoph Willibald Gluck, “Die Musikforschung” IV, 1951; J. Müller-Blattau Gluck und Racine, “Annales Universitatis Saraviensis” III, 1954; K. Geiringer Gluck und Haydn and A. Orel Einige Bemerkungen zu Tanzdramen Christoph Willibald Glucks, in Festschrift for O. E. Deutsch, Kassel 1963; K. Hortschansky Gluck und Lampugnani in Italien. Zum Pasticcio “Arsace”, “Analecta Musicologica” 1966 No. 3; J. Müller-Blattau Gluck und die Sprache der europäischen Musiknationen. Von der Vielfalt der Musik, Freiburg 1966 (reprint of 3 previously published sketches); K. Hortschansky Doppelvertonungen in den italienischen Opern Glucks. Ein Beitrag zu Glucks Schaffensprozess, “Archiv für Muskwissenschaft” XXIV, 1967; G. Croll Ein unbekanntes tragisches Ballett von Gluck, «Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Salzburger Landeskunde» CIX, 1969; R. Engländer Gluck-Pflege und Nachfolger Glucks im Schweden Gustavs III, in: Musa-Mens-Musici, Festschrift for W. Vetter, Leipzig 1969; T. Antonicek Beethoven und die Gluck-Tradition, in: Beethoven-Studien, Vienna 1970; A.A. Abert Die Bedeutung der opera seria für Gluck und Mozart, Mozart Jahrbuch 1971/72; K. Hortschansky “Arianna”. Ein Pasticcio von Gluck, “Die Musikforschung” XXIV, 1971; K. Geiringer Concepts of the Enlightenment in Gluck’s Italian Reform Opera, «Studies on Voltaire» LXXXVIII, 1972; J. Rushton “Iphigenie en Tauride”. The Operas of Gluck and Piccinni, “Music and Letters” LIII, 1972; G. Croll Gluck und Mozart, “Österreichische Musik-Zeitschrift” XXVIII, 1973; R. Monelle Gluck and the “Festa teatrale”, “Music and Letters” LIV, 1973; C. Dahlhaus Ethos und Pathos in Glucks “Iphigenie auf Tauris”, “Die Musikforschung” XXVII, 1974; G. Gruber Glucks Tanzdramen und ihre musikalische Dramatik, “Österreichische Musik-Zeitschrift” XXIX, 1974; A. Mahler Glucks Schulzeit, “Die Musikforschung” XXVII, 1974; P. Howard Gluck’s Two Alcestes, “The Musical Times” CXV, 1974; C. C. Russell The Libertine Reformed. “Don Juan” by Gluck and Angiolini, “Music and Letters” LXV, 1984.