Rentschler 1

Patty Rentschler

MUS-101-001

November 8, 2010

Handel’s Saul in 18th Century England

Handel first conceived of writing Saul in July 1738 after he was informed by then

Haymarket theatre opera administrator, John Heidegger, that the theatre did not procure enough

subscriptions to properly supplement an operatic season (Chrissochoidis 600). Handel quickly

turned to the idea of oratorio, which is a change that music scholars have long studied and

hypothesized upon. There are several ideas as to why Handel decided to focus on oratorio rather

than other musical genres. The evolution of his style throughout his career suggests forward

thinking about music along with a desire to be innovative. English oratorio would have been one

way to push music ahead at the time. The tastes of the concert-going public were also evolving

during this period and were undoubtedly a factor, forcing Handel to consider trends in order to

retain his reputation and livelihood. Oratorio, unlike opera, was also allowed during the Lenten

season because of its Biblical context. This meant that while the public was pining after opera

during the Lent period, their tastes for the dramatic could be satisfied through Handel’s large

scale choral works. In any scenario, the collective ideals of society seem to play a huge role in

the development of Handel’s English oratorios – particularly Saul. Saul is significant as an

example of early English oratorio because it speaks to national identity and ideals of the time as

well as Handel’s own musical goals in the mid-eighteenth century.

London in the 18th century was a lively center for music making. According to Nicholas

Temperley, “the burgeoning of London’s concert life around 1700…resulted from a confluence
 Rentschler 2

of many different factors. With the end of the Commonwealth in 1660, music could be more

openly promulgated as a legitimate leisure activity…” (Temperley). Concert going was no longer

just a luxury of a select few, which meant that musicians and composers of the time had to adapt

to new likes and dislikes of a broader audience. London audiences at the time favored vocal

virtuosity at the hands of famed Italian singers, and Italian opera was the favored genre during

this period. However, opera was an expensive endeavor and the opera season of 1738, as

Chrissochoidis points out, “seemed to have breathed its last” (601). Handel had to take these

factors into consideration because his court-paid income (his only steady income) could not bear

the cost of a failed concert season. Handel also took on responsibility in other aspects of

performance as the years wore on. He was abreast of most financial issues in staging his works

which had an influence on the shift to oratorio as well (Smith 18,19). Thus, Handel sought to

turn his interests to a different genre.

Oratorio appealed to Handel for several reasons. Like opera, oratorio could have

characters and was often split into several acts but it did not require actual action. Because no

action was required, oratorio was made to be more elaborate musically because action and drama

needed to be conveyed within the music to keep interest. Oratorio features many choruses and

requires more singers and instrumentalists to participate. This aspect would have appealed to

Handel’s progressive thinking and want to be innovative because he could experiment more with

form, orchestration, and other musical aspects. Oratorio also differed from opera in that it did not

require sets or lavish costumes which lifted a huge financial burden off of production. However,

oratorio was met with some animosity by the public for two reasons. The first issue spectators

had with oratorio was the fact that these works did not have any aesthetic value. People were

expecting a full show when they went out to hear the music but instead were given dramatic
 Rentschler 3

music by musicians in plain clothes on a stripped theater stage. The impression of this was given

candidly by one spectator:

“Han’t you been at the Oratorio?” says one. “Oh, if you don’t see the Oratorio you see

nothing,” says t’other; so away goes I to the Oratorio, where I saw indeed the finest

assembly of People I ever beheld in my very Life, but to my great surprise, found this

sacred Drama a mere Consort [i.e., concert], no scenery, Dress, or Action, so necessary to

a Drama; but Handel was placed in a Pulpit (I suppose the call that their oratory). By him

sat Senesino, Strada, Bertolli and Turner Robinson, in their own Habits. Before him stood

sundry sweet singers of this our Israel, and Strada gave us a Hallelujah of Half an Hour

long; Senesino and Bertolli made rare work with the English Tongue, you would have

sworn it had been Welsh. I would have wished it had been Italian that they might have

sung with more ease to themselves since, but for the name of English it might as well

have been Hebrew (Kelly 61).

Clearly oratorio was a new and unexpected experience for the members of the English, concert-

going public.

The second reason oratorio was mistrusted by some was its use of Biblical text outside of

the church and in a new genre. Handel had to take care in setting the sacred texts because “music

for the church and music for the stage were thought of as separate genres…” (Smith 44). There

was great debate at the time of whether or not oratorio was appropriate. Some believed that it

was not appropriate to use the sacred in art, and that pulling the sacred into the theater was an

atrocity (Smith 45). Others believed the sacred had no place in the secular world of music

because of the divine context, and especially had no place in a newly developed genre (Smith 44,
 Rentschler 4

45). Handel somewhat appeased the public through great variety, as the public had little interest

in old or stale music even though they preferred established genres. Handel’s oratorios had

variety in texture, forms (often taking unexpected forms from Italian opera like the love duet in

the Messiah), instrumentation, choruses, recitatives, and most other elements of the music.

Handel had reason to suspect that even though he was not strictly adhering to tastes and

criticisms at the time, audiences would still appreciate these large scale vocal works.

It has been suggested that a large component of Handel’s confidence in these works,

particularly Saul, was due to the embedded nationalism in the works – even in the name of the

genre, English oratorio. Handel’s choices of libretto and musical devices utilized in Saul are

symbolic of English nationalism and would have been perceived as such by most audience

members at the time (Smith 11). Though not entirely direct, the choice of subject matter and use

of exotic instruments would have been perceivable as moral and political symbols. During this

period in history, Britain was on the verge of war with Spain and anxieties were high while

morale was low. Handel’s (and Jennen’s) use of biblical texts to relate to the audiences’ anxiety

may have helped in the gradual success of the English oratorio. In Ruth Smith’s fascinating

discussion of the influence of early music in Saul, Smith goes into great detail about the use of

exotic instruments and how they enhanced the libretto and also make the symbolism more

apparent.

Handel’s first symbolic instruments added to the work Saul were the kettle drums. The

use of the drums relates to the word timbrel, a word found in the King James version of the Bible

nine times (Smith 173). The word timbrel (and other aspects of biblical music) had been

translated into English by Dom Augustin Calmet in 1724 and a second edition was published the

following year, showing its popularity in England at the time (Smith 173). The word timbrel was
 Rentschler 5

translated into meaning some form of percussion, which then took on a role of describing several

different kinds of drum. For the purposes of this discussion, and Smith’s discussion, the kettle

drum had been described as being a form of ancient timbrel (Smith 175). Handel used the

reference to the Bible and applied it to the music through use of kettle drums which not only

gave the music added meaning, but also clarified the intended meaning. They were not just any

kettle drums that Handel used but the Tower of London kettle drums (Smith 175). This has

significance because these drums would have seen battle and would have been easily recognized

by most members of the audience. Handel could have used any kettle drums, but his choice of

using the Tower drums makes it hard to argue against Saul as having a nationalist agenda as the

drums clearly represent battle and English identity.

Another instrument which made its way into Saul, the carillon, was met with some harsh

criticism (especially by Jennens). The carillon was a “glockenspiel with a keyboard mechanism”

and sounded like a “set of Hammers striking upon Anvils” (Smith 175). Handel used this to

reference Tubalcain from the Old Testament, brother to the inventor of music, and was himself a

great blacksmith (hence the anvil sound). This instrument with its distinct sound is used in Saul

to signify the moment in which Saul is consumed with envy of David’s recent victory and

eventually leads Saul to madness (see example). Jennens questioned Handel’s use of the carillon,

saying that Handel’s “head was more full of maggots than ever” but Handel does well to use the

exotic instrument in a way that is emotional and helps the audience connect their own thoughts to

the action in the libretto (Smith 175).

Handel also references the sackbut in Saul through use of three trombones. Trombones

were foreign at the time and not at all popular in England, so Handel had to hire foreign

musicians to play the parts. In Saul, they are most recognizably used in the dead march – an
 Rentschler 6

archaic use for the trombone (see example number two). The dead march is an anthem, a musical

piece that has “the double merit of inducing spiritual experience and being the pinnacle of artistic

achievement (Smith 93). One must consider the added inconvenience of procuring players and

instruments for the oratorio. Smith poses this question in her discussion of Handel’s Saul and

concludes that overall Handel was very dedicated to this work after coming out of an illness (he

suffered from a stroke in the previous season) and after learning that he would not be able to

secure an opera season. In his going out of the way to get these instruments and musicians, he is

showing a deeper affection for the oratorio and a want to properly convey the imagery in the

libretto. The use of non-native instruments also relates back to the idea of variety in music and

the public’s interest in new sounds. The added touches would have certainly made the audience

more aware of the story line and would have allowed them to meditate upon what the added

effort could mean.

Saul is generally regarded as one of Handel’s most emotional works and one must ask

why this is. Perhaps it is due to the plot of the story – a story of jealousy and regret which Handel

highlights through his choices in instrumentation and explores in other musical elements. Handel

was known for using the chorus in oratorio in a unique way. The chorus was used to comment

upon the action in the plot or often acted as a character itself, adding the action as well. In O fatal

Consequence of Rage (see example) the chorus comments on the moral implications of Saul

turning upon his own son in a fit of jealousy and rage. Handel uses imitation to highlight the

reaction of horror and the texture begins to alternate between imitation and rich harmonic

structure (see NAWM 751-764). The plot of the libretto is full of difficult moral situations and

talk of love, triumph, jealousy, torment, and other emotionally strong subjects which Handel

treats with impassioned arias, recitatives, and choruses. The emotional nature of the piece can
 Rentschler 7

also be contributed to its nationalistic agenda and Handel’s need to prove something after a

departure from opera. If the music was not striking on more than an aesthetic level, then the

oratorio may not have captured the interests of the audience without the use of visual elements.

Handel’s sudden switch to oratorio, though perhaps rocky at first, eventually became

what he was known for. He took into consideration the tastes of the time and the political context

of which he was writing in to seduce audiences into accepting a new genre of music. Handel

latched onto the idea of variety to please the public and also implemented several symbolic

devices to strengthen the audience’s connection with the works – particularly Saul. This new

genre, oratorio, can be called nationalistic because it was forged in England and was designed for

a specific public. Handel’s use of unique instruments for the work also illustrates the

nationalistic symbols through use of the Tower kettle drums. It also shows the lengths at which

Handel was willing to go for the work and to better achieve the overall aesthetic that he wanted.

Although oratorio is different than opera in several ways, the new genre was accepted due to

Handel’s acknowledgment of cultural ideals and what defined English identity. As a result, Saul

and other oratorios are still relevant in today’s repertoire and Handel is regarded more fondly for

his innovation in oratorio rather than his work in opera.

 Rentschler 8

Examples
 Rentschler 9

Works Cited

Chrissochoidis, Ilias. “Handel at a Crossroads: His 1737-38 and 1738-39 Seasons Re-examined,”
Music and Letters (2009): 599-635.

Handel, George Frideric. "Saul ." Norton Anthology of Western Music. Ed . J. Peter Burkholder
and Claude V. Palisca . New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. , 2010.

Handel, George Frideric. "Saul ." Norton Recorded Anthology of Western Music, Volume 1,
Ancient to Baroque. Ed . J. Peter Burkholder and Claude V. Palisca . New York: W.W.
Norton & Company, Inc. , 2010.

Kelly, Thomas Forrest. First Nights: Five Musical Premieres (Yale University Press, 2000).

Smith, Ruth. “Early music’s dramatic significance in Handel’s Saul,” Early Music (2007): 173-
189.

Smith, Ruth. Handel’s oratorios and Eighteenth-Century Thought (New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1996).

Temperley, Nicholas, et al. "London (i)." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. 14 Sep.
2010 <http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/16904pg5>.