Foreign elements submerged it.[154] A renewal of Puritanical opposition
which attacked the English stage contributed to the discouragement and
abdication of the national artists.[155] The last master of the great
epoch, John Blow, an estimable artist, famous in his time, whose
personality is a little grey and faded, was not wanting in distinction
or in expressive feeling--but he had then withdrawn himself into his
religious thoughts.[156]
In the absence of English composers, the Italians took possession of the
field.[157] An old musician of the Chapel Royal, Thomas Clayton, brought
from Italy some opera _libretti_, scores, and singers. He took an old
_libretto_ from Boulogne, caused it to be translated into English by a
Frenchman, and clumsily adapted it to music of little worth; and, such
as it was, he proudly called it "The first musical drama which has been
entirely composed and produced in England in the Italian style,
_Arsinoe, Queen of Cyprus_." This nullity, played at Drury Lane in 1705,
had a great success, which even exceeded the authentic Italian opera
given in the following year in London, _Camilla, regina de' Volsci_, by
Marc Antonio Bononcini.[158] Vainly Addison tried to battle against the
Italian invasion. By writing skits on the snobbism of the public with
pleasant irony, he endeavoured to oppose the Italian Opera with a
national English one.[159] He was defeated, and with him the entire
English theatre collapsed.[160] "Thomyris" in 1707 inaugurated the
representations half in Italian and half in English, and after the
_Almahade_ in January, 1710, all was in Italian. No English musician
attempted to continue the struggle.[161]
When Handel arrived then, at the end of 1710, national art was dead. It
would be absurd to say, as some have often done, that he killed English
music. There was nothing left to kill. London had not a single composer.
On the other hand, she was rich in excellent players. Above all she
possessed one of the best troupes of Italian singers which could be
found in Europe. Having been presented to the Queen Anne, who loved
music, and played the clavier well, Handel was received with open arms
by the Director of the Opera, Aaron Hill. He was an extraordinary
person, who travelled in the East, wrote a history of the Ottoman
Empire, composed tragedies, translated Voltaire, founded the "Beech Oil
Company" for extracting the oil from the wood of the beech, mixing it
with chemicals and using it for the construction of ships. This
orchestral man composed during a meeting the plan of an opera, after
_Jerusalem Delivered_. It was _Rinaldo_, which was written, poem and
music, in fourteen days, and played for the first time on February 24,
1711, at the Haymarket.
Its success was immense. It decided the victory of the Italian Opera in
London, and when the singer, Nicolini, who took the _role_ of Renaud,
left England he carried the score to Naples, where he had it produced in
1718, with the aid of young Leonardo Leo. The _Rinaldo_ marked a
turning-point in musical history. The Italian Opera, which had conquered
Europe, began to be conquered in its turn by foreign musicians, who had
been formed by it--the Italianised Germans. After Handel it was Hasse,
then Gluck, and finally Mozart; but Handel is the first of the
conquerors.[162] After _Rinaldo_, and until the time when Handel had
settled definitely in London, that is to say, between 1711 and the end
of 1716, was an indecisive period which oscillated between Germany and
England, and between religious music and the Opera.
Handel, who bore the title of Kapellmeister of Hanover, returned to his
post in June, 1711.[163] At Hanover he found the Bishop Steffani again,
and attempted to write in his style. In this imitation he composed some
twenty chamber duets, which did not come up to their model, and some
beautiful German songs on the poems by Brockes.[164] Several of his best
instrumental pages, his first Oboe Concertos, his Sonatas for Flute and
Bass,[165] seem to date from this time. The cavaliers of the Court of
Hanover were ardent flautists, and the orchestra, under the direction of
Farinel, was excellent; especially had the oboes reached a high degree
of virtuosity, which has hardly been approached at the present day. On
the other hand, the Opera at Hanover was closed, and Handel could not
even give _Rinaldo_.
He had a taste of the theatre, and did not like abandoning his plan; so
he turned his eyes again towards London. Having tested the soil of
England, and judged it favourable, Handel decided to establish himself
there. He received regular news from England whilst in Hanover.[166]
Since his departure no opera could hold its own except _Rinaldo_. The
English amateurs recalled him, and Handel, burning to depart, asked for
a new leave from the Court of Hanover. This was granted on the easiest
of terms: "on condition that he returned after a reasonable time."[167]
He returned to London towards the end of November, 1712, in time to
supervise the representation of a pastoral, _Il Pastor Fido_, a hasty
work, from which he abstracted the best airs later on.[168] Twenty days
later he had finished writing _Teseo_, a tragic opera in five very short
acts,[169] full of haste and of genius, which was given in January,
1713.
Handel endeavoured to settle himself firmly in England. He associated
himself with the loyalty and pride of the nation by writing for
political celebrations. The conclusion of the Peace of Utrecht, a
glorious day for England, approached. Handel prepared a _Te Deum_, which
was already finished in January, 1713, but the laws of England forbade
a foreigner to be charged with composing music for official ceremonies.
Parliament alone could authorise the representation of this production.
Handel cleverly wrote the flattering Ode for the anniversary of the
birth of Queen Anne, _Birthday Ode of Queen Anne_. The Ode was performed
at St. James's on February 6, 1713, and the Queen, enchanted with the
work, commanded Handel to write the _Te Deum_ and the _Jubilate_ for the
Peace of Utrecht, which was played on July 7, 1713, at a solemn service
at St. Paul's, on which occasion the Members of Parliament attended.
These works, in which Handel was helped by the example of Purcell,[170]
were his first great efforts in the monumental style.
Handel had succeeded in securing, despite precedent, the post of
Official Composer to the English Court. But he had not acted without
grave neglect of his duties towards other masters, the princes of
Hanover, in whose services he still was. The relationship was extremely
strained between the cousin by heritage and her poor parents at Hanover.
Queen Anne had taken a dislike to them, especially as she could not
endure the intelligent Duchess Sophia. She made up songs about her, and
dealt secretly with the Pretender Stuart, for whom she wished to secure
the Heritage. In remaining in her service then, Handel took sides
against his sovereign at Hanover. Certain historians have even breathed
the word "treason." It is the only fault which his biographer,
Chrysander, does not excuse, for it wounded his German patriotism. But
it is very necessary to say here that of German patriotism Handel had
hardly any. He had the mentality of the great German artists of his
time, for whom the country was art and religion; the State mattered
little to him.
He lived then amongst the English patrons--for a year with a wealthy
music lover in Surrey--then in Piccadilly at Lord Burlington's palace.
He remained there three years. Pope and Swift were familiars in the
house, which Gay had described. Handel performed there on the organ and
clavecin before the _elite_ of London society by whom he was much
admired--with the exception of Pope, who did not like music. He composed
a little,[171] being satisfied to exist, as in his sojourn at Naples,
waiting without hurry to be saturated by the English atmosphere. Handel
was one of those who can write three operas in two months, and then do
nothing more for a year. It is the rule of the torrential river which
sometimes overflows, and then runs dry. He awaited the course of events.
The inheritors of Hanover seemed decidedly ousted. The Duchess Sophia
died on June 7, 1714, Chrysander says of grief (but it was certainly
also apoplexy)--convinced that the Stuart would attain the coveted
heritage. Less than ever did Handel breathe a word of returning to
Hanover, but chance upset all his plans. Two months after the death of
the Duchess Sophia, Queen Anne died suddenly on August 1, 1714. The same
day, in the confusion into which events had thrown the Stuart party,
George of Hanover was proclaimed King by the secret council. On
September 20 he arrived in London. He was crowned at Westminster on
October 20, and Handel, very perturbed at the thought of his _Ode to
Queen Anne_, had the mortification of seeing that had he waited another
year his _Te Deum_ would have served for the enthronement of the new
dynasty.
To do him full justice, he did not seem much discomfited by this turn of
fortune's wheel. He did not put himself about to ask for pardon. He set
to work instead and wrote _Amadigi_. It was the very best way for him to
plead his cause. George I of Hanover had many faults, but he had one
good quality. He loved music sincerely, and this passion was shared by
very many of the people more or less notable in his Court. Music had
always been for Germany the fountain where soiled hearts purified
themselves, the redemption from the petty basenesses of "the daily
round, the common task." Whatever King George thought of Handel, he
could not punish him without punishing himself. After the success of his
charming _Amadigi_, played for the first time on May 25, 1715, he had
not the courage to harbour malice any longer against his musician. They
were reconciled.[172] Handel resumed his post of Kapellmeister at
Hanover by now acting as the music master to the little princesses, and
when the King went to Hanover in July, 1716, Handel travelled with him.
[Illustration: GEORGE I., IN HIS ROYAL BARGE, LISTENING TO HANDEL'S
"WATER-MUSIC."
(_From a Painting._)]
It was not that he had much occupation at the Court. The King was too
engrossed in State business, and with hunting. He did not even find time
to be anxious about his old retainer, Leibnitz, who died at Hanover on
November 14, 1716, unnoticed at Court. Handel took advantage of this
leisure to renew his acquaintance with the German art.
There was then in Germany a fashion for musical Passions. There was a
religious and theatrical tendency at that time. One cannot separate the
influence of Pietism and that of the Opera. Keiser, Telemann, Mattheson,
all wrote Passions, which caused a great stir[173] at Hamburg, on the
famous text of the Senator Brockes. Following their example, perhaps in
order to measure himself with these men, who had all three been rivals
or friends,[174] Handel took the same text and wrote on it in 1716 his
_Passion after Brockes_. This powerful and disparate work, where bad
taste mingles with the sublime, where affectation and pomposity are
mingled with the most profound and serious art--a work which J. S. Bach
knew well, and very carefully remembered--was for Handel a decided
experience. He felt in writing it what a great gulf separated him from
the Pietist German art, and on his return to England[175] he composed
the _Psalms_ and _Esther_.
* * * * *
This was the principal epoch of his life. Between 1717 and 1720, whilst
he was in the service of the Duke of Chandos,[176] he made a careful
examination of his own personality, and created a new style in music,
and for the theatre.
The Chandos Anthems or Psalms[177] stand, in relationship to Handel's
oratorios, in the same position as his Italian cantatas stand to his
operas: they are splendid sketches of the more monumental works. In
these religious cantatas, written for the Duke's chapel, Handel gives
the first place to the choruses: it is the exact words of the Bible
which they sing. Strong heroic words, freed from all the commentary and
sentimental effusions with which German Pietism had loaded them. There
is already in them the spirit and the style of _Israel in Egypt_, the
great monumental lines, the popular feeling.
It was only a step from this to the colossal Biblical dramas. Handel
took the step with _Esther_, which in its first form was entitled _Haman
and Mordecai, a masque_.[178]
Quite possibly the work had its first presentation at the Duke of
Chandos', but on August 29, 1720, it was presented on the stage. It was
in any case one of the greatest tragedies in the old style which had
been written since the Grecian period. It was as though the spirit of
Handel had been led insensibly towards the Hellenic ideal, for he
composed nearly at the same time his pastoral tragedy _Acis and
Galatea_, to which he also gave the name of masque,[179] and which did
not disengage itself from the complete idea of a free theatre. This
little masterpiece of poetry,[180] and of music, where the beautiful
Sicilian legend unfolds itself in pictures smiling and mournful, has a
classical perfection which Handel never surpassed.
* * * * *
_Esther_ and _Acis_ bore witness to Handel's desire to bring to the
surface of dramatic action all the powers of choral and symphonic music.
Even in these two works, which unquestionably opened up the way for his
future oratorios, it is not the oratorio which is his aim, but the
opera. Always attracted by the theatre, only a succession of disasters
of accumulating ruin thrust him away later against his will. So it is
natural to find him at the same time when he was writing _Esther_ and
_Acis_, also undertaking the musical direction of a theatre enterprise,
which led later on to one of the most important steps of his life, the
Academy of Italian Opera.[181]
Handel saw, it is said, in the year 1720 the end of his years of
apprenticeship; he certainly terminated (although he knew it not) his
years of tranquillity. Up to then he had led the life of numberless
other great musicians, who lived under the protection of princes, and
wrote for a select audience. He had only occasion to leave this path,
with his religious and national works, where he had voiced a people's
feelings. After 1720, and indeed up to the time of his death, all the
rest of his art belonged to everybody. He put himself at the head of a
theatre, and opened a struggle with the public at large. He exerted
prodigious vitality, writing two or three operas every year, knocking
into shape an undisciplined troupe of _virtuosi_ smothered with pride,
harassed with intrigues, hindered by bankruptcy, using his genius for
twenty years in the paradoxical task of thrusting on London a shaky and
shallow Italian opera, which could not live under a sun and in a climate
unsuitable to it. At the end of this strife, enraged, conquered, but
invincible, sowing on his way all his masterpieces, he reached the
pinnacle of his art--those grand oratorios which rendered him immortal.
After a voyage in Germany to Hanover, to Halle, to Duesseldorf, and to
Dresden, to recruit for his troupe of Italian singers,[182] Handel
inaugurated at the Haymarket Theatre the London Opera of April 27, 1720,
with his _Radamisto_, which was dedicated to the King.[183] The rush of
the public was very great indeed, but it was due more to curiosity than
to the turn of the fashion. Soon the snobbishness of the amateurs could
no longer content itself with Italianized German as the representative
of Italian Opera, and finally Lord Burlington, Handel's former patron,
went to Rome to induce the king of the Italian style, Giovanni
Bononcini, to come over.[184]
Bononcini came from Modena. He was about fifty years old,[185] son of an
artist of great merit, Giovanni Bononcini, whose premature death cut
short a career rich with promise.[186] Brought up with an almost
paternal affection by one of the first masters of that epoch, one of the
few who had preserved the cult and the science of the past, Giampaolo
Colonna, organist of St. Pietronio at Bologna, he had benefited early in
life by a high princely, even Imperial,[187] protection. More precocious
even than Handel, he published his first works at the age of thirteen,
was member of the Philharmonic Academy of Bologna at fourteen, and
master of the Chapel at fifteen. His first works were instrumental. This
was his speciality, having inherited his gift from his father.[188] He
only reached the Opera after having tried all the other styles. It was
not with him a natural calling. He was a born concert musician, and he
remained so even in the Opera. His tours in Germany and in Austria,
where he was created Imperial Composer in 1700, and gave his _Polifemo_
at Berlin in 1703,[189] fully established his renown in Europe. His
music spread in France after 1706 and excited there an almost incredible
infatuation.[190] When in Italy his reputation surpassed even that of
Scarlatti, who himself, according to Mr. Dent, came under his influence
to a small extent. He had a European vogue for about ten or fifteen
years. He was, so to speak, the reflection of the society of his time.
What strikes one in his music, if we are to believe Lecerf de la
Vieville, is the boldness of his modulations, the abundance of his vocal
ornaments, the unruliness of his mind. His style seemed to the Lullyists
that of the affected and distorted order as opposed to the school of
common sense. Bononcini was a "verticalist" then, differing from the
"horizontalists" of the preceding epoch.[191] He was essentially a
sensuous musician, and an anti-intellectualist. Right from the
beginning, as an instrumental composer he always remained indifferent to
his poems, to his subjects, and to everything which was outside of
music. In his music he set a pleasing sonority above everything;[192]
and it was evidently on this account that his work required less effort
of the intelligence than was necessitated by the severe art of
Scarlatti, or the recitative and expressive art of Lully.[193] In him
was inaugurated the reaction of fashionable good taste in the general
public against that of the savant.[194] Contrast the grand airs _Da
Capo_, broadly developed in a more or less contrapuntal fashion, with
his tiny little airs, also _Da Capo_, but in miniature, easy to
understand, which touched the popular feeling for melody. He carefully
perfumed it and served it up for the taste of the elegant and
fashionable.[195] This distinguished simplicity, this delicate
sensibility, rather feeble, always so correct in its audacities and
restrained in its pleasures, made Bononcini a drawing-room favourite, a
fashionable revolutionary. The more he worked, the more his traits were
accentuated, and became permanent. As happens to all artists who enjoy
too much success, this reacted on his art, and imposed on him the
repetition of certain fixed patterns. The natural laziness of Bononcini
only exaggerated this tendency, so that from year to year this
affectedness appeared in his art, making it quite mechanical. His music,
often beautiful and gracious, always harmonious, never expressive,
unrolled itself as a succession of elegant and highly finished subjects,
all cut out as if with scissors on the same pattern, and indefinitely
repeated. At first in London one was only conscious of his charm. The
personality of the musician added to the attractions of his music. The
gentle Italian had polished manners, a quality at once lovable, and
penetrated by a bold courage. He was a _virtuoso_ like Handel, but on an
instrument more distinguished than the clavier--on the violoncello; and
he was listened to with respect in the aristocratic _salons_. He was, so
to speak, the author _a la mode_; and his _Astarto_,[196] given at the
end of 1720, erased the impression made by Handel's _Radamisto_.
Handel had his work cut out. He was not suited to strive with Bononcini
on the ground of Italianism. However, he was up against the wall. The
English public, always keen on bear fights, cock fights, and _virtuoso_
contests, amused themselves by arranging a joust between Bononcini and
Handel. They were to be tested by an opera written in combination.
Handel took up the glove--and was beaten. His _Muzio Scevola_[197]
(March, 1721) is very feeble, and the _Floridante_ which followed
(December 9, 1721) is little better. The success of the Italian
increased his fame, and the pretty _Griselda_ (February, 1722)
consummated Bononcini's glory. He benefited by the strenuous opposition
of the English _litterateurs_, and the leading aristocrats, against the
Hanoverian Court and the German artists.
Handel's situation was much involved, but he took his revenge with the
melodious opera _Ottone_ (January 12, 1723), which was the most popular
of all his operas. Victorious then,[198] he went straight ahead without
troubling himself about Bononcini, and he composed, one after another,
three masterpieces in which he inaugurated a new musical theatre, as
musically rich, and more dramatic than that of Rameau, some ten years
later: _Guilio Cesare_ (February 20, 1724); _Tamerlano_ (October 21,
1724), and _Rodelinda_ (February 13, 1725). The last of _Tamerlano_ is a
magnificent example of the great music drama, an example nearly unique
before Gluck, in its poignancy and passion. Bononcini's party was
definitely ruined,[199] but the greatest difficulties now began for
Handel. The London Opera was delivered over into the hands of _Castrati_
and _Prime Donne_, and the extravagances of their supporters. In 1726
there arrived the most celebrated Italian singer of the time, the famous
Faustina.[200] From this moment the London representations became mere
jousts of song between Faustina and Cuzzoni--jousts as strenuous as the
shouting of their various partisans. Handel wrote his _Alessandro_ (May
5, 1721) for an artistic duel between the two stars of his troupe, who
acted as the two mistresses of _Alessandro_.[201] In spite of all, his
dramatic genius won the day by several sublime scenes from _Almeto_
(January 31, 1727), the grandeur of which veritably seized hold of the
public. But the rivalry of the singers, far from being appeased,
redoubled in fury. Each party had its hired pamphleteers, who let loose
on the adversary the most degrading libels. Cuzzoni and Faustina
reached such a state of rage that on June 6, 1727, during the play, they
fought and tore each other's hair unmercifully, amidst the yells of the
audience, the Princess of Wales being present.[202]
After this everything went to the dogs. Handel tried hard to take the
reins, but, as his friend Arbuthnot said, "the devil was loose, and
could never be caged again." The battle was lost, despite three new
works of Handel, where his genius again shone forth: _Riccardo I_
(November 11, 1727); _Siroe_ (February 17, 1728); and _Tolomeo_ (April
30, 1728). A little venture by John Gay and by Pepusch, _The Beggar's
Opera_ (A War Opera) finished the defeat of the London Academy of
Opera.[203] This excellent operetta, spoken in dialogue, with popular
songs interspersed, was at the same time a trenchant satire on Walpole,
and a spirited parody of the ridiculous sides of the opera.[204] Its
immense success took the character of a national manifestation. It was
a reaction of popular common sense against the pompous childishnesses of
the Italian Opera, and against the snobbishness which attempted to
impose it on other nations. We see in this the first blow struck at the
triumphant Italianism. Nationality awoke. In 1729 the _Passion according
to St. Matthew_ was given. Some years later Handel's earlier oratorios
were performed, and also the first operas of Rameau. In 1728 to 1729
Martin Heinrich Fuhrmann entered the campaign against Italian Opera with
his famous pamphlets. After him, Mattheson re-entered the ring: _The
Goths and their Hippogriffs to be purified in the crater of Etna_. But
nowhere was this national reaction so widely spread as in England, where
it roused itself with such robust humour, as with Swift and with Pope,
those famous layers of ghosts[205] and dreams.
* * * * *