Handel’s performing versions of “Messiah”
This essay will bring into discussion the various performing versions of “Messiah” and will briefly summarise Handel’s compositional process. It will also focus on the major changes that occurred in three important musical moments of this oratorio: “But who may abide the day of His coming”, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion” and “Thou art gone up on high”. Handel composed “Messiah” at the initiative of Charles Jennens, the librettist who, in a letter addressed to his close friend, Edward Holdsworth, wrote: “Handel says he will do nothing next Winter, but I hope I shall persuade him to set another Scripture collection I have made for him… I hope he will lay out his whole Genius and Skill upon it, that the Composition may excell all his former Compositions, as the Subject excells every other Subject. The Subject is Messiah…”1 “Messiah”, even from the beginning, was a very ambitious musical project. No other composer before Handel created a sacred work at these scales. One of the first issues was the adaptation of the text to the music. In this respect, Jennens have done some modifications to the text of the Authorised Version of the Bible in order to fit the music. However, the union of the text with the music would have definitely not represented a problem for Handel who once claimed that he knew the Holy Scriptures at least as well as any Bishop. Even though the text has some slight modifications it still expresses the full significance of the texts extracted from the Holy Bible. The 40:9 verse of Isaiah could be given as an example regarding the changes that have occurred in the Authorised Biblical text. The second text shown beneath fits much better inside the rhythmical-melodic frame. Text 1 [Isaiah, 40:9 - Authorised Version of the Bible] “O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high Mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!” 1 “Letters of and about Handel” – Ipad Digital Collection (Book Store), pg. 108;
Text 2 [Isaiah, 40:9 – Jennens’ alternative for “Messiah”] “O thou that tellest good Tidings to Zion, get thee up into the high Mountain: O that tellest good Tiding to Jerusalem, lift up Thy Voice with Strength! Lift up, be not afraid; Say unto the cities of Judah: Behold your God, Behold your God!” All the problems with which all the modern editors confronted, with respect to the possible versions of “Messiah”, originate from the fact that this it was not published during Handel’s lifetime, unlike Samson, for example, composed a few days after “Messiah” and immediately published by Mr Walsh. The “Collections of songs” (or “Songs of Messiah”) was the only material that was published during the lifetime of the composer. Moreover, no one could have the absolute confidence to affirm that the version published in 1763 would have been agreed in all respects by the composer. There are so many elements regarding the musical construction and delivery of “Messiah” that were considered by the modern editors while trying to make contour of a possible judicious versions of this oratorio. Among these elements of great importance are: the order and the number of bars for each musical moment, the equilibrium of the instrumental forces, the shape of the musical phrases, the articulation, the tempi, the rhythmical-melodic frames, and obviously the different performing versions of the movements of “Messiah”. The relation singer-composer was crucially important during Handel’s time. The composer adapted his music according to the vocal capacities of the singers he collaborated with. An important collaboration was with Mrs. Cibber. Burney wrote in this respect: “Handel was very fond of Mrs. Cibber, whose voice and manners had softened his severity for her want of musical knowledge”2. The most important feature of Mrs Cibber was certainly not the quality of her vocal projection but the power with which she was communicating the musical discourse. Another key point for a successful authentic performance is to identify what orchestral resources Handel preferred for the performances of “Messiah”. Handel adapted the orchestral resources in accordance with the venues in which he performed. The records of all instrumentalists that performed in 1758 and 1759 were fortunately not lost and they illustrate very clearly that Handel used 6 first violins, 6 second violins, 4 violas, 4 cello/bass, 4 oboes, 4 bassoons, 2 horns and drums. From the same records we could also identify that Handel, for the performances of 1758 and 1759, used approximately 13 women and 12 men. It is well-known that Handel preferred 2 Paul Henry Lang George Frideric Handel (W.W.Norton&Company, 1994), pg. 336;
enlarged orchestral and choral resources for the performances of “Messiah”. Handel would have probably had some difficulties to adapt “Messiah” to a concerto grosso like orchestra. However, Handel was very careful with the equilibrium between orchestra and chorus. For a judicious authentic performance the conductors have to make sure that the two forces are not disproportionate. On the contrary, the sound would be uneven and with many asperities. “But who may abide the day of His coming”, without any shadow of doubt, was a recitative in the performances of “Messiah” that took place in Dublin in 1742. That is proved by the copies of the “Dublin 1742 word-book” which have been miraculously preserved. In the same wordbook, is easy identifiable that “Thou art gone up high” was also a recitative. An obvious question would be if the current musical editions of “Messiah” respect the original intentions of the composer. The solution to answer this question is to examine Handel’s manuscripts and the historical documents. One of my recent discoveries, after consulting the Autograph score, demonstrates very clearly that the content of “But who may abide…” performed today is significantly different compared with the original musical writing of Handel. Different notes are above the same text in the scores that are performed today. Figure 1 illustrates Handel’s original musical writing whereas Figure 2 shows how the same musical phrase is performed today. Figure 1
Figure 2
“But who may abide” was, in the first instance, composed for a bass voice, in D minor, 3/8 time, and it was 136 bars long. The second version composed for Guadagni, an alto voice, was extended to 158 bars and included a prestissimo part in common time. The third version, for soprano, is a transposition of the Guadagni version from D minor to A or G minor. The fourth version was again a recitative. The original setting of “But who may abide” composed in 1741 was performed until 1750 when Handel remodelled this movement to fit the alto voice of Guadagni. At that time, Guadagni was one of the premiere singers and Handel expressed his joy regarding the further collaboration with him. The vocal score used by Singnora Passerini, a soprano, for the performances at the Foundling Hospital Chapel demonstrates that she sung on the alto key setting transposed by Handel to A minor, a perfect fifth higher. One of the great errors in the 19 th century vocal scores was the decision to transpose Guadagni’s version of “But who may abide…” in bass clef. In this respect, Mr Burrows wrote: “This dumps the original high-range coloratura into the middle of the orchestral texture, where it is both unmusical and ineffective”3. The “Critical Commentary” (Kritischer Bricht) of the Neue Mozart Ausgabe attributes this error to Mozart who, working from the printed edition, decided to change the clef from treble to bass. At the same time, the error has been spread because Vincent Novello’s version was influenced by Mozart’s version. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion” in the form of the Autograph score, found at the British Museum, had 113 bars, including the ‘da capo’ section. In 1745 Handel wrote a new setting which probably aimed to reduce the excessive amount of compound metre in the final bars of Part 1. Donald Burrows also gives a detailed explanation regarding Handel’s decision for revision. Burrows affirmed: “The reason for this revision is not very hard to guess. The end of Part 1 was lacking in variety, with successive movements in B flat major, the first two of which were for soprano soloist and in 12/8 time (*though at different tempi).4
3 Donald Burrows, “Handel: Messiah” Cambridge Handbook, pg. 46; 4 Donald Burrows, “Handel: Messiah” Cambridge Handbook, pg. 43;
“Rejoice greatly” has never been transposed and there is no evidence to support that Handel intended that. Handel was always preoccupied regarding the delivery of the mood of the text through the waves of sonority. In this respect he used specific harmonies, rhythmical-melodic progressions or tempos to express the mood that he cerebrated. The following musical example shows how the notes, the rhythm, even the breaks between notes aim to express that joy of the text. The first syllable of the word “Greatly”, in the first musical phrase, is not placed on the highest note by coincidence. Moreover, we could also observe in the second musical phrase, the word “Daughter” prepares the next emphasised word “Zion” which receives a kind of affection from those descending notes.
The middle section of “Rejoice greatly”, videlicet, ‘He is the righteous Saviour” was composed in 12/8 metre in order to express the prophetic mood of the text. The 4/4 setting could not be found in the Autograph Score, Grandville Score, Smith’s Score, and not even in the “Collection of Songs” that was published in 1749. The 4/4 setting was included in the Dublin Score and copied afterwards in the Foundling Score and Schölcher Score. In another train of thoughts, the two settings, 12/8 and 4/4, have no differences regarding the rhythmical-melodic frame. Another work that was adapted for Guadagni was “Thou art gone up high”. There are three settings of this Air. “Thou art gone up on high” is undoubtedly one of the musical moments to which Handel brought many changes. It has no less than five versions. The first version was composed for a bass voice, in D minor, 116 bars, with the voice entering on a minim. The first, which appears in the Autograph Score, was written in the bass clef, the second one was specially rewritten for Guadagni, in the alto clef and the third, which could be found in the “Smith Score R.M.” was composed for a soprano, and therefore written in the soprano clef. In comparison with the soprano and bass version of this Air, Guadagni’s version includes wonderful ornamentations, or the so-called fiorituri. It is more than obvious that Handel, in this version, was modelling the musical phrases in such a way that they were able to highlight the superb
vocal features of Guadagni. One of the aspects that is hard to explain is why the Guadagni setting does not appear in the 1767 version, published by “Randall and Abell Score” considering that the vocal diapason for the original bass setting and the Guadagni setting are similar. The answer would be that the editors probably considered that the more elaborate setting of Guadagni would have created some difficulties to the less skilled singers, from a vocal technique point of view. Even though I may have a few personal preferences regarding the final shape of a performance of “Messiah” I am very circumspect in claiming that one version is better than others and some versions must be performed in the detriment of others. The personal inclination of the conductors, the financial resources and the sound architecture of a venue are decisive in making the contour of a performance of “Messiah”. All the scores, the opinions of musicologists and editors and the different historical evidences could inform these choices. Handel himself, for example, did not hesitate to revise his music, to adapt it in accordance with the musical collaborations he had or to the venues in which “Messiah” was performed. However one thing that must be avoided by the conductors is trying to mix up the new versions of “Messiah” with the old ones. In consonance with the opinion presented above is also Donald Burrows who wrote: “In modern performances, my own inclination is to avoid mixing ‘early’ and ‘late’ versions. Handel’s post-’Guadagni scheme of 1750 (or one of its later versions) makes one good plan, and cases could be made out for performances based on early schemes from Dublin (1742) or London (1743): but a brew with elements from each is usually unsatisfactory. If we have confidence in Handel’s judgement, then the best course is to pursue the plan of one of his performances in its entirety. The musical features of individual schemes are varied, but they may cut across other practical constraints: a choir seeking an unusual version for its annual Messiah performance might decide to attempt the 1742 or 1743 versions, for example, but could immediately defeat the purpose of the enterprise by engaging only 4 soloists.”5 “Messiah” is such a splendid work which emphasises the essence and the beauty of our precious Christian values. What some people may fear to say today, when the atheism is flourishing and when the caverns of evil are increasingly more visible, is that Christianity has been and it is still 5 Donald Burrows, “Handel: Messiah” Cambridge Handbook, pg. 44;
one of the elements that unifies Europe. Each and every time I listen to a performance of “Messiah” I remember when King George II, who was so moved by Handel's work, rose to show his appreciation and asked all the others to stand when “Hallelujah” was performed. The great genius was always seeking perfection and tried to get closer as possible to the Musical Truth. He was the genius who indeed saw “all Heaven before him and the great God Himself”. In the end, I would like to conclude by quoting George Bernard Shaw: "Handel is not a mere composer in England: He is an institution. What is more, he is a Sacred institution!”6
6 Luis Crompton “The Great Composers: Handel in England” (University of California Press, 1961), pg 77.
Bibliography Books: 1) Richard Luckett, Handel’s Messiah: A Celebration, (London: Victor Gollancz LTD 1992); 2) Robert Manson, Myers, Handel’s Messiah:A Touchstone of Taste (New York: Macmillan 1948); 3) Donald Burrows, Handel: Messiah (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1991); 4) H. Watkins Shaw, Handel's Messiah: the story of a masterpiece (London : Hinrichsen 1946) 5) Jens Peter Larsen, Handel's Messiah: origins, composition, sources (Greenwood Press 1990) 6) John Tobin Handel’s Messiah: A critical account of the Manuscript Sources and Printed Editions (London: Cassel Edition, 1969) 7) John Tobin Handel at Work (London: Cassel Edition, 1964) 8) Paul Henry Lang George Frideric Handel (W.W.Norton&Company, 1994)
Scores: 1) “Messiah”: the composer's autograph manuscript, British Library R.M.20.f.2 in facsimile - Handel ; introduction by Donald Burrows (London : The British Library c2009) 2) “Messiah”: an oratorio for solo voices, chorus and orchestra : Eleven versions, 1742-1754 / George Frideric Handel. London : Edition Peters An urtext edition / by Donald Burrows. Keyboard accompaniment by Kurt Soldan revised and supplemented by Donald Burrows, 1987 3) Hallische Händel-Ausgabe. Oratorio in three parts -Tr: Der Messias : Oratorium in drei Teilen / herausgegeben von John Tobin.Ser.1, Oratorien und groe Kantaten. Bd.17, John Tobin 1891Kassel ; London : Bärenreiter 1965
Online sources: 1) Naxos Online: Messiah (1751 Version) [8.570131-32] : http://www.naxos.com/mainsite/blurbs_reviews.asp?item_code=8.57013132&catNum=570131&filetype=About%20this%20Recording&language=English
2) British Library Online: Handel’s Messiah http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/onlineex/musicmanu/handel/