The St Gall Passion Play

The St Gall Passion Play » LUDUS « Medieval and Early Renaissance Theatre and Drama 10 Edited by Peter Happé and Wim...

Author: Peter Macardle

90 downloads 1854 Views 4MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

The St Gall Passion Play

» LUDUS « Medieval and Early Renaissance Theatre and Drama 10

Edited by Peter Happé and Wim Hüsken

Volume 1: English Parish Drama Volume 2: Civic Ritual and Drama Volume 3: Between Folk and Liturgy Volume 4: Carnival and the Carnivalesque Volume 5: Moving Subjects Volume 6: Farce and Farcical Elements Volume 7: Cyclic Form and the English Mystery Plays Volume 8: Acts and Texts Volume 9: Interludes and Early Modern Society Volume 10: The St Gall Passion Play

The St Gall Passion Play Music and Performance

by

Peter Macardle

Amsterdam – New York, NY 2007

Cover design: Studio Pollmann The illustration on the cover of this book is from a15th-century antiphonal fragment, Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 65/738, fols. 35r. All titles in the Ludus - Medieval and Early Renaissance Theatre and Drama series (from 2002 onwards) are available to download from the Ingenta website http://www.ingentaconnect.com The paper on which this book is printed meets the requirements of “ISO 9706:1994, Information and documentation - Paper for documents Requirements for permanence”. Le papier sur lequel le présent ouvrage est imprimé remplit les prescriptions de "ISO 9706:1994, Information et documentation - Papier pour documents Prescriptions pour la permanence". ISBN: 978-90-420-2346-8 ©Editions Rodopi B.V., Amsterdam – New York, NY 2007 Printed in The Netherlands

Table of contents

Acknowledgements Introduction

7 11

I II III IV

21 45 79

The Text and the Problem Liturgy and Localization Approaches Cantat dicat respondeat : Directions and Performers

93

A note on the transcription and editing of text and notation

119

V VI VII VIII IX X XI

123 165 227 281 321 357 391

Localizing the Play Before the Passion The Passion (1) The Passion (2) The Resurrection and the Harrowing of Hell The Empty Tomb Conclusions

Bibliography

397

Acknowledgements

n Africa they know it takes a whole village to bring up a single child. Similarly, bringing out a single book is impossible without the help and support of the academic village, and it gives me the greatest of pleasure to acknowledge my indebtedness to many of its members. The help I have received from two outstanding scholars in the field of medieval German theatre, Prof. Emeritus Hansjürgen Linke and Prof. Ulrich Mehler, both of the University of Cologne, has been invaluable. They have advised, encouraged, and given me access to the uniquely rich medieval drama collection at the Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Literatur of the University of Cologne. To Prof. Hermann Reifenberg, the pioneer of modern scholarly study of the Mainz liturgy, go my sincere thanks for detailed information at an early stage of the project. Another student of Mainz liturgical tradition, Dr Konrad Wiedemann of the Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek, Kassel, most generously put unpublished material from his own researche at my disposal. Assembling the material for this book involved research in many libraries and archives, where I often received assistance and advice far beyond the call of duty. First and foremost I must thank the Durham libraries in which I have spent so much of my time: the University Library, especially Sheila Hingley, Beth Rainey, Ian Doyle and all the ever-helpful staff at Palace Green; the Cathedral Dean and Chapter Library, especially Roger Norris; and the Library of Ushaw College, especially Michael Sharratt and Alistair MacGregor. Further afield, there are nearly thirty libraries and archives to be acknowledged: the library of the Institut für Deutsche Sprache und


Literatur of the University of Cologne, especially Frau Hiltrud Hoffmann-Richter; the Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, Darmstadt; the Bruno-Stäblein-Archiv of the Institut für Musikwissenschaft of the University of Erlangen, especially Prof. Andreas Haug; the Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Frankfurt am Main, especially Dr Gerhardt Powitz and Dr Bernhard Tönnies; the Universitätsbibliothek, Heidelberg; the Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, especially Dr Ute Obhof; the Generallandesarchiv, Karlsruhe; the Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek, Kassel; the British Library, London; the Institute of Germanic Studies and the Warburg Institute, University of London, the Martinusbibliothek of the Bischöfliches Priesterseminar, Mainz; the library of the Gutenbergmuseum, Mainz; the Stadtbibliothek, Mainz, especially Frau Annelen Ottermann; the John Rylands Library, University of Manchester; the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich; the Bibliothek des Metropolitankapitels, Munich; the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg; the Taylor Institution Library, Oxford; the Bibliothèque Mazarine, Paris; the Pfälzische Landesbibliothek, Speyer; the Bibliothek des Gymnasiums am Kaiserdom, Speyer; the Archiv des Bistums Speyer, especially Dr Hans Ammerich; the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City; the Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel; the Stadtarchiv, Worms; the Stadtbibliothek, Worms. Specialized information, constructive criticism and best of all, interest and encouragement, has come in abundance from my colleagues in Durham and elsewhere, especially Jeff Ashcroft, Jenny and Richard Britnell, Anna Carrdus, Andrew Davis, John Flood, Peter Ganz, the late Colin Good, Margaret Harvey, Kevin Hilliard, Tim Jackson, Jonathan Long, John McKinnell, Ann Moss, Nigel Palmer, Nicholas Saul, Peter Scott, Michael Shields, Jane Taylor, Dick Watson and Chris Wells. Special words of appreciation must go to my son Killian, for IT assistance, to Gabriele Fischer and Michael Straeter, for vital help and support in Cologne; and to Alfons Pyka, former director of the Martinusbibliothek, Mainz, and Mrs Pyka, for both bibliographical assis8

Acknowledgements

tance and extraordinarily generous hospitality on several research visits to Mainz. My most important debt is to my wife Fiona. She has freely shared her musical expertise, and has been of enormous practical help in processing the chant texts. More importantly, without her unstinting support, material and emotional, over many years, this book would simply never have seen the light of day. I dedicate it to her in gratitude and love.

9

Introduction Since the plays of the Church were actually sung, our knowledge of them cannot be complete until such of their music as exists has been published, elucidated and heard. (Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church, Oxford, 1933, vol. I, pp. xiii-xiv.)

early seventy years ago, in a pioneering study of the music of the Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Karl Dreimüller lamented the scholarly neglect of music in medieval religious drama and pleaded for increased co-operation between specialists in literature, liturgy and musicology.1 This has been long in coming: even recent publications routinely bemoan the ignorance of liturgy displayed by literary students of liturgical drama, or liturgiologists lack of concern for music.2 Literary scholars tend to give the music of medieval theatre a wide berth, whilst musicologists regard most of it as late and

1

2

Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. I: Abhandlungen, p. 8; idem, Die Musik im geistlichen Spiel des späten deutschen Mittelalters. Dargestellt am Alsfelder Passionsspiel , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 34 (1950), pp. 27-34, esp. 27-28 and 30. C. Clifford Flanigan, Medieval Latin Music-Drama , in Eckehard Simon (ed.), The Theatre of Medieval Europe: New Research in Early Drama, Cambridge, 1991, pp. 21-41, esp. 26 and 29; JoAnna Dutka, Music in the English Mystery Plays, Kalamazoo, MI, 1980 (Early Drama, Art, and Music Reference Series, 2), p. 1 and notes 1 and 2; Wolfgang Suppan (ed.), Texte und Melodien der Erlauer Spiele; auf Grund einer Textübertragung von Johannes Janota, Tutzing, 1990 (Musikethnologische Sammelbände, 11), p. 9.


lacking in interest.3 And so this large corpus of music has languished under the neglect of both disciplines, and a vital aspect of the overall effect and meaning of medieval religious drama has been largely disregarded. If this situation has improved in recent years, then above all in the Anglo-Saxon world, where the English Mystery cycles are staples of theatre, and even of radio and television,4 and where universities have developed a vigorous interdisciplinary approach to the study and performance of early drama.5 In the German-speaking countries, by contrast, the genre is still largely the fief of university Germanistik with its linguistic, editorial and literary focus. Important studies have often entirely disregarded the musical dimension of their subject-matter.6 Performances are still the exception. Nonetheless, a concern with aspects other than the literary text has begun to infiltrate recent scholarship on German drama. Considerable input here, in both the staging and study of German plays, has 3

4

5

6

In Gustav Milchsack (ed.), Egerer Fronleichnamsspiel, Tübingen, 1881, p. 349, this is given as the rationale for not editing the play s chants. Glynne Wickham s introduction to Simon (ed.), Theatre of Medieval Europe, pp. 1-18, esp. 9-10, reviews landmarks in medieval drama production over the last century; cf. John R. Elliott, Playing God, Toronto, 1990, passim, and John W. Robinson, Studies in Fifteenth-Century Stagecraft, Kalamazoo, MI, 1991 (Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series, 14), pp. 1-12. David Bevington, The Staging of Twelfth-Century Liturgical Drama in the Fleury Playbook , in Thomas P. Campbell & Clifford Davidson (eds.), The Fleury Playbook: Essays and Studies, Kalamazoo, MI, 1985 (Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series, 7), pp. 62-81; Cynthia Bourgeault, Liturgical Dramaturgy and Modern Production , in ibid, pp. 144-60. Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, pp. 160-62, surveys scholarship on the documents of medieval English drama. E.g. Helmut de Boor, Die Textgeschichte der lateinischen Osterfeiern, Tübingen, 1967 (Hermaea, Germanistische Forschungen, n.s., 22). See the critiques in Flanigan, Medieval Latin Music-Drama and Andrew Hughes, Liturgical Drama: Falling between the Disciplines , in Simon (ed.), Theatre of Medieval Europe, pp. 4262. Brigitte Lehnen, Das Egerer Passionsspiel, Frankfurt, 1988 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 1034).

12

Introduction

come from outside the German-speaking world.7 But German scholars too have begun to range wider: Hansjürgen Linke has recognized the vast spectrum of knowledge needed to comprehend medieval drama and has encouraged interdisciplinary work; Bernd Neumann s archival study has added considerably to our knowledge of the extent and conditions of dramatic performance in medieval Germany.8 There are also encouraging signs that general scholarly attitudes to music in German plays are shifting considerably. Collaboration between Germanists and musicologists, though still far from the norm, is now at least established. The editorial partnerships of Hansjürgen 7

8

E.g. the work of Johan Nowé, such as Die Regie als symbolstiftende Instanz des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift, 45 (1995), pp. 3-23; Nowé s ambitious production of the Redentiner Osterspiel, Catholic University of Leuven, April 2000; Katja Scheel (ed.), Et respondeat : Studien zum deutschen Theater des Mittelalters. Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Johan Nowé anlässlich seiner Emeritierung, Leuven, 2002 (Medievalia Lovaniensia, Series I, Studia, XXXII). Also Michael Rudick, Theme, Structure and Sacred Context in the Benediktbeuern Passion Play , Speculum 49 (1974), 267-86; Thomas Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Winterthur, 1982 (Sonderband der Reihe Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, zum 50, Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis), pp. 144-57; idem, [Recording of] The Greater Passion Play, Reconstructed from the Thirteenth-Century Manuscript Carmina Burana . Singers and Instrumentalists of the Early Music Institute, Indiana University School of Music, 1983 (Focus, 831); idem, [Recording of] Das große Passionsspiel Carmina Burana (13. Jh.), Mittelalterensemble der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, 1984 (Deutsche Harmonia Mundi, IC 2LP 165); Stephen K. Wright, The Ingressus Pilatus Chant in Medieval German Drama , Comparative Drama 28 (1994), pp. 348-66. Hansjürgen Linke, Drama und Theater des Mittelalters als Feld interdisziplinärer Forschung , Euphorion 79 (1985), pp. 43-65; Bernd Neumann, Geistliches Schauspiel im Zeugnis der Zeit: Zur Aufführung mittelalterlicher religiöser Dramen im deutschen Sprachgebiet, 2 vols., München-Zürich, 1987 (Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 84-85) cf. Eckehard Simon, Das Egerer Fronleichnamspiel in den Stadtrechnungen , in Elrich Mehler & Anton H. Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel: Festschrift für Hansjürgen Linke zum 65. Geburtstag, Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA, 1994 (Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik, 38-39), pp. 299-311.

13


Linke and Ulrich Mehler, and Wolfgang Suppan and Johannes Janota, have important work to their credit; another multi-disciplinary team produced the compendious edition of the plays of the Sterzing group.9 Significant studies of music in medieval plays are appearing.10 And music is increasingly being recognized as an important source of scholarly insights. The shape of neumes is adduced in Georg Steer s re-localization of the Carmina Burana manuscript in the South Tyrol; 9

10

Hansjürgen Linke & Ulrich Mehler (eds.), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau; Kritischer Text und Faksimilia der Handschriften, Tübingen, 1990 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 103); Suppan (ed.), Texte und Melodien der Erlauer Spiele; Walther Lipphardt & Hans-Gert Roloff (eds.), Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, Bern, 1980- (Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 14-19). E.g. Renate Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus: Recovery of the Sung Liturgical Core of the Thuringian Zehnjungfrauenspiel , Toronto, 2002 (Studies and Texts, 140); Rainer Gstrein, Anmerkungen zu den Gesängen der Osterspiele des Sterzinger Debs-Kodex , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik. Akten des 2. Symposiums der Sterzinger Osterspiele (12.-16. April 1992), Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 91-98; Helmut Hucke, Zur Situation der musikalischen Mittelalterforschung in Deutschland , Die Musikforschung 37 (1984), 25759; Johannes Janota, Zur Funktion der Gesänge in der hessischen Passionsspielgruppe , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 109-20; Walther Lipphardt, Musik in den spätmittelalterlichen Passionsspielen und Osterspielen von Bozen, Sterzing und Brixen , in Egon Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel: Beiträge zur Theatergeschichte des Alpenraumes, Bozen, 1976 (Schriftenreihe des Südtiroler Kulturinstitutes, 3), pp. 127-66; Wolfgang Suppan, Zur Musik der Erlauer Spiele , Studia musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 11 (1969), pp. 409-21; Anthonius H. Touber, Das Osterspiel im Donaueschinger Passionsspiel: Text und Musik , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 203-09; Andreas Traub, Zwischen Aufgezeichnetem und Nichtaufgezeichnetem: Probleme bei der Edition der Melodien der Sterzinger Spiele , in ibid, pp. 211-18; idem, Überlegungen zur Edition von Melodien in geistlichen Spielen an Beispielen aus dem Sterzinger Spielarchiv , in Anton Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur: Beiträge der Bamberger Tagung Methoden und Probleme der Edition mittelalterlicher deutscher Texte , Göppingen, 1994 (Litterae, 117), pp. 255-59. Cf. summary of literature in Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), pp. 112.

14

Introduction

the music of the Sterzing plays is shown to be a clue to other aspects of performance; Klaus Wolf s commentary on the Frankfurt plays recognizes the importance of the liturgical-musical stratum; Bernd Neumann envisages the possibility of liturgical localization of the Innsbrucker Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt.11 This change in attitudes to music is both influenced by, and itself influences, modern developments in editorial practice. Nineteenthand earlier twentieth-century editing of medieval drama reflected the aim of genealogical textual criticism: to reconstruct an Urtext, of which later versions represented progressive contaminations .12 Wackernell s edition of the Tyrolean plays is a classic example; yet ironically, the archetypal Tiroler Passion it reconstructs is a hypothetical text, which never took that precise form in any actual manuscript or performance.13 This kind of editing also assumed readerly textual reception: perusal in the study, not performance on stage. This both reflected and encouraged a logocentric fixation on spoken dialogue: early editors like Milchsack and Wackernell often simply left other manuscript strata, pre-eminently music, out of account.14 The re11

12

13

14

Georg Steer, Carmina Burana in Südtirol. Zur Herkunft des clm 4660 , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 112 (1983), pp. 1-37, esp. p. 37, note 116; Andreas Traub, Der Debs-Codex als musikalische Quelle , in Mehler & Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel, pp. 339-47; Wolf, Kommentar; Bernd Neumann, Das Innsbrucker Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt : Gedanken zu einer Neuedition , Neue Beiträge zur Germanistik 109 (2002), pp. 191-206, esp. 203-04. E.g. Hermann Kantorowicz, Einführung in die Textkritik, Leipzig, 1921, p. 5; Johannes Janota, Auf der Suche nach gattungsadäquaten Editionsformen bei der Herausgabe mittelalterlicher Spiele , in Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel, pp. 74-87, esp. 83. J. E. Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, Graz, 1897 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Litteratur und Sprache Österreichs und seiner Kronländer, 1); cf. Dieter Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? Überlegungen zur Edition mittelalterlicher Dramen , Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 37 (1993), pp. 131-45, esp. 133. Wackernell s edition repeatedly omits the manuscript abbreviation Rm (responsorium) (e.g. p. 354, ll. 82b-c) and misreads the abbreviation An- (antiphona) as ante or antea (e.g. p. 368, l. 649b).

15


stricted aims of such editions matched the limited expectations of their readership. More recently an increasing concern with performance and with effects beyond the textual has raised awareness of the limitations of such editions. Technological advances, first in reprographics, now in the electronic media, have also offered liberating new editorial possibilities denied to previous ages. All this has led to scholarly debate about the gattungsadäquate Editionsform for medieval plays: the kind of edition which will best do justice to medieval drama as a performancebased genre, and to the ways in which it was, may have been, and can still be, received. This is a problem which can only be alluded to briefly here.15 Paul-Gerhard Völker was among the first Germanists to criticize the literary editing of medieval drama as an approach better suited to the courtly novel or lyric poetry than to the theatre.16 In 1976 Johannes Janota developed Völker s ideas, arguing that editions which privilege literary text and form over the stage reality of the plays effectively turn medieval theatre into Lesedrama, and actively impede the Rekonstruktion von Spielsituationen , a necessary interpretative response to the genre.17 Janota stressed that the different textual forms taken by plays are not corruptions of an original, but different Entstehungsvarianten eines immer neu realisierbaren [ ] Textes ; editors should present them in ways that allow the history of these different

15

16

17

Discussion and secondary literature summarized in Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , passim. Paul-Gerhard Völker, Schwierigkeiten bei der Edition geistlicher Spiele des Mittelalters , in Hugo Kuhn, Karl Stackmann & Dieter Wuttke (eds.), Kolloquium über Probleme altgermanistischer Editionen, Marbach am Neckar, 26. und 27. April 1966. Referate und Diskussionsbeiträge, Wiesbaden, 1968 (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Forschungsberichte, 13), pp. 160-68. Janota, Auf der Suche nach gattungsadäquaten Editionsformen , pp. 76 and 80.

16

Introduction

realisations to be readily grasped something which approaches like Wackernell s make well-nigh impossible.18 This is precisely the problem which Janota himself addressed two decades later in his edition of the Hessian plays, an edition which tries to make the successive alterations to the text of the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle explicit, and to clarify the relations between the plays of the Hessian group; in the attempt it pushes the possibilities of print technology and of parallel text edition about as far as they will go.19 The editorial future for medieval drama is doubtless in electronic form, allowing the whole range of information carried by the manuscripts to be accessed and evaluated in a variety of ways for different academic purposes; though this is likely to be some way off. Janota s main concern is for the relationship of different Realisationsformen of a play or group of plays. But generic adequacy also involves the question of the different strata within a single text or Realisationsform , especially the strata other than the spoken text which the older editions routinely left out or played down; of these music is a very important example. A consensus has been developing that modern editions need to include information of this kind, and to treat it much more adequately than did their older counterparts, so that readers realize the closeness of the plays to liturgy, understand the importance of the musical dimension, and appreciate the true length and scale of performances, of which the spoken text gives a very misleading idea.20 18 19

20

Ibid, p. 83 and passim. Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, p. 4; cf. Hansjürgen Linke, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 121 (1999), pp. 156-62, esp. 162. Bernd Neumann, [Review of Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 104 (1982), pp. 318-23, esp. 318-19; cf. John Tailby, Schwierigkeiten der Dramenedition , in Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte, pp. 251-54, esp. 253; Hansjürgen Linke, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische

17


Change is still slow, however. Over thirty years after Karl Konrad Polheim criticized Peter Liebenow s edition of the Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel for an outdated disregard of music, liturgy and theatricality, such one-sidedly textual editing is not entirely a thing of the past.21 Polheim s own edition of the Admonter Passionsspiel (197280), with its manuscript facsimile and its commentary on every chant, is exemplary; but its example is followed by few. Recent editions of the Zwickau and Sterzing plays do handle the music carefully it is in fact the text which is inadequately treated in the Sterzing edition.22 But many plays have still not been edited in a form that does justice to the music. Ironically, Janota s edition of the Hessian plays has been taken to task for its failure to reconstruct chant-incipits, and for confusing and inconsistent editorial treatment of the notated chants of the Alsfelder Passionsspiel.23 And too often music is grudged its place: Touber s edition of the Donaueschinger Passionsspiel relegates the

21

22

23

Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 126 (2004), pp. 359-66, esp. 365. Karl Konrad Polheim, [Review of Peter K. Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, Berlin, 1969 (Ausgaben Deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama, 2)] , Zeitschrift für Volkskunde 67 (1971), pp. 286-88, esp. 287. Linke & Mehler (eds.), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe. II. Alsfelder Passionsspiel. Major textual inaccuracies in Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, led to its withdrawal and re-editing in 1986; cf. John Tailby, Drama and Community in South Tyrol , in Alan Hindley (ed.), Drama and Community: People and Plays in Medieval Europe, Turnhout, 1999 (Medieval Texts and Cultures of Northern Europe, 1), pp. 554-66, esp. 555. Mistakes in musical transcription were subsequently noted: Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, pp. 139-56; cf. idem, Der Debs-Codex als musikalische Quelle , p. 339, note 2. The later volumes also contain many, often gross, textual misreadings. Linke, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I] , p. 159; idem, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II] , pp. 36466.

18

Introduction

melodies to an appendix, and whilst even minor errors in the dialogue are dealt with editorially, analogous problems in the sung portions are often left uncommented.24 And all this applies to plays whose manuscripts include some or all of the music used in them. In the case of plays without notation, the solely textual approach is still very much alive.25 Renate Amstutz s recent reconstruction of the chants of the Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel is a splendid exception to a general trend.26 How should the unnotated musical dimension in plays like this, a class to which many of the surviving German plays belong, be treated in editions? This is a question which the subject of this book, the St. Gall Passion Play, poses in a very interesting way.

24

25

26

E.g. gätly for gältly (l. 3887) is noted, but not the major verbal and melodic gaps in the chant Tollite portas (ll. 3907a-10, melody transcribed, p. 255). E.g. Cobie Kuné (ed.), Das Prager Abendmahlspiel , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 128 (1999), pp. 414-24; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I; its lack of chant reconstruction is criticized in the review by Hansjürgen Linke, Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 121 (1999), pp. 158-59 and 161. Comment on the chants in the Ergänzungsband to this edition by Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002, is limited in scope. Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus. The chants are reconstructed on the basis of Mainz-rite liturgical books from the area in which the play originated.

19

Chapter I

The Text and the Problem

etween two pages of Codex 919 of St Gall Abbey Library, there is bound a paper booklet, now numbered pages 197218, preserving the only known copy of the St Gall Passion Play, a fourteenth-century vernacular play from the central Rhineland. It is part of the collection of Dom Gall Kemli (1417-c. 1477), a monk of St Gall who spent a long enforced absence from the abbey (144370) collecting manuscripts in the dioceses of Mainz, Trier and Cologne; he very likely acquired the play somewhere in this area.1 The manuscript was not however copied by Kemli himself; it is written in a rather careless hand of the earlier fourteenth century.2 The play may have originated before the start of the fourteenth century, indeed numerous scribal errors strongly suggest that the manuscript is a copy rather than an original;3 but any earlier manuscript or manuscripts of 1

2

3

Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978, pp. 44-51. Ibid., pp. 55-56; cf. Rudolf Schützeichel, Zum Mittelrheinischen Passionsspiel der St. Galler Handschrift 919 , in Ursula Hennig & Herbert Kolb (eds.), Mediævalia litteraria. Festschrift für Helmut de Boor zum 80. Geburtstag, München, 1971, p. 532; Rolf Bergmann, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele und Marienklagen des Mittelalters, München, 1986, no. 54, pp. 133-35. Ursula Schulze, Schmerz und Heiligkeit: Zur Performanz von Passio und Compassio in ausgewählten Passionsspieltexten (Mittelrheinisches, Frankfurter, Donaueschinger Spiel) , in Horst Brunner & Werner Williams-Krapp (eds.), Forschungen zur deutschen Literatur des Spätmittelalters. Festschrift für Johannes Janota, Tübingen, 2003, p. 214 and note 10, notes the lack of influence on the St Gall Passion Play of Die Erlösung, an early-fourteenth-century biblical poem which influenced the Hessian plays depiction of the Passion. Scribal errors: Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 56-60; cf. Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu


the play, which may have preserved previous textual stages or details of earlier performances, are seemingly long destroyed. Rudolf Schützeichel convincingly concludes, however, that the original from which the manuscript was copied cannot have been significantly older than the copy.4 Various plays have been suggested as sources of the St Gall Passion Play and vice versa, but there is no scholarly consensus on this. It is clear, however, that the play is connected with the Hessian tradition, and very recently Klaus Wolf s work has thrown further light on similarities between it and the Frankfurt plays. Wolf notes that both the St Gall Passion Play and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle give a brief speaking part to St Bartholomew, a very minor figure indeed both in the gospels and in German drama. In Frankfurt this was local pride: the Dirigierrolle was produced under the aegis of the Kaiserdom, which in 1239 had been re-dedicated as Sankt Bartholomäus, and where the saint s skull was preserved. The mention of Bartholomew in the St Gall Passion Play thus surely reflects Frankfurt origins; relations between Frankfurt and Mainz Cathedral were close.5 And a considerable amount of text from a play closely related to the St Gall Pas-

4

5

Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, Munich, 1972 (Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 14), pp. 18, 22. Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, p. 60; cf. Hugo Stopp, Untersuchungen zum St. Galler Passionsspiel , Diss. University of Saarbrücken, 1959, p. 117; Bergmann, Studien, pp. 38-39, 91-97. St Gall Passion Play, ll. 685a-86; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 41 (cf. 38-44). Rolf Bergmann, St. Galler (mittelrheinisches) Passionsspiel , in Kurt Ruh et al. (eds.), Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserslexikon, Berlin-New York, 1978- [2nd ed.], vol. II, cols. 1042-44 (col. 1043); Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [first volume of additions to Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002], pp. 106-08; idem, Für eine neue Form der Kommentierung geistlicher Spiele. Die Frankfurter Spiele als Beispiel der Rekonstruktion von Aufführungswirklichkeit , in Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (ed.), Ritual und Inszenierung: Geistliches und weltliches Drama des Mittelalters, Tübingen, 2004, pp. 5-6, 21, 23 and note 113.

22

I. The Text and the Problem

sion Play (though not the play in the form in which we know it), has made its way into the late-fifteenth-century Frankfurter Passionsspiel.6 Yet despite all these similarities with Frankfurt tradition, the St Gall Passion Play is not simply a Frankfurt play. It is different dialectally from the Frankfurt texts, and despite various interesting parallels by no means identical to the roughly contemporary Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. It is clearly a play that has developed at some remove from Frankfurt but at precisely what remove? For all its undoubted interest, Wolf s approach does not seem to offer an answer to this question. The play has so far had four editors: Franz Joseph Mone (1846), Emil Wolter (1912), Eduard Hartl (1952) and Rudolf Schützeichel (1978).7 It has also gone under as many names: Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu (Wolter, following Mone); Das St. Galler Passionsspiel (Hartl); Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel (Schützeichel); and the modern standard Das St. Galler (mittelrheinische) Passionsspiel.8 The play is of considerable literary interest. In a compact 1400 lines it covers a broad sweep of action: the miracle of Cana; John the Baptist and the Jews; the baptism of Christ and his temptation in the 6

7

8

E.g. the numerous parallels in the episode of the healing of the blind man, St Gall Passion Play, ll. 315a-449; cf. Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 881b-965a. Wolf, Kommentar, pp. 2, 590-95; idem, Für eine neue Form der Kommentierung geistlicher Spiele , p. 23, note 113. Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, Karlsruhe, 1846, vol. I, pp. 49-132; Emil Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977] (Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41); Eduard Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Halle an der Saale, 1952 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41), pp. 56-131; Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978. This is the title used in Bergmann, Katalog, no. 54, and in Wolfgang Stammler & Karl Langosch (eds.), Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, Berlin-Leipzig, 1933-55, vol. II, cols. 1042-44; cf. Rolf Steinbach, Die deutschen Oster- und Passionsspiele des Mittelalters: Versuch einer Darstellung und Wesensbestimmung nebst einer Bibliographie zum deutschen geistlichen Spiel des Mittelalters, Köln, 1970 (Kölner Germanistische Studien, 4), p. 134.

23


wilderness; the calling of Peter and Andrew; the repentance of the woman caught in adultery and of Mary Magdalene; the healing of the blind beggar; the raising of Lazarus; then the standard episodes of the Passion and Easter plays, from the High Priests council to the appearance of the risen Christ to Mary Magdalene, and her passing on the news of the resurrection to the Apostles.9 The play s conciseness, and its avoidance of the coarse comedy and the antisemitism of so much of the Passion play tradition, give it a lapidary, austere dignity which has repeatedly impressed readers. Yet as Eduard Hartl notes, the scale of the play is not unambitious, and despite adhering closely to the biblical original, the compiler of the drama manages to connect and relate the individual episodes through judicious selection and compression, carefully considered repetition of key material, and the use of tensions and oppositions. Considerable room is given to the human, emotional aspects of the action, yet the play never descends into the merely profane: the transcendence of its matter is always apparent, the atmosphere consistently serious and solemn.10 The St Gall Passion Play, like most German Passion plays, has two textual strata : vernacular rhyming dialogue, and sung Latin chants, almost all liturgical in origin, and the relation of these two Sprachebenen has also been judged favourably. Hartl attributes the solemnity of the play to a pervasive liturgischer Grundton :11 the chants play an important aesthetic part in the drama as a whole. Steinbach remarks on 9

10

11

Full contents listed in Bergmann, Katalog, pp. 134-35; cf. William Louis Boletta, The Role of Music in Medieval German Drama: Easter Plays and Passion Plays , Diss. Vanderbilt University, 1967, p. 122. Eduard Hartl, Untersuchungen zum St. Galler Passionsspiel , in Gerhard Eis, Johannes Hansel & Richard Kienast (eds.), Festschrift für Wolfgang Stammler zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, dargebracht von Freunden und Schülern, Berlin-Bielefeld, 1953, pp. 109, 117-21, 126-27. Similarly Friedrich Ranke, Von der ritterlichen zur bürgerlichen Dichtung, 1230 1430 , in Heinz Otto Burger (ed.), Annalen der deutschen Literatur, Stuttgart, 1971 [2nd revised ed.], p. 216; Steinbach, Osterund Passionsspiele, pp. 133-41, esp. 133. Hartl, Untersuchungen , p. 123.

24


the careful balance of German and Latin in the text, which gives both strata the prominence they deserve.12 So far, however, the Latin liturgical stratum has received scant scholarly attention. This is partly explained by the sketchy, problematical representation of the sung Latin in the manuscript. For whilst the vernacular dialogue is recorded complete, the chants are given only as incipits, often of the briefest kind: ten consist of a single word, twenty of only two. The highly abbreviated Latin has challenged editors skills of deciphering.13 The manuscript contains not a single musical note or neume for any of its chants. Written in one colour of ink, it does not even clearly mark the boundary between chants and directions or dialogue, as do many performance-oriented manuscripts. Such an absolute lack of musical indications is rare: even unnotated manuscripts like the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle distinguish directions in red ink from chant and dialogue incipits in black, and even contain occasional neumes.14 Only a few St Gall Passion Play directions clearly describe a chant as a liturgical item antiphon, responsory, or verse, yet most of the chants are demonstrably from liturgical sources. Nowadays, medieval drama scholars increasingly insist that editors have the right, indeed the duty, to reconstruct the text and if possible even the music of the chants represented by incipits, so as to give a fuller and clearer impression of the play s total effect. Such editorial practice demonstrates the plays relationship to liturgy and their

12

13

14

Steinbach, Oster- und Passionsspiele, pp. 133-34. Bergmann, Katalog, p. 89, points out that the proportions of the two strata are typical of fourteenth-century German plays. Rudolf Schützeichel, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel: Paläographie und Edition , in idem, Textgebundenheit. Kleinere Schriften zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur, Tübingen, 1981, p. 167; cf. chant no. 17 below. Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, p. 5 on colours of ink; neumes over Baptista contremuit (26), Ductus est Jesus (32a) and Sicut ovis (222a).

25


starke musikalische Bestimmtheit ;15 one could add that it would also permit, perhaps even encourage, reasonably authentic performance. Hansjürgen Linke has lost no opportunity to encourage editors to reconstruct incipits, or to castigate them when they do not.16 Might such a reconstruction be possible in the case of the St Gall Passion Play? None of the four editions of the play offers a reliable textual version of its chants. In 1846 Mone contented himself with reproducing the incipits, insofar as he could decipher them, without any comment or attempt at reconstruction. The sound but unaccountably disregarded scholarly edition of Wolter (1912) also gave the incipits only, though Wolter usually read them accurately. Hartl s edition of 1952, which has been taken to task by critics for general inaccuracy,17 must be given credit for first attempting to reconstruct the chants, but in doing so Hartl showed a startling unfamiliarity with the topic: seemingly unaware of the liturgical origin of most such chants, he reconstructed

15

16

17

Bernd Neumann, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 104 (1982), pp. 318-23, esp. 318, 319. Hansjürgen Linke, [Review of Peter K. Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, Berlin, 1969 (Ausgaben Deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama, II)] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 81 (1970), pp. 69-72, esp. 72; idem, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 90 (1979), pp. 154-60, esp. 159; idem, [Review of Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, vol. I: Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments und des Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragments , Tübingen, 1996] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 121 (1999), pp. 156-62, esp. 159. Cf. Karl Konrad Polheim, [Review of Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel] , Zeitschrift für Volkskunde 67 (1971), pp. 286-88, esp. 287. Criticism of Hartl summarized in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 90-91; cf. Bergmann, Katalog, pp. 26-27; Steinbach, Oster- und Passionsspiele, p. 138, note 44.

26


them on the basis of biblical text, producing results which are wrong in a great many cases. Yet ironically, Rudolf Schützeichel s compendious edition of 1978 is most disappointing of all in respect of the chants. Produced by a team of scholars, and over twelve years in the making, it nonetheless gives only the incipits, albeit in an accurate transcription.18 Apart from the briefest of footnote references to those identified by Rolf Bergmann, the chants of the play are not even mentioned in the extensive apparatus and commentaries.19 Modern readers thus have a definitive edition which as far as the chants are concerned offers little more than did Mone one hundred and thirty years previously. Several reviewers expressed disappointment at this.20 In the case both of Hartl s and Schützeichel s editions, one problem was timing: Hartl s edition appeared only a year after Schuler s catalogue of the music of medieval German drama21 too late, presumably, for Hartl to have consulted Schuler s results, which made it abundantly clear that the chants were largely liturgical. At any rate, Hartl s edition makes no reference to Schuler.

18

19

20

21

The edition was announced in Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 85 (1966), pp. 458-60. Rolf Bergmann, F. Interpretation. I. Der Inhalt des Spiels , in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 219-39, referring to Bergmann, Studien. This section criticized by Bernd Neumann, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 104 (1982), pp. 318-23, esp. 321. Reviews of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, by Ursula Hennig, Daphnis 8 (1979), pp. 351-55, esp. 351; Hansjürgen Linke, Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 90 (1979), pp. 154-60, esp. 159-60; Bernd Neumann, Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 104 (1982), pp. 318-23, esp. 318-19. Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940).

27


Similar chronological misfortune attended the preparation of Schützeichel s edition: simultaneously, Hermann Manfred Pflanz, a doctoral student at the University of Saarbrücken, was attempting to reconstruct the St Gall Passion Play chants and to draw conclusions from them about the localization of the play. His dissertation appeared in late 1977, before Schützeichel s edition was published but after its completion in September 1976.22 Pflanz, relying on Wolter s and Hartl s editions, thus had to wrestle with many a textual problem which Schützeichel had already resolved. Equally, several reviewers suggested that Pflanz s reconstructions would have enriched Schützeichel s edition.23 To this suggestion Schützeichel reacted with extraordinary vehemence, dismissing Pflanz s scholarship as virtually worthless.24 In this brief but caustic critique Schützeichel made four main points. First, that to include a reconstruction of the chants in his edition would have been editorially improper: the St Gall Passion Play manuscript was not a performance text. Second, that Pflanz s reconstruction of the play s chants simply repeated work already done by others. Third, that a reliable reconstruction of the chants was in any case impossible. And fourth, that Pflanz s methods, legitimate or not, added nothing to our knowledge of the dating and localization of the 22

23

24

Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205). Dates: Schützeichel, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel , p. 167, note 10. Reviews of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel by Ursula Hennig, Daphnis 8 (1979), pp. 351-55, esp. 351; Hansjürgen Linke, Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 90 (1979), pp. 154-60, esp. 159-60; Bernd Neumann, Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 104 (1982), pp. 318-23, esp. 320; Eckehard Simon, Speculum 54 (1979), pp. 627-28, esp. 628. Reviews of Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, by Johannes Janota, Germanistik 20 (1979), pp. 148-49; Ulrich Mehler, Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 91 (1980), pp. 120-24, esp. 120. Schützeichel, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel , pp. 164-72.

28


play. A swingeing critique indeed; but how well does it stand up to scrutiny? Schützeichel s first objection was that even had Pflanz s results been to hand, it would not have been legitimate to incorporate them in his edition as a completion of the chant-incipits. This, he insisted, would distort the manuscript, which had not been conceived as an Aufführungsvorlage , into a Regiebuch .25 Here, however, Schützeichel completely contradicted what he himself had written ten years previously about his projected edition. Then he had described a chant reconstruction as a major desideratum, without which an edition would give an unvollständiges und schiefes Bild of the play.26 Now inclusion of the music would distort the edition an unexplained editorial volte-face. Here Schutzeichel touches on, without engaging with, two complex and closely related questions. The first is whether medieval play manuscripts can be readily divided into performance and reading manuscripts. The second is how modern editions of the plays preserved in these manuscripts should be presented: the problem of the gattungsadäquate Editionsform . Both these questions have been discussed in some detail, by Hansjürgen Linke and Dieter Trauden.27

25 26

27

Ibid., p. 167, note 10: Solche Ergänzungen [verfehlten] den Sinn der Edition . Schützeichel, Zum Mittelrheinischen Passionsspiel der St. Galler Handschrift 919 , p. 537. Bergmann, Katalog, pp. 15-29, too, had asked for editing that would allow a Rekonstruktion der Spielsituation . Hansjürgen Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften mittelalterlicher Spiele , in Volker Honemann & Nigel F. Palmer (eds.), Deutsche Handschriften, 11001400: Oxforder Kolloquium 1985, Tübingen, 1988, pp. 527-89; Dieter Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? Überlegungen zur Edition mittelalterlicher Dramen , Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 37 (1993), pp. 131-45. Cf. Johannes Janota, Auf der Suche nach gattungsadäquaten Editionsformen bei der Herausgabe mittelalterlicher Spiele , in Egon Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel: Beiträge zur Theatergeschichte des Alpenraumes, Bozen, 1976 (Schriftenreihe des Südtiroler Kulturinstitutes, 3), pp. 74 87.

29


Linke makes two crucially important points. First, that a crude division of manuscripts into Aufführungsmanuskripte and Lesehandschriften ignores the large category of those which cannot firmly be put in either camp. Ascribing a manuscript to one of these groups is a complex matter, requiring the convergence of several criteria. Second, that the distinction between Text and Textträger , between the text of the play and the manuscript in which it is preserved, is vital: frequently a manuscript clearly not designed for use in a performance preserves a text which very evidently was.28 As Textträger , St Gall ms 919 admittedly displays none of the features typical of an Aufführungsmanuskript . It is not laid out in the style of a Dirigierrolle (a text designed for the director or ductor ludi) with different colours and hands highlighting the different strata of dialogue, chant and directions. It does not refer to the date, place or casting of an actual performance, to the arrangement of the playing area or the order in which players are to enter it, or to the disposition of props. There are none of the cuts, additions and shifted blocks of dialogue often noted in undoubted working books such as the Alsfelder Passionsspiel, nor do crosses or pointing fingers alert the director to cues, musical entries and other crucial performance details.29 It is clear that the manuscript was not designed for use in an actual performance; nor indeed has this ever been seriously suggested. But does the manuscript show any positive signs of being specifically intended for reading? These are: explicit dedication of the manuscript to members of the audience or players; a description of the text as a book ( liber or buoch ); illustrations or decoration clearly 28

29

Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , pp. 528-29, citing Bergmann, Zur Überlieferung der mittelalterlichen geistlichen Spiele and idem, Aufführungstext und Lesetext: Zur Funktion der Überlieferung des mittelalterlichen geistlichen deutschen Dramas , in Herman Braet, Johan Nowé & Gilbert Tournoy (eds.), The Theatre in the Middle Ages, Leuven, 1985 (Medievalia Lovaniensia, Series I / Studia, 13), pp. 314 51. Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , pp. 530, 531, and 536-40.

30


aimed at readerly pleasure; the use in later manuscripts of vellum rather than paper; dialogue written out not in lines of verse but continuously; rhymed or narrative texts rather than performance-orientated stage directions; marginal glosses on biblical texts quoted in the play; a text preserved in a manuscript containing other, miscellaneous material. Several of these criteria together can reliably indicate the pure Lesehandschrift.30 Only two of these features apply to St Gall ms 919. The text is written in continuous lines rather than in single verses; but this criterion is reliable only for late manuscripts, since this layout was common in earlier ones; in the case of this fourteenth-century manuscript it cannot be seen as decisive.31 The St Gall Passion Play is found in a Sammelhandschrift containing other very diverse material; but this is not its original home: it is in a separate booklet, later bound into St Gall ms 919.32 The manuscript itself, then, is neither clearly an Aufführungsmanuskript nor a Lesehandschrift . What of the text preserved in it? As Linke stresses, the fact that a play is contained in a manuscript designed primarily for reading does not automatically make the play itself a Lesedrama (in any case a modern concept, barely applicable to the middle ages). Texts in Lesehandschriften often contain features 30

31

32

Ibid, pp. 540-43; Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , pp. 140-41, with examples. Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , p. 541; Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , p. 141. Similarly, Bergmann s generalization that performance manuscripts have a narrow page format (Bergmann, Aufführungstext , p. 320), is shown by Linke ( Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , p. 534, note 19) as inapplicable to thirteenth- and fourteenth-century books, a point conceded by Rolf Bergmann, Geistliche Spiele des Mittelalters Katalogerfassung und Neufunde , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik. Akten des 2. Symposiums der Sterzinger Osterspiele (12. - 16. April 1992), Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 13-32. Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , p. 541. Inventory of St Gall, Codex 919, in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 31-43.

31


which indicate closeness to performance. These include: references to an actual performance of the play; a text which describes itself as a play ( spil , ludus ); stage directions expressed in imperative forms; references to props or stage effects; allusions to stage conditions, the players, or the audience; alternative or ad libitum texts. Again, a number of such features is needed to establish Aufführungsnähe .33 And indeed, with the exception of references to a performance, the St Gall Passion Play manuscript does present examples of nearly every one of these; in fact Linke exemplifies many of the typical signs of Aufführungsnähe from this very play. The text does call itself a play : et sic finiatur ludus prenotatus (l. 1347f). The Latin stage directions never use past indicative forms, which could suggest a reader-oriented, narrativized description of a past performance; they are functionally imperative, instructions to director and actors.34 The present subjunctive predominates overwhelmingly: tollatur lapis (l. 529a); [Iudas] suspendatur (l. 861a); as well as the ubiquitous respondet , there are about a dozen present and future indicatives: Tunc discipuli fugiunt (l. 752a); Postea vestient eum purpura et imponent ei coronam spineam (l. 917c). In the directions, a variety of verbs differentiate ways of performing the sung texts ( dicere , cantare , dicere cantando ); these too are designed for the director and actors rather than for a reader. Directions often allude to practicalities of staging and performance: Omnibus personis decenter ornatis, cantent angeli (l. 0b); cantet ter aliqua persona abscondita voce Patris (ll. 111a-b); Tunc angeli cantent responsorium Ductus est Iesus in desertum usque Si es filius Dei quod accedens Dyabolus cantet (ll. 123a-c); sangu[is] lanceam descen33

34

Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , pp. 543-51; Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , p. 141. Cf. Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , pp. 542 and 545. Past-tense directions are found, for example, in the Admonter Passionsspiel. Hartl, Untersuchungen , p. 128, bizarrely interprets the subjunctive in the St Gall Passion Play as an authorial reminder of the play s fictional status.

32


den[s] tangat oculos et videbit (l. 1188a). The direction tunc Lazarus fingat se mortuum (l. 476a) oscillates between fictive Spielwirklichkeit (the character Lazarus ) and literal reality (the actor playing Lazarus feigns death); this shows awareness of the process of fictive dramatic representation.35 The angels repeatedly exhort the audience to silence, and Augustinus adverts to what they are about to see: Man wil begen nu vorbaz | wie Iesus hude zu tische saz | bit den lieben iungern sin (ll. 599-601); both are clearly part of a text aimed at a real audience.36 In general, the directions are far too laconic to act as a readerly substitute for witnessing a performance. They are intended for a Spielleiter and players to fill out in a real production. The brief chant incipits themselves are of course references to the musical stratum of the play as performed, and designed for the performers guidance rather than for readerly pleasure. When Mary Magdalene washes Jesus s feet, for example, the text (ll. 305a-c) suggests three possible chants, information aimed at a director rather than a reader.37 Even more obviously for directorial eyes are the prescriptions for Mary Magdalene s dances, such as: Tunc Maria Magdalena cum una puella et duobus iuvenibus curizet (ll. 161c-d), and the direction that the soldiers go off to guard Christ s tomb cantantes aliquid (l. 1262a); an eminently performance-oriented instruction to the director to find a suitable song, which would be unhelpful, even annoying, to a reader. In these ways the St Gall Passion Play text is so clearly performance-related as to call severely into question Schützeichel s polemics about the edition becoming a Regiebuch . And indeed, Schützeichel seems to have been exaggerating for effect here: in the 35

36 37

Cf. Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , pp. 547-48. Hartl, Untersuchungen , pp. 128-29, mistakenly sees here a conflation of actor and role: Die Einheit von Darsteller und dargestellter Person [kann] so bedrohlich eng werden, daß der Darsteller darüber sein eigenes Ich verliert. Cf. Linke, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften , pp. 547-49. Ibid, p. 545; Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , p. 141.

33


non-polemical context of his edition, he concedes that the manuscript, though not an actual Aufführungsmanuskript , does preserve the text in a form which could serve as a basis for further productions.38 In any case, the idea that chant reconstructions would have turned the edition into a Regiebuch is grossly overstated: they could easily have been signalled as editorial additions and need not have compromised the integrity of the text.39 They could have been placed in one of the many commentary sections appended to the edition. One of these, for example, discusses elements of Regie : props and stage layout and movement, and draws conclusions, some necessarily speculative, on this aspect of the play.40 By drawing out the implications of the text for the staging, the commentary generates a distinctly more concrete impression of the play than the manuscript alone; many of its conclusions could be used as an aid to performance. If this is a licit editorial way of going beyond the bare textual shape of the play, then so, surely, is a comparable reflection on the chants. Schützeichel s second major point is that Pflanz s work had not in any sense relativized the value of his own edition, as some reviewers had suggested. Pflanz, he asserted, had effectively done no more than Rolf Bergmann, who had already identified the play s chants of the St Gall Passion Play.41 Now Pflanz s apparent ignorance of Bergmann s 38 39

40

41

Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, p. 59. Ursula Hennig, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel] , Daphnis 8 (1979), pp. 351-55, esp. 351; Linke, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, I] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 121 (1999), pp. 156-62, esp. 159; cf. idem, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, II] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 126 (2004), pp. 359-66, esp. 364-66. Bergmann, F. Interpretation. I: Der Inhalt des Spiels , pp. 219-39. Adverse criticism in reviews of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel by Linke, Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 90 (1979), pp. 15460, esp. 155-56, and Simon, Speculum 54 (1979), pp. 627-28. Schützeichel, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel , p. 167, note 10; Bergmann,

34


work in this area is indeed a major flaw of his study. But Bergmann had in fact identified only about forty-five of the more than seventy chants of the play, by no means all correctly, as this study will show, and without considering possible textual variation or questions of performance practice. Further work on this topic is neither impossible nor undesirable. Thirdly, Schützeichel argues that the play s chants cannot in any case be reliably reconstructed, because they are only angedeutet in the stage directions.42 In his edition he had made a similar point, rejecting Hartl s reconstruction of the chants as unreliable, because based on insufficient evidence.43 This view is highly problematic. It glaringly contradicts the assertion that Bergmann had already identified the chants of the play: for how could this have been done if the basis was indeed so shaky? Schützeichel s position on this point seems unwarrantedly pessimistic. In his edition, pages 91-95, where he subsumes the incipits into the Bühnenanweisungen of the manuscript, his brief comment on the chants is revealing. The chants were, he concedes, an important part of a play such as the St Gall Passion Play. However, reconstructing them is bound to be a risky undertaking, because of the various ways in which they were characterized by Variabilität and freie Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten : the size of the choir, the number of repetitions, the precise wording, and the general musikalische Ausgestaltung und Darbietung .44

42

43

44

Studien, Initienregister , pp. 290-91. Schützeichel, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel , p. 167; Eckehard Simon, Speculum 54 (1979), pp. 627-28, esp. 628, reviewing Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, seems to agree. Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, p. 91: Ergänzung der angesprochenen Gesänge ohne auch nur annähernd gesicherte Grundlage ; cf. p. 94: Die Auflösung der Abbreviaturen in den Bühnenanweisungen geht nicht bis zur Ergänzung der immer nur angedeuteten Gesänge, weil dazu eine wirklich verläßliche Grundlage fehlte. Ibid., p. 94.

35


Now, three of these aspects of performance practice might indeed vary, even between performances of the same play. But one, the precise wording, would not. Schützeichel confuses variability in wording with these other variables, asserting that the wording of chants varied to the extent that incipits are effectively mere Andeutungen . This suggests a distorted view of the nature and function of chant incipits in the manuscripts of medieval drama. The fact that notation is usually missing in these manuscripts, and is often deplorably inaccurate when it is found, does not mean that the status of music in the plays was secondary or unstable.45 The manuscript was the primary, indeed the only, record of a play s spoken text, but not of its music, which was primarily preserved in the memory of those who performed it, and in the liturgical books which fixed it in written form. Insofar as it could be fixed, that is: the musical ambiguities and inaccuracies, notably in modality, found in many liturgical manuscripts show that long after the development of precise-pitch notation, these books were still more an aide-mémoire than a primary re45

Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, p. 7: Sterzing manuscripts often depict neumatic nuances inadequately; idem, Überlegungen zur Edition von Melodien in geistlichen Spielen an Beispielen aus dem Sterzinger Spielarchiv , in Anton Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur: Beiträge der Bamberger Tagung Methoden und Probleme der Edition mittelalterlicher deutscher Texte , Göppingen, 1994 (Litterae, 117), pp. 255-59, esp. 255 and 257, on poor standards of musical information in Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; cf. Andreas Traub, Zwischen Aufgezeichnetem und Nichtaufgezeichnetem: Probleme bei der Edition der Melodien der Sterzinger Spiele , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 21118, esp. 211; Hansjürgen Linke & Ulrich Mehler (eds), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau: Kritischer Text und Faksimilia der Handschriften, Tübingen, 1990 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 103), pp. 29-44, footnotes, passim, on inaccuracies and inconsistencies in notation. By contrast, Lipphardt s and Osthoff s negative characterization of musical transcription in the Erlau plays is refuted by Wolfgang Suppan, in idem (ed.), Texte und Melodien der Erlauer Spiele; auf Grund einer Textübertragung von Johannes Janota, Tutzing, 1990 (Musikethnologische Sammelbände, 11), pp. 7-16, esp. 9-13.

36


pository of liturgical melodies.46 Clerics acting in plays, or rehearsing lay actors, will not have used the play manuscripts as a primary practical basis, but will have consulted their memory, clerical colleagues, or probably as a last resort a liturgical book.47 The inadequate representation of music in so many play manuscripts reflects this simple truth; it does not mean that the music was unimportant, arbitrarily variable and practically irretrievable by later scholars. Indeed, the chants written in manuscripts of religious plays testify on the whole to a great stability in the musical repertoire of that drama. A recent study of the Hortulanus scenes in the Sterzing plays reveals considerable differences in the dialogue and the vernacular sung items from play to play, but great stability in the Latin chants, implying that stronger inhibitions were quite understandably felt about altering liturgical chants than about changing spoken text.48 The convention of the chant-incipit combines abbreviation with precision of reference. Play manuscripts can use incipits precisely because they refer to a textually and melodically stable corpus of liturgical material whose primary locus of preservation was not in the play manuscripts themselves. Schuler s identification of the chants of medieval German drama in the liturgy, based mainly on the incipits in the 46

47

48

Clyde W. Brockett, Osanna! New Light on the Palm Sunday Processional Antiphon Series , Plainsong and Medieval Music 9 (2000), pp. 95-129, esp. 111-22; Suppan (ed.), Texte und Melodien der Erlauer Spiele, pp. 12-14; Richard L. Crocker, An Introduction to Gregorian Chant, New Haven, 2000, pp. 148-60; Susan K. Rankin, From Memory to Record: Musical Notations in Manuscripts from Exeter , Anglo-Saxon England 13 (1984), pp. 97-112. Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , p. 134, note 12; Wolfgang Suppan, Zur Musik der Erlauer Spiele , Studia musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 11 (1969), p. 418. Cf. Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 143a-d: tunc plebanus [ ] cantet [ ] Surrexit dominus de sepulchro vt in Anthiphonario . Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, pp. 17-18, doubts even that performers learnt speaking parts from copies of the play manuscript. Rainer Gstrein, Anmerkungen zu den Gesängen der Osterspiele des Sterzinger Debs -Kodex , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 91-98, esp. 93-94.

37


relevant manuscripts, is in effect a vindication of the approach.49 Schützeichel s own view of the St Gall Passion Play manuscript as the Grundlage für eine spätere Bearbeitung im Hinblick auf eine Aufführung in fact implicitly concedes this possibility. In other ways too there was less scope for musical variation than Schützeichel suggests. The size of choirs no doubt varied; but many chants in the St Gall Passion Play and other plays are sung not by a choir but by soloists or small groups (see Chapter IV). Little, admittedly, is known about how the plainsong might have been embellished (vocal organum, conceivably instrumental accompaniment in later plays);50 but, as emphasized above, this affects neither the verbal nor the basic musical form of the chant performed. Most Latin chants in medieval plays were not strophic, so the number of verses sung is not an important consideration. The number of times a chant might be repeated is also hardly an issue. The repetition of most pieces of liturgical plainsong is intrinsically unlikely. It would probably only apply to responsories, where the refrain of the chant might either be repeated after the verse and repetenda (as in liturgical performance), or be sung only once, without the verse, if a briefer effect was required. This is not, in truth, an important variation; and in any case it belongs to the flexibility of actual performance, which by its very nature can never be reflected in any 49

50

William Smoldon, The Music of the Medieval Church Dramas, (ed.) Cynthia Bourgeault, London [etc.], 1980, pp. 4-5, refutes the assertion of Young, Drama, vol. I, p. 601, that incipits do not allow the full reconstruction of chants. E.g. Edmund A. Bowles, The Role of Musical Instruments in Medieval Sacred Drama , Musical Quarterly 45 (1959), pp. 67-84; idem, Were Musical Instruments used in the Liturgical Service during the Middle Ages? , Galpin Society Journal 10 (1957), pp. 40-56 and 12 (1959), pp. 89-92; Andreas Traub, Der Debs-Codex als musikalische Quelle , in Ulrich Mehler & Anton H. Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel: Festschrift für Hansjürgen Linke zum 65. Geburtstag, Amsterdam-Atlanta, 1994 (Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik, 38-39), pp. 339-47, esp. 342-43; Susan Rankin, [Review of recordings of Das große Passionsspiel Carmina Burana, dir. Binkley] , Early Music 14 (1986), pp. 443-46, esp. 446.

38


written text. Obviously it cannot be known exactly how much of a particular chant was sung at any particular performance of a play; directorial decisions, exigencies of staging and other imponderables will all have played a part. But this of course applies to the spoken dialogue too: that recorded in a play manuscript may have been altered in any given performance of that play without the changes being noted, at least in copies that survive. Manuscripts like the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, Alsfelder Passionsspiel, or Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, which do contain such changes, show that medieval directors were just as given to cutting, adding and adapting to suit the practical demands of performance as their modern counterparts. It is a fundamental truth that the precise dialogue of any individual performance of a medieval play is simply unknowable from the manuscripts, even from those which clearly have a close relationship with performance and record alterations; for it is never possible to know whether they have recorded them all.51 But this is an unavoidable area of indeterminacy which applies to any textual copy of any play from any period, with the exception (perhaps) of carefully marked prompt copies used for specific productions in modern professional theatres, and it most certainly does not invalidate the practice of making editions of medieval drama. The impression given by Schützeichel of musical possibilities so shot through with potential variations that the manuscript can only hint vaguely at the chants is a serious misrepresentation. Thus far, Schützeichel s critique of Pflanz often seems ill-focused, self-contradictory and overstated. But his fourth line of attack has rather more weight. Pflanz, on pages 151-161, argued that his liturgical investigations allowed him to localize the St Gall Passion Play in the Mainz diocese. In a direct deprecation of this method, Schützeichel contends that all Pflanz has done is to confirm that the play s chants do indeed occur in manuscript and printed service books: far 51

Trauden, Archetyp oder Aufführung? , pp. 139, 142.

39


from contributing towards dating or localizing the manuscript, this simply presupposes the results arrived at by palaeography, codicology and historical dialectology.52 In other words, even if Pflanz s results are correct, his approach is footling and insubstantial, capable at best of confirming the results of the staple methods of medieval Germanic studies (if such confirmation were needed), but not of adding anything new. Is this simply odium theologicum, the over-reaction of traditional Germanistik to a methodology which it sees as upstart and amateurish? Or might it have more substance? This is one of the questions this study aims to explore. The Problem of Localization Pflanz examined twenty-three manuscript and six printed liturgical books from three German dioceses, Mainz, Trier and Cologne. On the basis of the number of the St Gall Passion Play s incipits which matched chants in books from the different uses, he concluded that the play had been written in the Mainz diocese.53 His choice of bishoprics reflected the then current scholarly opinion on the localization of the play. The language of the manuscript was agreed to be West Central German, but whilst Mone had localized the play in the moselfränkisch area, between Mainz, Cologne and Trier, Wilmotte had proposed the ribuarisch region, Weinhold the Wetterau or Hessia, Wolter the Wetterau or Nassau. Rueff and Ranke had suggested Rheinhessen or the Rheingau, Dörrer the Frankfurt area; Hartl had even seen indications, in part of the play, of Allemannic origins.54 52 53 54

Schützeichel, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel , p. 167, note 10. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 151-61. Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, vol. I, p. 71; Maurice Wilmotte, Les passions allemandes du Rhin dans leur rapport avec l ancien théâtre français, Paris, 1898, p. 14; Karl Weinhold, Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik, Paderborn, 1883 [rpt. 1967], paragraphs 167, 218 and 222; Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu, p. 61; Hans Rueff, [Review of Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 38 (1919), 66-70,

40


Schützeichel s edition, however, brought a new localization. In it, Hugo Stopp, who had already investigated the language of the play in a study of 1959, presented a masterly synthesis of updated research.55 Having established that the dialect was neither ribuarisch nor moselfränkisch,56 Stopp went on to a more detailed investigation, in which a number of major criteria emerged as important for localization (see map). The use of both forms bis and bit for Middle High German biz (modern German bis) pointed to the west of the Rhine, since east of the river, and east of a line between Wiesbaden and Gießen, only the form bis was found.57 Both endings (-nt and -t) of the second person plural of the present indicative verb paradigm were found in the manuscript (e.g. komment and kommt). The predominance of the -nt form (96%) was typical of usage in the Rheingau and in Rheinhessen down as far as south of Worms.58 Using further criteria Stopp concluded that the manuscript had not originated very far south of Worms. Both the forms sol and sal for the first and third person singular of the verb sollen (modern German soll) occurred. This was typical of Mainz and Worms, whereas in the Speyer region sal seemed to be unknown.59 The play s initial and intervocalic d rather than t (dun, godes) were typical of Worms written usage, but not of Speyer.60 The manuscript s near-complete failure to

55

56 57 58 59 60

esp. 68-69; Ranke, Von der ritterlichen zur bürgerlichen Dichtung , p. 216; Anton Dörrer, Baldemar von Peterweil , in Stammler & Langosch (eds.), Verfasserlexikon, vol. I, cols. 155-58, esp. 156; Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, p. 48. Summary in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, p. 172. Stopp, Untersuchungen zum St. Galler Passionsspiel ; idem, E. Lokalisierung , in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 161-215. Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 210-12. Ibid., p. 213. Ibid., pp. 200-03, esp. 203, and 214. Ibid., pp. 205, 215. Ibid., pp. 188, 215.

41


mark umlaut characterized writing from Worms and further north; Speyer documents of the fourteenth century typically indicated it more fully.61 The most decisive of these criteria, however, was the unshifted initial and medial p found in the text (pennig; plegen; schopper). This was untypical of early fourteenth-century use in Speyer and further south, where the shifted form pf was consistently found.62 Combining these data staked out a rough area within which the manuscript had almost certainly been written; and, since nothing indicated that the manuscript had been copied from an original in a different Schreibdialekt, this was presumably the home of the play itself.63 This area lay west of the Rhine, no further north than the Rheingau, not very much further south than Worms; a north-south distance of about seventy kilometres. However, only the eastern boundary was reasonably exact. To the north, Stopp suspected that the Rheingau should be excluded, but this required more detailed linguistic evidence.64 The southern limit, the boundary between shifted and unshifted p, was difficult to fix. East of the Rhine, it was somewhere around Lorsch or Weinheim; to the west, Stopp could place it no more precisely than südlich Worms ; moreover, in the fourteenth century it seemed to have been shifting southwards.65 How precisely could it be located, early in the the century, in the mere thirty-five kilometres between Worms and Speyer? Even harder to pin down was the western boundary. In the Palatinate, roughly on the latitude of Worms-Speyer but further west, not enough was known about Schreibdialekte: documents were lacking, or had not yet been analysed in detail.66 Stopp himself thought southern Rheinhessen the most likely Heimat: hence

61 62 63 64 65

66

Ibid., pp. 175-76, 205. Ibid., pp. 166-77, 170-71, 214-15. Ibid., p. 215. Ibid., p. 215. Ibid., pp. 214-15. Ibid., p. 215.

42


his conclusion that the play was to be localized an den linken Mittelrhein in die Gegend um Worms und Mainz .67 Even with these few uncertainties, Stopp made previous localizations look amateurish; but his results effectively undermined Pflanz s entire liturgically-based attempt. For by excluding the ribuarisch and moselfränkisch dialect areas Stopp had ruled out the bishoprics of Cologne and Trier. Pflanz had been looking in the wrong place: the dioceses he ought to have examined were Mainz, Worms and Speyer. Yet Stopp s conclusions were also highly suggestive, because in this area, as the map shows, diocesan and dialect boundaries relate in interesting and potentially helpful ways. If the play could be localized liturgically in any one of the three dioceses, this would dramatically reduce the area in which it must have been written. If the play definitely belonged to Worms, for example, it could be placed in a compact triangle between Oppenheim and Mundenheim on the Rhine and Landstuhl in the west; the diocesan border from Mundenheim westwards would be a much clearer demarcation than the only vaguely traceable p/pf line. Localization in Mainz or Speyer would be equally helpful; even a limitation to two of the three dioceses would mean a useful gain in precision. Here is a possible vindication of the liturgical localization which Pflanz was attempting. The question is, however, whether this method, applied to the correct data, can in fact deliver a reliable localization.

67

Ibid., p. 215.

43


The boundaries of the Diocese of Worms (diagonally hatched) are based on the map in Hans Meyer, Topographie der Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Archiv für hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F. 17 (1932), pp. 1-92.

44

Chapter II

Liturgy and Localization

In all, the problems concerned with the identification of liturgical material in the plays are as yet very far from a solution. Here, more than anywhere else, perhaps, is room for some carefully-designed research: but it must be said that the risk of getting nowhere is considerable. (Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, p. 299.)

n recent years scholars have been emphasizing the need for engagement with the local liturgies of the areas in which medieval plays were produced as a means of understanding their liturgicalmusical content in detail.1 This is a welcome development, but it is well to sound a note of caution. Before the reforms of the Council of Trent, western Catholic liturgy did indeed vary from region to region. But by the early four1

E.g. Thomas Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Winterthur, 1982 (Sonderband der Reihe Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, zum 50. Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis), pp. 14457, esp. 149-55; Johannes Janota, Zur Funktion der Gesänge in der hessischen Passionsspielgruppe , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik, Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 109-20, esp. 118; Hansjürgen Linke, Drama und Theater des Mittelalters als Feld interdisziplinärer Forschung , Euphorion 79 (1985), pp. 43-65, esp. 61; Bernd Neumann, [Review of Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 104 (1982), pp. 318-23, esp. 322-23.


teenth century, when the St Gall Passion Play was produced, the local variation of previous centuries had been reduced by ecclesastical and imperial fiat, and with the establishment of the European diocesan structure. Uses were by now specific not to individual churches or localities, but to entire dioceses. The production of text-only breviaries and missals for the individual cleric rather than the individual church, both reflected and speeded the process.2 Diocesan traditions were probably never absolutely uniform, and particularly in those ceremonies not intrinsically part of mass or office, and usually written down not in the breviary or missal but in the ritual, a considerable diversity prevailed till early modern times.3 But for the period of the St Gall Passion Play one can properly speak, for the great bulk of the mass and office, of standardized local liturgy (Ortsliturgie or Eigenliturgie), of a diocesan rite or use (Ritus).4 The degree of variation of such local liturgies should not be overestimated. By the fourteenth century, apart from the very few nonRoman rites like the Ambrosian (Milan) and Mozarabic (Spain, from the eleventh century only Toledo),5 the western European dioceses used what, for all their jealously guarded particularities, were recognizably local variants of the Roman liturgy itself the original use of the city of Rome cross-fertilized, between the sixth century and the 2 3

4

5

Archdale A. King, Liturgy of the Roman Church, London, 1957, p. 38. In Agenda Spirensis, Speyer, 1512, first unsigned gathering, sig. ii, bishop Philipp von Rosenberg describes medieval Speyer rituals as partim inter se discordes: [ ] partim etiam minus emendatas , leading to multos [ ] errores: pericula et confusiones . Technically, the more inclusive rite is distinguished from use, a local variant of a rite (e.g. the Mainz or Salisbury use within the Roman rite); cf. Archdale A. King, Liturgies of the Past, London, 1959, p. v; William J. McDonald et al. (eds.), New Catholic Encyclopedia, New York [etc.], 1967-, vol. XII, pp. 519-22, esp. 519. German tends to use the term Ritus for both, and often there is no real danger of confusion. So this book often uses the terms interchangeably when this is not ambiguous. Archdale A. King, Liturgies of the Primatial Sees, London, 1957, pp. 286-456 (Ambrosian), 457-632 (Mozarabic).

46

II. Liturgy and Localization

ninth, by ritual and musical developments from the Frankish tradition.6 This was true even of very distinctive local uses such as that of Lyon or the English sees of Sarum (Salisbury) and York, and the liturgy of orders like the Dominicans.7 By the fourteenth century, the main differences between diocesan liturgies were calendrical. The framework of the temporal liturgy (temporale or proprium de tempore) commemorating the salvific events of the life of Christ and of the church Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Easter, Pentecost had long been standardized, the same chants occurring everywhere, in near-identical textual and musical forms. Variations in the repertoire were slight; diocesan differences in the precise liturgical placing of the same chants did not affect the chants themselves. But by the same period the sanctoral cycle (sanctorale or proprium de sanctis), the round of feasts in honour of the saints, had developed mightily and diversely. Many saints were local figures whose cult was limited to a particular area. Even the cult of saints of a more universal rank often varied regionally. The precise selection of saints to be venerated, the degrees of ceremony with which this was done, and the calendar which governed it, were thus characteristic of different regions or dioceses; even sometimes of different cities or churches. The particularities of sanctoral calendars in different manuscripts provide one important criterion for the diocesan localization of servicebooks.8 6

7

8

King, Liturgy of the Roman Church, pp. 31-38; Helmut Hucke, Toward a New Historical View of Gregorian Chant , Journal of the American Musicological Society 33 (1980), pp. 437-67. Lyon: see King, Liturgies of the Primatial Sees, pp. 1-154. Sarum, York: see King, Liturgies of the Past, pp. 276-374. Dominicans: see Archdale A. King, Liturgies of the Religious Orders, London, 1955, pp. 325-95. E.g. Eef A. Overgaauw, Saints in Medieval Calendars from the Diocese of Utrecht as Clues for the Localization of Manuscripts , Codices Manuscripti 16 (1992), pp. 81-97; cf. the description of the investigation of the liturgical manuscripts in Kas-

47


Differences, then, between local uses were numerous rather than radical. They did not affect the basic style or structure of the mass or office, but rather the precise selection of chants and prayers for the feasts of the sanctorale, and to a very much lesser extent the temporale. And even here differences were less marked than may sometimes be imagined: after all, the Corpus antiphonalium officii, compiled from a mere twelve manuscripts, contains the bulk of office chants found in all the European dioceses of the Roman rite. It is important to insist on this because medieval drama scholars often sound over-optimistic about the precision of the information that local liturgical books can provide. Binkley, for example, envisages finding specific south German breviaries which could locate the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel and the Carmina Burana manuscript.9 The probability is remote. Schuler s results show, and this study of the St Gall Passion Play will confirm, that apart from biblical verses performed to reciting tones, items from the repertoire of liturgical drama , and a few hymns, the vast majority of chants used in the Passion and Easter plays are office chants from the temporale (Epiphany, Lent and Easter); and these are precisely the chants which show hardly any local variation. Diocesan differences here hardly ever concern the particular chants used, or divergences in wording or melody, but simply the order in which they were sung in the various hours.

9

sel in Konrad Wiedemann, Manuscripta theologica: Die Handschriften in Folio, Wiesbaden, 1994 [in Hans-Jürgen Kahlfuß (ed.), Die Handschriften der Gesamthochschulbibliothek Kassel Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek, 1:1], pp. XXIV-XXIX. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 152-53; cf. pp. 149-50, 156.

48


Liturgical Sources Before any localization on liturgical criteria can be undertaken, however, one must have a reasonable corpus of liturgical works which can be reliably dated and linked to dioceses. This is provided by only one of the dioceses in question, Mainz, which has preserved an extensive range of liturgical books from the early Middle Ages to the present day, and subjected it to intensive scholarly study. By comparison, the traditions of the other two dioceses are patchily preserved and much less fully investigated. Diocese of Mainz Mainz, a bishopric since the second century, was by the time of the Anglo-Saxon missionary Boniface (bishop, c. 746-54) the ecclesiastical centre of Germany. It became the largest German church province, at its greatest extent containing fifteen suffragan dioceses; its archbishop was primate of Germany, chancellor and senior elector of the Holy Roman Empire. As well as the Cathedral, the city of Mainz was home to numerous collegiate churches and religious houses. In the wake of the French ocupation (Treaty of Lunéville, 1801) the old Mainz diocese was abolished in 1803, and the present-day one is considerably smaller.10 The main collections of manuscript and printed Mainz liturgical sources are in the library of the Mainz Bischöfliches Priesterseminar (Diocesan Seminary), now known as the Martinusbibliothek, the Stadtbibliothek Mainz, the Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt 10

Karl Heinemeyer, Mainz I , in Gerhard Krause & Gerhard Müller (eds.), Theologische Realenzyklopädie, Berlin, 1977-, vol. XXI, pp. 710-17; Anton Brück, Mainz , in Josef Höfer & Karl Rahner (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, 11 vols., Freiburg, 1957-67 [2nd ed.], vol. VI, cols. 1300-05; idem, Mainz , in Kurt Galling et al. (eds.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft, 6 vols. and index, Tübingen, 1957-65 [3rd ed.], vol. IV, cols 614-17, all citing the relevant historical literature.

49


am Main, the Stiftsbibliothek Aschaffenburg, the Universitätsbibliothek Würzburg, and the Landesbibliothek and Murhardsche Bibliothek Kassel, particularly rich in books from Fritzlar, a Mainz outpost in Fulda diocese where a local variant of Mainz liturgy was used, but with the Mainz ordo applying till 1359.11 Smaller collections are found in other libraries and archives, notably the Vatican, the Gutenbergmuseum Mainz (printed books only), the Dom- und Diözesanarchiv Mainz, the Dombibliothek Fritzlar, the Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt, the Chorstift Kiedrich, the Bistumsarchiv Speyer, the library of the Gymnasium am Kaiserdom, Speyer, and the Stadtarchive of Darmstadt, Mainz and Würzburg.12 11

12

Published catalogues: Gerhard List & Gerhardt Powitz, Die Handschriften der Stadtbibliothek Mainz, vol. I: Hs. I 1 - Hs. I 150, Wiesbaden, 1990; Clemens Köttelwesch (ed.), Die Kataloge der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main, 3 vols., Frankfurt, 1968-79, vol. I: Gerhardt Powitz, Die Handschriften des Dominikanerklosters und des Leonhardstifts in Frankfurt am Main (1968), vol. II: Gerhardt Powitz & Herbert Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts und des Karmeliterklosters in Frankfurt am Main (1974), vol. III: Karin Bredehorn & Gerhardt Powitz, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Gruppe Manuscripta latina (1979); Josef Hofmann & Hermann Hauke, Die Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek und der Stiftskirche zu Aschaffenburg, Aschaffenburg, 1978 (Veröffentlichungen des Geschichts- und Kunstvereins Aschaffenburg e.V., 16); Die Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Würzburg, vol. II: Hans Thurn, Handschriften aus benediktinischen Provenienzen, I, Wiesbaden, 1973; vol. IV: idem, Die Handschriften der kleinen Provenienzen und Fragmente, Wiesbaden, 1995; Wiedemann, Manuscripta theologica, pp. XXIV-XXIX, esp. XXVI; cf. Karl E. Demandt, Das Chorherrenstift St. Peter zu Fritzlar: Quellen und Studien zu seiner mittelalterlichen Gestalt und Geschichte, Marburg, 1985 (Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Hessen, 49), p. 536. Published catalogues: Henricus Stevenson Jr., Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae codices manu scripti recensiti, vol. I: Codices Palatini latini, Roma, 1886; more detailed information in Pierre Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques de la Bibliothèque Vaticane: Studi e Testi, 5 vols., Vaticano, 1968-72; Gerhard List, Die Handschriften der Dombibliothek Fritzlar, Wiesbaden, 1984; Leo Eizenhöfer & Hermann Knaus, Die Handschriften der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt, vol. II: Die liturgischen Handschriften der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt, Wiesbaden, 1968.

50


Mainz liturgy has enjoyed extensive scholarly investigation.13 A particularly important modern figure is Hermann Reifenberg, who has published studies of the Mainz office, mass and other liturgical traditions, identifying and listing many manuscript and printed sources, notably those in the Mainz Seminary.14 More recently the Mainz ordo 13

14

Esp. Adam Gottron, Tausend Jahre Musik in Mainz, Mainz-Berlin, 1964 [2nd ed.] (Mainz: Geschichte und Kultur einer Stadt, 2); idem, Mainz , in Friedrich Blume (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 16 vols., Kassel, 1949-79), vol. VIII, cols 1522-29; Theodor Heinrich Klein, Die Prozessionsgesänge der Mainzer Kirche aus dem 14. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Speyer, 1962 (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 7); Georg Paul Köllner, Der Accentus Moguntinus: Ein Beitrag zur Frage des Mainzer Chorals , Diss. JohannesGutenberg-Universität, Mainz, 1950; idem, Die Bedeutung des Johann Philipp von Schönborn für die Reform des liturgischen Kirchengesangs , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 39 (1955), pp. 55-70; idem, Der Accentus Moguntinus nach den Schönborn-Drucken , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 40 (1956), pp. 44-62; idem, Zur Tradition des Accentus Moguntinus , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 42 (1958), 39-46; Johannes Rau, Tropus und Sequenz im Mainzer Cantatorium Cod. Lond. Add. 19768 , Diss. Universität Heidelberg, 1959; Hermann Reifenberg, Messe und Missalien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Zeitalter der Gotik, Münster, 1960 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 37); idem, Stundengebet und Breviere im Bistum Mainz seit der romanischen Epoche, Münster, 1964 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 40); idem, Sakramente, Sakramentalien und Ritualien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Spätmittelalter, 2 vols., Münster, 1971-72 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 53-54); Karlheinz Schlager, Über den Choralgesang in Mainz , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 27 (1975), pp. 19-26, esp. 24-26; Andreas Ludwig Veit, Kirche und Kirchenreform in der Erzdiözese Mainz im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung und der beginnenden tridentinischen Reformation (1517-1618), Freiburg, 1920 (Erläuterungen und Ergänzungen zu Janssens Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, 10:3); idem, Kirchliche Reformbestrebungen im ehemaligen Erzstift Mainz unter Erzbischof Johann Philipp von Schönborn, 1647-1673, Freiburg, 1910 (Studien und Darstellungen aus dem Gebiete der Geschichte, 7:3); Stephan Alexander Würdtwein, Commentatio historico-liturgica de stationibus ecclesiae Moguntinae, ex antiquitatibus ecclesiasticis eruta et addito ecclesiarum Trevirensis et Coloniensis ritu illustrata, Mainz [= Frankfurt], 1782. See, apart from the works referred to in footnote 13, also his unpublished theological dissertation Der Ordo Missae Moguntinus seit dem 14. Jahrhundert , Universität Mainz, 1952; Vom Missale Moguntinum des Jahres 1602 zum Missale

51


has been further investigated by Konrad Wiedemann, in the course of cataloguing the many Mainz liturgical manuscripts in the Hessische Landesbibliothek Kassel.15 Other Mainz liturgica have been, or are presently being, reliably catalogued and inventorized.16 This remarkable corpus shows that the distinctive diocesan use, the Mainz-römischer Ritus , remained amazingly stable throughout the medieval period. It is found in the manuscripts and earliest printed books, the latest being the ritual of 1513, the breviary of 1517 and the missal of 1520.17 After Trent, a very limited accommodation to the Roman liturgy was made: the reformierter Mainz-römischer Ritus , first seen in the breviary of 1570, the ritual of 1599 and the missal of 1602.18 A thoroughgoing liturgical Romanization came only in the seventeenth century, reaching fruition under the two archbishops Johann Philipp and Lothar Franz von Schönborn.19 This Romanized Mainz liturgy was enshrined in impressive printed books, the most magnificent being the antiphonal Cantus Gregoriano-Moguntinus of 1666 and 1667, and the Graduale of 1671, where a Roman text was

15 16

17

18

19

Romano-Moguntinum von 1698 , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchangeschichte 13 (1961), pp. 432-39; and Mainzer Liturgie vor dem Hintergrund des Mainzer Chorals , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 27 (1975), pp. 9-17. Wiedemann, Manuscripta theologica, pp. XXIV-XXIX. E.g. those in Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek; Fritzlar, Dombibliothek; cf. List, Handschriften der Dombibliothek Fritzlar, p. VII; Mainz, Stadtbibliothek; cf. List & Powitz (eds.), Handschriften der Stadtbibliothek Mainz, vol I: Hs. I 1 - Hs. I 150, p. 7. Agenda Maguntin[a] [...], Mainz, 1513, [two printings]; Enchiridion seu Breuiarium: secundum morem insignis ecclesie Moguntine [ ], Mainz, 1517; Missalis Moguntiaci [ ] opus [ ] [Speyer], 1520. See Reifenberg, Vom Missale Moguntinum , pp. 432-33, esp. note 4. Breviarium Moguntinum [...] integritati pristinæ fidelißimè restitutum, Köln, 1570; Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis [ ], Mainz, 1599; Missale Moguntinum [ ] ad pristinam normam ac ordinem Breuiarii restitutum, Mainz, 1602. See Reifenberg, Vom Missale Moguntinum , pp. 432-33, esp. note 3. Köllner, Die Bedeutung des Johann Philipp von Schönborn ; Reifenberg, Vom Missale Moguntinum ; idem, Stundengebet, pp. 24-30, 255.

52


married, not always very comfortably, with the traditional Mainz melodies.20 The ritual, however, remained comparatively unchanged, effectively staying in the reformierter Mainz-römischer Ritus phase till the mid-twentieth century.21 Mainz liturgical books have already been dealt with in considerable detail in an extensive secondary literature. What follows is not a complete list but only a comment on those consulted for this study. The Mainz Ordo Authoritative for the medieval Mainz ordo is Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 92, the Sakristeibuch of Mainz Cathedral, which combines the Cathedral liber ordinarius with a list of payments to canons, rubrics of Cathedral ceremonies, and a chronicle. Begun in 1544, it has additional entries from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.22 It is usefully supplemented by three manuscripts in the Landesbibliothek Kassel. Ms. 2o theol. 143 is a mid-fourteenth-century breviary, psalter and liber ordinarius of the Mainz collegiate churches, identified during the cataloguing of the Kassel manuscripts; Ms. 2o theol. 138 and 20

21

22

Cantus Gregoriano-Moguntinus Breviario Romano accommodatus, Mainz, 166667, 2 vols.: Pars hiemalis and Pars aestiva; Graduale Missali Romano, cantui vero Gregoriano-Moguntino accommodatum [ ], Mainz, 1671. See Köllner, Die Bedeutung des Johann Philipp von Schönborn , pp. 57-60. Text-only books: Hebdomadarium et commune sanctorum, Mainz, 1665; Missale Romano-Moguntinum, Mainz, 1698. See Köllner, Die Bedeutung des Johann Philipp von Schönborn , pp. 57 and 69. Rituale sive Agenda ad usum Ecclesiarum Metropolitanae Moguntinae, et Cathedralium Herbipolensis et Wormatiensis [...], Würzburg, 1671; Rituale sive Agenda, ad usum Ecclesiae Metropolitanae Moguntinae [ ], Mainz, 1695; Rituale sive Agenda, Ad usum Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinæ [...], Mainz, 1696. See Reifenberg, Vom Missale Moguntinum , p. 433, note 8. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 92: Registrum praesentiarum secundum chorum ecclesiae Maguntinae. Other relevant sources include Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 3, Calendarium praesentiarum and liber ordinarius for special feasts, second half of the fourteenth century; and various libri ordinarii for the Mainz collegiate churches; listed in Wiedemann, Manuscripta theologica, p. XXVII, note 1.

53


Ms. 2o theol. 99 are two examples of a combined liber ordinarius and collectar from the collegiate church of St Peter, Fritzlar, respectively from the early thirteenth and the first half of the fifteenth century; they illustrate the Fritzlar variant of the Mainz ordo.23 Mass Mainz graduals and missals are extant from the early Middle Ages. About twenty have been consulted; they are listed in the bibliography. Particularly useful is Frankfurt, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Barth. 107, a combined missal and ritual of the first half of the fourteenth century. Since notated sources from the early fourteenth century are very rare, melodies have been identified in Frankfurt, Stadtund Universitätsbibliothek, Ms. lat. qu. 44, a gradual of the second quarter of the fifteenth century used in the important collegiate church of Sankt Bartholomäus, Frankfurt.24 Though considerably later than the period of the St Gall Passion Play, it has the advantage of presenting a full, uniform corpus of notated mass chants unavailable in any earlier book; its contents have routinely been checked against the wide range of Mainz mass books from various parts of the diocese, including Fritzlar and Würzburg, and the printed Mainz gradual of 1500.25 This has confirmed that the chants of the medieval Mainz liturgy show a remarkable degree of textual and melodic stability. There

23

24

25

2o theol. 143: Wiedemann, Manuscripta theologica, pp. 198-202; 2o theol. 138: ibid., pp. 187-88; 2o theol. 99: ibid., pp. 117-19. Bredehorn & Powitz, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Gruppe Manuscripta latina, Frankfurt, 1979 (Köttelwesch [ed.], Kataloge der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main, 3), pp. 32-33. Fritzlar: Kassel, Landesbibliothek, 2o Ms. theol. 100, neumed missal, thirteenth century; 2o Ms. theol. 122, pars aestivalis, fourteenth century; 2o Ms. theol. 125, pars hiemalis, fourteenth century; Würzburg: esp. Universitätsbibliothek, M. p. th. f. 85, Mainz diocesan missal, mid-fourteenth century; printed Mainz gradual (no title), [Speyer], 3 June 1500; printed Mainz missals also listed in the main liturgical bibliography.

54


is no danger that the chants given in lat. qu. 44 misrepresent the form which they took in the early fourteenth century. Office From the very wide range of Mainz office books, several from the Frankfurt Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek have been chosen as the main sources. Three are text-only breviaries dating from the same period as the St Gall Passion Play and coming from the same area. Ms. Barth. 150 is a breviary for a Mainz collegiate church from the first third of the fourteenth century, possibly written in the Liège diocese and used in Frankfurt since the early fifteenth century. Barth. 160 is a Mainz diocesan breviary of the fourteenth century, used in Sankt Bartholomäus, Frankfurt, in the late part of that century. Barth. 161 is a Mainz diocesan breviary (pars hiemalis) of the first half of the fourteenth century, probably from the Rhine/Main area.26 As with the mass chants, office chants have had to be taken from later books: the matching pair of late-fifteenth-century antiphonals from Sankt Bartholomäus, Frankfurt, Ms. lat. qu. 48 (pars hiemalis) and Ms. Barth. 94 (pars aestivalis).27 Again, a broad range of other office books, manuscript and printed, has been consulted to ensure an overview of the Mainz tradition. Ritual The ritual is an important source of several Holy Week chants, notably those of the Palm Sunday Procession and the antiphons for the Man26

27

See detailed descriptions and inventories in Powitz & Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts und des Karmeliterklosters in Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, 1974 (Köttelwesch [ed.], Kataloge der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main, 2): Barth. 150 (Vellum, I+488 fols.): pp. 342-45; Barth. 160 (Vellum, I+529 fols.): pp. 358-62; Barth. 161 (Vellum, I+461 fols.): pp. 362-64. Lat. qu. 48: Bredehorn & Powitz, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Gruppe Manuscripta latina, pp. 37-39, esp. 37. Barth. 94: Powitz & Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts und des Karmeliterkloster, pp. 205-06 esp. 205.

55


datum or washing of feet on Maundy Thursday. Because they are used only once every year, and at ceremonies which are not an integral part of mass or office, these chants are very often missing from graduals, missals, antiphonals and breviaries.28 Medieval rituals in Mainz, as in many other dioceses, are much rarer than liturgical books of other kinds. Apart from Frankfurt, Ms. Barth. 107, a combined missal and ritual of the first half of the fourteenth century, there are only Darmstadt, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, Hs. 3183, a festal and votive missal and ritual written for a parish church in about 1175, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 488 (fifteenth century, noted) and cod. pal. lat. 490 (fourteenth century, from the Abbey of Lorsch).29 None contains Mandatum liturgy; the two Vatican books are particularly sparse. The printed diocesan rituals of 1480, c. 1492 and 1513 preserve the medieval liturgy, but offer more detail than the earlier manuscripts, and are often quoted in this study; that of 1551 already shows some accommodation to Roman models, but sometimes confirms the older tradition.30

28

29

30

Cyrille Vogel, Introduction aux sources de l histoire du culte chrétien au moyen âge, Spoleto, 1981 (Biblioteca degli Studi Medievali, 1), pp. 215-33; Jean-Baptiste Molin & Annick Aussedat-Minvielle, Répertoire des rituels et processionaux imprimés conservés en France, Paris, 1984, pp. 9-17. Barth. 107: Powitz & Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts, pp. 24750, used in Sankt Bartholomäus, Frankfurt. Darmstadt 3183: ritual sections in manuscript, pp. 49-124, 177-202, 213-26; detailed inventory in Eizenhöfer & Knaus, Die liturgischen Handschriften der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt, pp. 120-23. Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 488 and 490: Stevenson, Codices Palatini, vol. I, pp. 159, 160; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. III, nos 198, 199. Mainz ritual: Mainz, 1480. See Reifenberg, Die Mainzer Inkunabel-Agende von 1480 ; Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, Straßburg, [c. 1492]; Agenda Maguntina: Mainz, 1513; Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis, Mainz, 1551. Cf. Reifenberg, Vom Missale Moguntinum , p. 432, note 4.

56


Processional Processionals, too, are a valuable source of antiphons and responsories associated with particular feasts, and of information on diocesan ordo; none, however, survive for Mainz from earlier than the fifteenth century. Two in the Stadtbibliothek Mainz are a reliable witness to the use of Mainz Cathedral. Hs. II 74, from the early fifteenth century, has musical notation from the fifteenth, sixteenth-seventeenth, and seventeenth-eighteenth centuries; almost identical in content is Hs. II 303, from late in the same century. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118, is a processional of Sankt Peter, Mainz, of the fifteenth-sixteenth century; Aschaffenburg, Stiftsbibliothek, Ms. perg. 32, is a fifteenth-century processional from Aschaffenburg.31 The numerous surviving seventeenth- and eighteenth-century manuscript processionals illustrate the great stability of the Mainz tradition. Three are in the Mainz Martinusbibliothek: Hs. 110, from Mainz Cathedral, with the title Processionale Sumptibus Joannis Kleij Metropolitanae Ecclesiae Vicarij conscriptum. Anno 1704; Hs. 121, from Liebfrauen in Mainz, 1762 (without musical notation); and Hs. 142, also probably from Liebfrauen, of the eighteenth century. Three further Mainz Cathedral processionals, nearly identical to that of 1704 (Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 110) are found in two Speyer libraries, though the current catalogues identify them wrongly.32 They 31

32

Hofmann & Hauke, Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek und der Stiftskirche zu Aschaffenburg, pp. 69-71. No published catalogue for Mainz, Martinusbibliothek; relevant volume for Mainz, Stadtbibliothek not yet published. Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 4 and Hs. 5, Mainz Cathedral processionals, early eighteenth century; in 1999 still wrongly described in the handlist (Bestand A: Bücher, Handschriften, Frühdrucke, Drucke) as Antiphonar [Speyer] [16./17. Jh.] . Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, no shelfmark, Mainz Cathedral processional, early eighteenth century, wrongly dated 1500 by Klaus Finkel, Die Speyrer Domkantorei im Mittelalter, Speyer, 1975 (Schriften des Diözesanarchivs Speyer, 1), pp. 12-13. Described in 1999 as Psalterium in the Gymnasium library handlist. Cf. Jürgen Vorderstemann, Die Büchersammlungen des Speyerer Domes in tausend Jahren:

57


came to Speyer in 1825 from a collection of displaced Mainz Cathedral liturgica in Aschaffenburg.33 A detailed observation on one book is in order here. The attribution of Hs. 100 of the Mainz Martinusbibliothek, a processional of the fifteenth or early sixteenth century, to Mainz Cathedral by Klein is almost certainly a mistake.34 Neither its processional stations nor its antiphons match those in guaranteed Cathedral sources.35 There is no reference to the distinctive spatial order of the Cathedral, with its two choirs, the eastern one always called the chorus ferreus in Mainz processionals.36 Most of the distinctive Mainz saints are absent, most strikingly the Mainz patron Boniface and the responsory Felix Moguntinensis populus for his feast; so is O Martine o pie (Corpus antiphonalium officii 4038), a trademark Mainz chant which would

33 34

35

36

Ein Überblick aus Anlaß der 950-Jahr-Feier im Jahre 1980 , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 33 (1981), pp. 45-61, esp. 61 and note 78. Vorderstemann, Die Büchersammlungen , pp. 60-61. Klein, Prozessionsgesänge, p. 16. Also Walther Lipphardt, Die Mainzer Visitatio sepulchri , in Ursula Hennig & Herbert Kolb (eds.), Mediævalia litteraria: Festschrift für Helmut de Boor zum 80. Geburtstag, München, 1971, pp. 177-91, esp. 177 and 179; idem, Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, 9 vols., Berlin 197590, vol. VI, p. 322; and Renate Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus: Recovery of the Sung Liturgical Core of the Thuringian Zehnjungfrauenspiel , Toronto, 2002 (Studies and Texts, 140), p. xxv. Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. II 74, Mainz Cathedral processional ( Processionale des Domsängers von Eltz ), early fifteenth century, with musical notation from the fifteenth, sixteenth-seventeenth, and seventeenth-eighteenth centuries; Hs. II 303, Mainz Cathedral processional, late fifteenth century, almost identical to Hs. II 74; Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 92, the Sakristeibuch of Mainz Cathedral, including the liber ordinarius of the Cathedral; Hs. 110, Mainz Cathedral processional, 1704; Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 4 and Hs. 5, Mainz Cathedral processionals, early eighteenth century; Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, no shelfmark, Mainz Cathedral processional, early eighteenth century. E.g. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 110, fols. 55v, 98; Hs. 92, fols. 80, 127; Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. II 303, fols. 42, 61.

58


figure in any genuine source of the Cathedral use.37 The Visitatio sepulchri ceremony has the Quem quaeritis dialogue in the older first form used in Mainz (and numerous other dioceses), but not the rhythmic chant Ad sepulchrum Domini gementes venimus which is a Mainz speciality.38 Finally, the manuscript has five-line staves, whereas, as Klein notes,39 medieval Mainz processionals uniformly use a four-line stave. This book s provenance, and whether it was actually used in Mainz, are interesting, and at present intractable questions; but it cannot be regarded as a genuine source of Mainz liturgy.40 This is important for the localization of one St Gall Passion Play chant, no. 36, Fides etenim (see Chapter V). There are no printed Mainz processionals. Since Pflanz several times cites later Mainz books, several have been quoted where relevant.41 37

38

39 40

41

Felix Moguntinensis populus (not in René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12) or CANTUS. A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant. URL: http:// publish.uwo.ca/~cantus); Klein, Prozessionsgesänge, pp. 90-91. O Martine : e.g. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 110, fol. 3v; Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. II 74, fols. 2, 60v-61; Hs. II 303, fol. 2; cf. Stephan Alexander Würdtwein, Commentatio historico-liturgica de stationibus ecclesiae Moguntinae, ex antiquitatibus ecclesiasticis eruta et addito ecclesiarum Trevirensis et Coloniensis ritu illustrata, Mainz [= Frankfurt], 1782, p. 101. Melody in Klein, Prozessionsgesänge, pp. 126-28. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 100, fols. 35v-38v, Lipphardt, Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, no. 257 Mainz8. The chant Ad sepulchrum Domini , found in Mainz ceremonies (ibid., nos. 207 Frankfurt, 209 Fritzlar2, 252-56 Mainz37 ), is die typisch mainzische Fassung der Botschaftsantiphon (ibid., vol. IX, p. 946). Klein, Prozessionsgesänge, pp. 141-42. The Mainz Martinusbibliothek handlist of manuscripts makes no diocesan attribution. Breviarium Moguntinum [ ], Köln, 1570; Cantus Gregoriano-Moguntinus Breviario Romano accommodatus; Graduale Missali Romano, cantui vero Gregoriano-Moguntino accommodatum [ ], Mainz, 1671; Mainz processionals, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hss. 4 and 5, and Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, no shelfmark; Rituale sive Agenda, Ad usum Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinæ [ ], Mainz, 1696.

59


Diocese of Worms The Worms liturgy is by far the least well preserved of all three dioceses. Worms was a bishopric since the fourth century, and by the twelfth one of the most important in Germany. But there were swingeing losses of churches and revenue at the Reformation, and in the seventeenth century, devastation at the hands of both the Swedes and the French. Changes in secular government meant that the diocese lost territory to Mainz in 1802, and ceased to exist altogether in 1806.42 Thus not only are the diocese s books and archives destroyed or dispersed, but local diocesan pride, an important motivation for scholars of diocesan history and liturgy, no longer exists either. There is no published scholarship on the Worms liturgy. The few surviving manuscripts are nearly all from the same very limited period, the middle to later fifteenth century, and their contents are the same as the early printed breviaries and missals. The historical dimension is thus particularly lacking in our knowledge of Worms liturgy; however, the analogy of the demonstrably conservative traditions of Mainz and Speyer suggests that the Worms liturgy of the early fourteenth century will not have been markedly different from that of the fifteenth.

42

F. M. Illert, Worms , in Höfer & Rahner (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, vol. X, cols. 1224-29; H. Gensicke, Worms , in Kurt Galling et al. (eds.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft, Tübingen, 1957-65 [3rd ed.], 7 vols., vol. VI, col. 1808, both citing secondary literature, of which see esp. Johann Friedrich Schannat, Historia Episcopatus Wormatiensis pontificum romanorum bullis, regum, imperatorum diplomatibus [ ] aliisque pluribus documentis authenticis asserta ac illustrata [ ], Frankfurt am Main, 1734; Hans Meyer, Die Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Beiträge zur hessischen Kirchengeschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F., Ergänzungsband 9 (1931), pp. 340-431, citing further sources on pp. 341-42, and idem, Topographie der Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Archiv für hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F. 17 (1932), pp. 1-92, citing further sources on pp. 2-3, and including map.

60


The Worms Ordo The only manuscript Worms liber ordinarius is Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 521 and 522 (fourteenth-fifteenth century, from the Heilig-GeistKirche in Heidelberg; there are two printed annual ordines for 148283 and 1488-89.43 Mass No manuscript Worms mass books, with or without notation, are known to survive. Printed missals of 1488 and 1522 are unnotated.44 No copies of an alleged edition of 1572 are known to exist.45 Office As far as is known, not a single Worms antiphonal or other neumed or noted source of the Worms office has survived. Eleven manuscript breviaries are extant. The oldest, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 518, is a pars hiemalis dated 1401.46 The others there (cod. pal. lat. 515, 516, 519, 520, 524, 530/531), are from the fifteenth and early sixteenth centu-

43

44

45

46

Cod. pal. lat. 521, 522: Stevenson, Codices Palatini, vol. I, p. 172; Salmon, Ma-nuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 177; H. Ehrensburger, Libri liturgici bibliothecae apostolicae Vaticanae manuscripti, Freiburg, 1897, p. 570. Lipphardt, Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. VI, p. 408, dates it 1445-82. Worms annual ordo, September 1482-April 1483, (No title), [Straßburg, 1482]; Worms annual ordo, September 1488-April 1489, (No title), [Speyer, 1488]. Worms missal, (No title), [Basel, 1488], two printings, with slightly different foliation; Missale secundum ritum et obseruantiam Ecclesie & diocesis wormatiensis, [Speyer], 1522. William H.J. Weale, Bibliographia liturgica: Catalogus Missalium ritus latini ab anno 1474 impressorum; [ed.] Hanns Bohatta, London-Leipzig, 1928 [rpt. Stuttgart, 1990], no. 1652; Joseph Basile Bernard van Praet, Catalogue des livres imprimés sur vélin, qui se trouvent dans les bibliothèques tant publiques que particulières [ ], Paris, 1824-28, 4 vols., vol. I, 145, 417. Stevenson, Codices Palatini, p. 171; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 288.

61


ries.47 The remaining ones are: London, British Library, MS add. 19415, a very fine complete breviary written in about 1475;48 Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lutherbibliothek 3a, a pars aestivalis of about the same date;49 and Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Ms. lat. 1310, a complete breviary written for Reinhard von Sickingen, bishop of Worms 1445-82.50 All surviving manuscript breviaries are thus of the fifteenth or early sixteenth century, and contain the same liturgy as the early printed books (six breviaries and two Lenten diurnals).51 If earlier medieval Worms liturgy differed, there is no longer any way of knowing. 47

48

49

50

51

Stevenson, Codices Palatini, pp. 170-73; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, nos 285, 286, 289, 290, 292, 298. Gerhard Pietzsch, Zur Musikgeschichte von Speyer vor der Reformation , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 9 (1957), pp. 51-67, esp. 51, note 2, is almost certainly wrong in pairing cod. pal. lat. 515, a pars hiemalis, with 514, a pars aestivalis from Speyer. Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 285, attributes 515 to Worms; also 514 (cf. ibid., no. 284) is written on paper, 515 on vellum. Vellum, 658 fols., simply illuminated initials. Fol. 2v: calendar and computus; fol. 26: psalter; fol. 98: commune sanctorum; fol. 128: registrum adventus; fol. 141: proprium de tempore (pars hiemalis); fol. 271: proprium de sanctis (pars hiemalis); fol. 326: proprium de tempore (pars aestivalis); fol. 461: proprium de sanctis (pars aestivalis). The computus is calculated from 1475 (fol. 15, 18, 18v and 22v). See Catalogue of Additions to the Manuscripts in the British Museum in the Years MDCCCXLVIII-MDCCCLIII, London, 1868 [rpt. 1965], p. 240. Vellum, 363 fols. Fol. 1: calendar; fol. 6a: Sunday liturgy; fol. 18vb: proprium de tempore (pars aestivalis); fol. 173a: proprium de sanctis (pars aestivalis); fol. 302a: dedicatio ecclesiae; fol. 306va: commune sanctorum; fol. 363v: Jacob Hofmann Meßner, 1615 . The manuscript was unaccountably missing from the Worms Stadtbibliothek in September 2002. Vellum, XI+367 fols. Fol. 1: psalter; fol. 71: commune sanctorum; fol. 91v: proprium de tempore (pars hiemalis); fol. 163: proprium de sanctis (pars hiemalis); fol. 198: proprium de tempore (pars aestivalis); fol. 264v: proprium de sanctis (pars aestivalis); fol. 347v: dedication of church; fol. 350v: hymnary; cf. Bibliothèque Nationale, Catalogue général des manuscrits latins, Paris, 1939-83, 12 vols., vol. I, p. 491. Worms breviary (no title), [Marienthal, c. 1475]; Worms breviary (no title), [Speyer, c. 1483]; Worms breviary (no title), [Straßburg, c. 1490]. Worms breviary (no title), [Speyer, c. 1495]; only the pars aestivalis of the proprium de tempore and the proprium sanctorum survives; Breviarium juxta ritum et ordinem Ecclesie

62


Ritual Complete manuscript rituals attributable to Worms do not exist. Two relevant fifteenth-century manuscripts in the Bibliotheca Palatina in the Vatican are of uncertain provenance.52 Other relevant manuscripts in the same collection are brief ritualis elementa, skeletal references to ritual material in liturgical books of other kinds.53 These usually contain blessing formulae, but not the important liturgies for the Palm Sunday procession and the Maundy Thursday Mandatum or footwashing, ceremonies whose chants often appear in religious drama. The printed ritual of about 1500-10 is the only one extant before several printed in the eighteenth century.54

52

53

54

Wormatiensis, Mainz, 1516; Breviarium iuxta ritum et ordinem ecclesiae Wormatiensis [...], Mainz, 1576; Diurnale quadragesimale secundum ordinem ecclesie Wormatiensis, [s.l., c. 1490; Diurnale quadragesimale secundum dyocesim wormaciensem. vna cum lxx. et quinquagesima de tempore et Sanctis nouiter additis, [Speyer, c. 1505]. Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 484, noted ritual, fifteenth cemtury, including Mandatum (Stevenson, Codices Palatini, p. 155; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. III, no. 196); cod. pal. lat. 619, miscellany, twelfth-thirteenth century (including ritualis elementa [Worms or Trier?]) (Stevenson, Codices Palatini, pp. 222-24; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. III, nos 196, 210). Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 509, Dominican missal, Heidelberg, fourteenth century, fols. 237-38 (Stevenson, Codices Palatini, p. 169; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 323, vol. III, no. 206); cod. pal. lat. 516, Worms breviary, fifteenth century, fol. 2 (Stevenson, Codices Palatini, p. 170; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 286, vol. III, no. 207); cod. pal. lat. 520, Worms nocturnal, fifteenth century, fols. 365-67 (Stevenson, Codices Palatini, p. 171; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 290, III, no. 209). Agenda secundum ritum & ordinem ecclesie wormaciensis, [Speyer, c. 1500-10] (dated c. 1500 by the Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 477, c. 1510 by the Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1983-, no. A771); Agenda pastoralia, sive Ritualia Archi-Dioecesium Moguntinae, Trevirensis, et Coloniensis, uti et in Wormatiensi, Spirensi, aliisque dioecesibus [ ], Mainz, 1734; Rituale sive Agenda, ad usum dioeceseos Wormatiensis edita, ad normam Ritualis Romani accom-

63


Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1 is a fifteenth-century manual from the Richardikonvent in Worms, a nunnery founded as a beguinage in 1288, but which became an Augustinian house in 1469. Though mainly taken up with monastic rites, it contains liturgy for the Palm Sunday procession and the Mandatum.55 Processional No medieval or early modern examples, manuscript or printed, are known to survive. There is only the Processionale of 1777, much too late to represent the earlier liturgy.56 Diocese of Speyer A bishopric since the fourth century, Speyer, with its vast Salian Kaiserdom , built 1030-1105, was still politically and ecclesiastically important in 1486, when Wimpfeling praised the cathedral life and liturgy.57 But like Worms, the diocese lost many churches and much revenue at the Reformation, and was pillaged by the French in the Pfalzzerstörung of 1689 and again in the aftermath of the Revolution. Its boundaries and its size changed greatly after the French con-

55

56

57

modata [...], Mannheim, 1740; Compendium Ritualis Moguntini, Wormatiensis, Spirensis et Trevirensis [ ], Mainz, 1752. Previously Abt. 112/1. Vellum, 2+72 fols. Front endpaper, verso: Diß Manuall ist der andechtigen geistlichen || schwesteren Jn dem riechen Conuent Jn der kei || serlichen Stat Wormbz hinder Sanct Steffen . Fol. 1: clothing of a novice; fol. 3: profession of a nun; fol. 7: election of an abbess; fol. 11: communion of a sick nun; fol. 11v: extreme unction; fol. 12v: penitential psalms; fol. 20: papal absolution; fol. 20v: death of a nun; fol. 38: communion of sick guests and servants; fol. 39: burial; fol. 40: Candlemas; fol. 42v: Palm Sunday; fol. 49v: Maundy Thursday, including Mandatum (fols. 52-57v); fol. 57v: Good Friday (excluding procession); fol. 62: Easter Vigil; fol. 67v: miscellaneous blessings. Processionale ad usum ecclesiarum collegiatarum civitatis Wormatiensis, Frankenthal, 1777. Jakob Wimpfeling, Laudes ecclesiae Spirensis, (ed.) Jodocus Gallus, Basel, 1486, passim, esp. fol. 3v.

64


cordat of 1801; the modern diocese, founded in 1821, is much smaller than the medieval one, and has completely different borders.58 The dearth of surviving Speyer liturgical sources is the result of these vicissitudes, which scattered Speyer manuscripts, and destroyed most of the Cathedral s liturgical collections.59 A comprehensive bibliography of primary and secondary sources on Speyer liturgy is given by Rolf Bohlender.60 58

59

60

L. Litzenburger, Speyer , in Walter Kasper et al. (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, Freiburg, 1993- [3rd ed.], vol. IX, cols. 961-63; K. Lutz, Speyer , in Galling et al. (eds.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VI, cols. 24142, both citing relevant historical literature; see also Kurt Andermann, Hochstift Speyer , in Meinrad Schaab and Hansmartin Schwarzmaier (eds.), Handbuch der baden-württembergischen Geschichte, vol. II: Die Territorien im alten Reich, Stuttgart, 1995, pp. 481-90. Alois Lamott, Das Speyerer Diözesanrituale von 1512 bis 1932: Seine Geschichte und seine Ordines zur Sakramentenliturgie, Speyer, 1961 (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 5), § 1; Emil Gugumus, Ein Speyerer Kalendar des 15. Jh. aus Cod. Pal. 514 der Vatikanischen Bibliothek , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 11 (1959), pp. 245-53, esp. 245; Vorderstemann, Die Büchersammlungen , pp. 50-56. Rolf Bohlender, Dom und Bistum Speyer: Eine Bibliographie, Speyer, 1979 [2nd ed.], esp. pp. 66-67, 80-81, 85-86, and 121-27. The most important secondary literature for present purposes is: Hans Ammerich, Das Fürstbistum Speyer im Zeichen der tridentinischen Erneuerung , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 41 (1989), pp. 81-104; Albert Becker, Die Speyerer Palmsonntagsprozession , Palatina (1922), pp. 55-56; Hanns Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, 1501-1850, Leipzig, 1937 [rpt. Stuttgart-Nieuwkoop, 1963], no. 259: Breviarium Spirense; idem, Liturgische Bibliographie des XV. Jahrhunderts mit Ausnahme der Missale und Livres d heures, Wien, 1911 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1960], no. 2: Agenda Spirensis; no. 31: Breviarium Spirense; no. 40: Diurnale Spirense; [Anton Doll], Die Karwoche im Speyerer Dom vor 500 Jahren , Der christliche Pilger 101 (1951), p. 164; Anton Doll, Eine Osterfeier im Dom zu Speyer. Nach einem Zeremonienbuch des Domsakristans aus dem 16. Jahrhundert , Pfälzische Heimatblätter 2 (1954), p. 32; Ludwig Eid, Zur Geschichte der alten Speyerer Dommusik , Musica sacra 63 (1933), pp. 234-37; Klaus Finkel, Liturgisches Drama am Mittelrhein , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 57 (1973), pp. 25-28; idem, Musikalische Aufführungspraxis besonderer Meßstiftungen und Feierlichkeiten im fürstbischöflichen Dom zu Speyer , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 58-59 (1974-

65


What is clear from the surviving sources, however, is that, as in many of the German dioceses, Speyer tradition was essentially conservative, even after the Romanization of the liturgy at Trent. The printed breviary of 1591 shows no change from the medieval liturgy; the use of the Roman Breviary and Missal in the diocese was ordered only by Johann Hugo von Orsbeck, archbishop of Trier and bishop of Speyer (1675-1711); he had a Speyer Proprium printed in 1707 as a supplement to the Roman calendar.61 The surviving Speyer manuscripts and even the early printed liturgical books are generally described inadequately, and often wrongly, in the relevant secondary literature. Since there is at present no single secondary source where a correct detailed description of them all can be found, such a description of them here is justified.

61

75), pp. 47-56; idem, Musik in Speyer: Ein Überblick zur Speyerer Musikgeschichte bis zur Gegenwart, Speyer, 1975 (Beiträge zur Speyerer Stadtgeschichte, 4); idem, Die Speyrer Domkantorei; Gugumus, Ein Speyerer Kalendar des 15. Jh. , pp. 245-53; idem, Die alte Heidelberger Bibliotheca Palatina: Eine pfälzische Forschungsaufgabe , Pfälzische Heimatblätter 9 (1961), pp. 19-21; idem, Dedicatio Spirensis Ecclesie Antiqua: Zur Weihe des frühsalischen Domes im Jahr 1061 , in Ludwig Stamer (ed.), 900 Jahre Speyerer Dom: Festschrift zum Jahrestag der Domweihe, Speyer, 1961, pp. 175-87; Franz Haffner, Der Gründonnerstag im alten Speyer , Die Rheinpfalz 19-20.4.1973, p. 15; Fritz Klotz, Zwei Blätter eines Rituale des 15. Jahrhunderts , Pfälzische Heimat 15 (1964), pp. 103-04; Alois Lamott, Zur Geschichte der Germansverehrung in der Speyerer Liturgie , in St. German in Stadt und Bistum Speyer: Festschrift zur Weihe der Kirche des Priesterseminars St. German in Speyer, Speyer, 1957, pp. 49-71; idem, Speyerer Diözesanrituale; idem, Codex Vindobonensis 1882: Ein Liber ordinarius des Speyerer Domes aus dem 13. Jahrhundert , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 13 (1961), pp. 27-48; Gerhard Pietzsch, Gedanken zu einer pfälzischen Musikgeschichte , Pfälzer Heimat 7 (1956), pp. 1-10; idem, Zur Musikgeschichte von Speyer vor der Reformation ; Vorderstemann, Die Büchersammlungen . Lamott, Geschichte der Germansverehrung , p. 51, note 36, citing further secondary literature on the gradual displacement of the old Speyer use by the Roman liturgy.

66


The Speyer Ordo One of the main sources of the Speyer ordo is the Karsthans , the Sakristeibuch of Speyer Cathedral, now Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 67/452. Begun between 1438 and 1470, it contains detailed descriptions of the sacristan s duties as well as a calendar, liturgical references and many historical notes.62 More details on the office ordo are found in Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Codex Vindobonensis 1882, a mid-thirteenth-century liber ordinarius of Speyer Cathedral.63 It contains mixed temporal and sanctoral liturgy; chant incipits have unheighted neumes. The above manuscripts are usefully supplemented by a printed Directorium of 1522, several annual ordines, and even the officia propria printed in 1707, which preserves the medieval diocesan calendar almost unchanged.64 Mass The medieval mass liturgy is contained in a handful of manuscripts. Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Codex Vindobonensis

62

63

64

Paper, 17+104 fols.; cf. Finkel, Liturgisches Drama am Mittelrhein , esp. pp. 2526. Lamott, Codex Vindobonensis 1882 is more convincing than Finkel, Musik in Speyer, p. 12, who describes it as a Speyer psalter with additions describing Speyer customs. Directorium horarum canonicarum secundum ritum dioecesis Spirensis dicendarum [...], [s.l.], 1522; Bohlender, Dom und Bistum Speyer, no. 1426; Speyer ordines: 1483-84: [Speyer, 1483]; 1484-85: [Speyer, 1484]; 1493-94: [Speyer, 1493]; May-November 1494: [Speyer, 1494]; 1498-99: [Speyer, 1498]; 1507: Speyer, 1507; Bohlender, Dom und Bistum Speyer, no. 1424; 1514: Speyer, 1514; Bohlender, Dom und Bistum Speyer, no. 1425; Officia propria sanctorum et patronorum ecclesiae et dioecesis Spirensis ad formam breviarii Romani redacta [ ], Mainz, 1707; Bohlender, Dom und Bistum Speyer, no. 1410.

67


1845, is a missal probably written for Bamberg in about 1080 but used in the Abbey of St Germanus in Speyer in the thirteenth century.65 Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1 is a Speyer Cathedral plenary missal of about 1343, containing proper chants in Gothic notation on fourline staves with a yellow c-line and a red F-line. It is very complete, including material for the Palm Sunday procession and the Mandatum.66 Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076 is a Speyer missal of the mid-fourteenth century. Probably written by the Speyer canon Conrad Bethilmann, it contains temporal and sanctoral liturgy of the pars hiemalis. It was previously held in the Court Library at Mannheim.67 Darmstadt, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, Hs. 889, a festal missal of about 1380, probably came from the Carmelite monastery of Hirschhorn. It contains only the most important liturgies of the year, and, though compatible with Speyer use, it has no specifically Speyer feasts.68

65

66

67

68

Lamott, Germansverehrung , p. 50 and note 19; Lamott, Codex Vindobonensis 1882 , p. 27, note 2. Previously Speyer, Dom- und Diözesanmuseum, D 467. Vellum, 9+320+7 fols. Fol. 2: calendar; fol. ia: proprium de tempore; fol. ccxiiiva: proprium de sanctis; fol. cclxxxxvva: commune sanctorum. See Lamott, Germansverehrung , p. 51 and note 28. Fol. 1a: proprium de tempore (pars hiemalis); fol. 140a: proprium de sanctis (St Andrew to St Ambrose); fol. 179a: votive masses. More detailed inventory in Elisabeth Remak-Honnef and Hermann Hauke, Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Die Handschriften der ehemaligen Mannheimer Hofbibliothek Clm 10 001-10 930, Wiesbaden, 1991, pp. 51-53. Vellum, fols. 3-177. Main contents: fol. 34a: mixed temporal and sanctoral feasts from first Sunday in Advent till St Katherine (25 November). Detailed inventory in Eizenhöfer & Knaus, Die liturgischen Handschriften der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt, pp. 144-46; cf. Ute Obhof, Zur Geschichte der Bibliothek des ehemaligen Karmeliterklosters Hirschhorn am Neckar , Bibliothek und Wissenschaft 27 (1994), pp. 56-148.

68


Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 65/738 is a fragmentary manuscript containing sanctoral liturgy of the pars aestivalis for both mass and office. It is not with absolute certainty a Speyer book, and is too fragmentary to allow reliable diocesan attribution.69 These scanty manuscript sources are supplemented by the earliest printed Speyer missals, of 1484, 1487 and 1501; the third was reprinted in 1509 with appended textual and liturgical comments by Jodocus Gallus.70 The completeness of Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, and its guaranteed attribution to Speyer, make it the ideal reference for the Speyer mass chants. Office Few medieval Speyer office books with notation survive. There is one late manuscript psalter: Sélestat, Bibliothèque Municipale, Ms. 127 (fifteenth century). It should be noted that the manuscripts in the Speyer Gymnasialbibliothek referred to by Finkel as Speyer psalters are in fact Mainz Cathedral processionals of the eighteenth century.71 Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, is a neumed psalter and breviary, containing not only the choral office chants but the lessons and

69

70

71

Michael Klein, Die Handschriften 65/1-1200 im Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe, Wiesbaden, 1987, p. 262. The attribution to Speyer Cathedral by Finkel, Liturgisches Drama am Mittelrhein , p. 26, note 15, is questionable. He also mistakes the offices of the Visitation (fols. 1-18v) and Mary Magdalene (fols. 29-38v) for liturgical dramas (ibid., pp. 26-27). Speyer missal (no title), Speyer, 1484; Missale secundum ordinem ecclesie spirensis, [Bamberg, 1487]; Speyer missal (no title), Speyer, m. ccccc. primo Idus Augusti , i.e. 12 August 1500 or 13 August 1501; reprint, with critical comments of Jodocus Gallus, sig. Ai-Biiv, Speyer, 1509. Finkel, Die Speyrer Domkantorei, pp. 12-13; idem, Musik in Speyer, p. 14, note 32.

69


prayers as well. It dates probably from the late twelfth century.72 Its main contents (fols. 36vb-163b) are temporal and sanctoral liturgy per annum, with many gaps and later additions; the sanctoral liturgy of the pars aestivalis in particular is very incomplete. Whilst the calendar (fols. 1va-2vb) shows a number of similarities with the definitely Speyer calendar in Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 67/452, and the Speyer proper of 1707, many feasts have been added in a later hand, and their liturgy does not appear in the breviary. Only one of the feasts particularly typical of the Speyer calendar is found.73 The book thus has the distinct appearance of having been adapted for use in Speyer, and can be used only corroboratively, not as a definite primary Speyer source. Speyer, Pfälzische Landesbibliothek, Hs. 2, a fragment from an antiphonal (pars aestivalis), probably written in St Gall or Rheinau, c. 1510-20, is far too small to be a useful liturgical source;74 but its text and illustrations show the stylistically similar Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, a psalter and antiphonal (pars aestivalis), to have been produced in the same area at a similar date.75 72

73

74

75

Lamott, Germansverehrung , p. 63, note 22, dates it to the mid-thirteenth century; cf. the conspectus of Speyer calendars (ibid., pp. 50-52, 63-64). Pietzsch, Gedanken zu einer pfälzischen Musikgeschichte , p. 1956, note 17: Antiphonar [ ] vermutlich aus der Zeit um 1250 ; Finkel, Musik in Speyer, p. 14: Psalterium des Speyrer Domes (vor 1200) . Lamott, Codex Vindobonensis 1882 , pp. 34-37, identifies Anastasius (22 January); Celsus (27 July); Pope Stephen I (2 August); Zoilus (6 October); Gregory Dux Maurorum (15 October); Secundinus (15 November). Only Stephen is found in the calendar of Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3 (fol. 2). Clemens Jöckle & Jürgen Vorderstemann, Schmuckblatt zum Beginn des Sommerteils eines Brevierantiphonales. Hs. 2 Fol. 1 der Pfälzischen Landesbibliothek Speyer, Speyer, 1980. Previously Speyer, Dom- und Diözesanmuseum, D 469. Jöckle & Vorderstemann, Schmuckblatt, pp. 3-7; Vorderstemann, Die Büchersammlungen , p. 57, note 64. Wrongly classed as a breviary by Pietzsch, Zur Musikgeschichte von Speyer vor der Reformation , p. 51, note 2, and Finkel, Musik in Speyer, p. 14, and as Speyerer Missale (Chorbuch, Breviarium) in the handlist of the Speyer Bistumsarchiv

70


Bistumsarchiv 2, which now consists of 315 folios, but originally had more, was used in Speyer Cathedral at least as late as 1603.76 The music (as in Pfälzische Landesbibliothek, Hs. 2, fol. 1) is in Gothic notation on five-line staves, usually ten systems to the page.77 Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 65/740, is not, as catalogued, a Hymnarfragment ,78 but a fragment of an antiphonal, containing a mixture of temporal and sanctoral liturgy for both mass and office from around Pentecost till the feast of St Verena (1 September). Its connection with the Speyer diocese is far from certain. There is thus no known extant medieval Speyer office book containing the complete music for the pars hiemalis of the temporal liturgy, from which the great majority of chants in passion plays are taken. This of course means that a detailed comparison of most of the relevant Speyer melodies with those of Mainz cannot be undertaken. Speyer office books without music include the following: Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Cod. Bruchsal 10, a Speyer breviary of the fifteenth century. This manuscript, interestingly, notes several Worms divergences from the Speyer liturgy.79

76

77

78 79

(Bestand A: Bücher, Handschriften, Frühdrucke, Drucke; late 1999). Lamott, Germansverehrung , p. 64, note 29, and Codex Vindobonensis 1882 , p. 47, note 131, dates it to the late fifteenth century. An accompanying bookbinder s report (1957), and examination of the text, show that folios are missing between the present fols. 16 and 17, 18 and 19, 64 and 65, 210 and 211, 272 and 273. Note now pasted on inner front cover: Pro D: Sexpræbendarijs: Lateris Præpositi: 1603 . Paper, 315 fols., approx. 395x285 mm. Fol. 1: settings of the invitatory Psalm 94 (95); fol. 17: proprium de tempore (pars aestivalis) including (fols. 42v-57v) proprium de sanctis, Easter to Pentecost; fol. 131: proprium de sanctis from Visitation (2 July) till Katherine (25 November); fol. 272v: commune sanctorum; fol. 307: collection of hymns. An inserted gathering in a different hand (fols. 76-84) contains Corpus Christi liturgy. Klein, Die Handschriften 65/1-1200, p. 263. Armin Schlechter & Gerhard Stamm, Die kleinen Provenienzen, Wiesbaden, 2000 (Die Handschriften der Badischen Landesbibliothek in Karlsruhe, 13), pp. 401-03; Emil Ettinger, Die ursprüngliche Herkunft der Handschriften, die aus Kloster-, bi-

71


Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 514, a Speyer breviary (pars aestivalis) of the late fifteenth century.80 Printed Speyer office books of the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries are relatively common: six breviaries, a diurnal and two psalters; there is also a breviary printed in 1591.81 Ritual No medieval Speyer ritual survives; the earliest source is the printed Agenda of 1512.82 In a preface, Philipp von Rosenberg (bishop 150413) asserts that the numerous medieval rituals in the diocese were inconsistent; some were dilapidated and illegible, or erroneous ( partim inter se discordes: partim caducas et illegibiles: partim etiam minus emendatas ); the whole diocese should in future follow the use of the Cathedral.83 Even allowing for the rhetoric of the liturgist exaggerating the muddle he wishes to reform, it is clear that there may have

80

81

82 83

schöflichen und Ritterschafts-Bibliotheken nach Karlsruhe gelangt sind, Heidelberg, 1901 (Die Handschriften der großherzoglichen badischen Hof- und Landesbibliothek in Karlsruhe, Beilage III), p. 61. See Vorderstemann, Die Büchersammlungen , p. 60. Worms divergences: e.g. fols. 19a, 19b, 21a, 40v, and 113v; see Schlechter & Stamm, Die kleinen Provenienzen, p. 401. Gugumus, Ein Speyerer Kalendar des 15. Jh. ; Salmon, Manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 284. Speyer breviary (no title), Speyer, 19 November 1478; Speyer breviary, [Straßburg, 1491]. Speyer breviary (pars hiemalis), [Straßburg, c. 1500]; Orarium Spirense, Venezia, 1507-09, 2 vols.: Pars hiemalis (ferial psalter, temporale, sanctorale); pars aestivalis (same contents); Diurnale de tempore et de sanctis per totum annum secundum ordinem Spirensem, [Speyer, c. 1478]; Psalterium ad usum orandi secundum diocesim Spirensem: ordinatum, [Venice, 1507]; Psalterium Spirense: ad vsum orandi et cantandi ..., Speyer, 1515. Breviarium Spirense, Köln, 1591. No copies are known of the edition of 1590 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2750 [not confirmed by Robert Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés (supplément aux catalogues de Weale et Bohatta): Propres des saints, Paris, 1990]). Agenda Spirensis, [Speyer, 1512]. Epistola proemialis , in Agenda Spirensis, Speyer, 1512, first unsigned gathering, fols. ii-iii (here iir-v).

72


been considerable divergence in the contents of Speyer rituals in the fourteenth century. Processional No Speyer processionals, manuscript or printed, are known to survive. Other manuscripts Other Speyer manuscripts include Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Vindobonensis 377 and Cod. Vindobonensis 553, Speyer passionals, of the eleventh and eleventh-twelfth century respectively.84 In the case of all three dioceses, the surviving books show a great consistency in liturgy, so chants are in most cases quoted from a few selected texts in each diocese, close to the date of the St Gall Passion Play where this is possible. In the case of Worms in general, and of Mainz sources containing notation, only later texts (usually from the fifteenth century) are available. The general presumption should be that the few texts cited represent the consistent liturgical tradition of the dioceses in question. Only when necessary will the occurrence of chants in further texts be noted. Sources are cited in a shortened form, as follows: Mainz Mass Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44 : Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitatsbibliothek, Ms. lat. qu. 44, gradual, fifteenth century. Frankfurt, Barth. 107 : Same library, Ms. Barth. 107, missal and ritual, fourteenth century. Kassel, 2o theol. 100 : Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel, 2o Ms. theol. 84

Lamott, Codex Vindobonensis 1882 , p. 27, note 2.

73


100, full Mainz neumed missal, Fritzlar, first third of the thirteenth century. Kassel, 2o theol. 122 : Same library, 2o Ms. theol. 122, Mainz missal (pars aestivalis), Fritzlar, second half of the fourteenth century. Kassel, 2o theol. 125 : Same library, 2o Ms. theol. 125, Mainz missal (pars hiemalis), Fritzlar, late fourteenth century. Würzburg, M. p. th. f. 85 : Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M. p. th. f. 85 (missal, fourteenth century.) Missale Maguntinum, 1507 : Missale Maguntinum. denuo exactissima cura recognitum et a prioribus quibusdam mendis operose ac solecter emaculatum, Mainz, 1507. Office Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48 : Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitatsbibliothek, Ms. lat. qu. 48, antiphonal, pars hiemalis, fifteenth century. Frankfurt, Barth. 94 : Same library, Ms. Barth. 94, antiphonal, pars aestivalis, fifteenth century. Frankfurt, Barth. 150 : Same library, Ms. Barth. 150, breviary, fourteenth century. Frankfurt, Barth. 160 : Same library, Ms. Barth. 160, breviary, fourteenth century. Frankfurt, Barth. 161 : Same library, Ms. Barth. 161, breviary, fourteenth century. Enchiridion ecclesie Moguntine, 1509 : Enchiridion seu Breuiarium: secundum morem insignis ecclesie Moguntine. necnon totius diocesis: Nouissime impressum [ ], Mainz, 1509. Breviarium Moguntinum, 1570 : Breviarium Moguntinum. Iussu et authoritate [...] D. Danielis S. eiusdem Moguntinæ Sedis Archiepiscopi, &c. integritati pristinæ fidelißimè restitutum, Köln, 1570.

74


Ritual Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 488 : Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 488, Mainz ritual, fifteenth century. Printed Mainz ritual, 1480 : (no title) [Printed Mainz ritual], Mainz, 1480 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 468). Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, c. 1492 : Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, [Straßburg, c. 1492] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 469). Agenda Maguntina, 1513 : Agenda Maguntina, Mainz, 1513. Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis, 1551 : Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis [ ], Mainz, 1551. Rituale Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinae, 1696 : Rituale sive Agenda, Ad usum Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinæ edita jussu et auctoritate [...] D. Lotharii Francisci, S. Sedis Moguntinæ Archi-Episcopi [...], Mainz, 1696. Worms Mass Printed Worms missal, 1488 : (no title) [Printed Worms missal], Basel, 1488. Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522 : Missale secundum ritum et obseruantiam Ecclesie & diocesis wormatiensis, [Speyer], 1522. Office BL, add. 19415 : London, British Library, MS add. 19415, complete breviary, c. 1475. Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lu 3a : Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lutherbibliothek 3a, breviary (pars aestivalis), c. 1475. Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 518 : Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 518, breviary (pars hiemalis), 1401. Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519 : Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, breviary (pars hiemalis), fifteenth century. 75


Printed Worms breviary, c. 1475 : (no title) [Printed Worms breviary], [Marienthal, c. 1475] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513). Printed Worms breviary, c. 1483 : (no title) [Printed Worms breviary], [Speyer, c. 1483] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5514). Printed Worms breviary, c. 1490 : (no title) [Printed Worms breviary], [Straßburg, c. 1490] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515). Ritual Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1 : Worms, Archiv der Stadt Worms, Abt. 106/1, manual, Augustinian nunnery, Worms, fifteenth century. Agenda ecclesie wormaciensis, 1500-10 : Agenda secundum ritum et ordinem ecclesie wormaciensis, Speyer, 1500-10 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 477). Speyer Mass Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1 : Speyer, Archiv des Bistums Speyer, Hs. 1, noted plenary missal, Speyer Cathedral, c. 1343. Darmstadt, Hs. 889 : Darmstadt, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, Hs. 889, festal Speyer missal (pars hiemalis), c. 1380. Printed Speyer missal, 1500 : (no title) [Printed Speyer missal], Speyer, [1500 or 1501]. Office Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2 : Speyer, Archiv des Bistums Speyer, Hs. 2, Speyer Cathedral antiphonal (pars aestivalis), c. 1500-10. Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3 : Speyer, Gymnasium am Kaisersdom, A.D.3, psalter and neumed breviary, possibly adapted for Speyer use, late twelfth century? (Held in Speyer, Pfälzische Landesbibliothek). 76


Printed Speyer breviary, 1478 : (no title) [Complete printed Speyer breviary], Speyer, 1478 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5464). Printed Speyer breviary, 1491 : (no title) [Printed Speyer breviary], [Straßburg, 1491] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465). Orarium Spirense, 1507 : Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), Venezia, 1507. [Orarium Spirense, 1509] : (no title) (pars aestivalis), Venezia, 1509. Ritual Agenda Spirensis, 1512 : Agenda Spirensis, Speyer, 1512. Other Liturgical Sources Other liturgical works, largely modern Roman books, are cited in footnotes.

77

Chapter III

Approaches

Problems with Pflanz s Approach ssembling a corpus of suitable liturgical material is only the first step: one must also have a clear idea of how to decipher, interpret and apply it, and unfortunately this is not a strength of Pflanz s study. Ironically, the generally positive reviews of Pflanz had something important in common with Schützeichel s academic savaging: they said little about methodology. For Schützeichel the very attempt at a chant reconstruction was pernicious enough; he had no interest in how it had been done. What Schützeichel condemned, the reviewers welcomed, but they too had little to say about the adequacy of Pflanz s approach: Janota s remark that Pflanz tended to ignore sources other than the liturgy was one of the few specific methodological criticisms.1 Yet Pflanz s work reveals several quite serious methodological inadequacies. These will be outlined only briefly here; there are discussions of how they affect the individual St Gall Passion Play chants in the main body of the study. Ironically, it is the two main foci of Pflanz s title, Liturgie and Textgrundlagen , which are the key problematical points in his analysis. Liturgy Pflanz s basic unfamiliarity with liturgy, and with the books which contain it, emerges constantly from his study. Admittedly, his manu1

Johannes Janota, [Review of Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977] , Germanistik 20 (1979), pp. 148-49.


scripts were not at that time all adequately inventorized or localized. For though most of the Frankfurt manuscripts he used had been exhaustively described by 1974, those in the Mainz Stadtbibliothek are still being catalogued, in a programme that began only in 1978, and those in the Mainz Martinusbibliothek are still only summarily treated in an unpublished handlist.2 However, this does not account for basic problems of orientation and citation. Pflanz cites manuscripts not by folio but by page . He seems to have worked from microfilm, and to have interpreted each frame (i.e. the verso of one folio on the left, and the recto of the next on the right) as a single page , to which he gives the number of the relevant recto: thus S. 45 can refer to fol. 44v or fol. 45r, and the correct foliation can only be determined by independent inspection of the manuscript.3 Pflanz does not understand the conventional abbreviated ways in which chants can be written out, and is especially challenged by responsories. By the fourteenth century, the performance of responsories had become standardized. First the refrain was sung through. This was followed by the verse, at the end of which the singers returned to the refrain but only to the latter part, the repetenda, usually indicated by a capitalized or rubricated letter (breviaries often give only the first

2

3

Gerhardt Powitz, Die Handschriften des Dominikanerklosters und des Leonhardstifts in Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, 1968; Gerhardt Powitz & Herbert Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts und des Karmeliterklosters in Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, 1974; Karin Bredehorn & Gerhardt Powitz, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Gruppe Manuscripta latina, Frankfurt, 1979 [vols. I-III of Clemens Köttelwesch (ed.), Die Kataloge der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main]; Gerhard List & Gerhardt Powitz (eds.), Die Handschriften der Stadtbibliothek Mainz, Wiesbaden, 1990-98, vol. I: Hs. I 1 - Hs. I 150; vol. II (ed. by Gerhard List): Hs. I 151 - Hs. I 250. For a description of the Mainz Stadtbibliothek cataloguing project, see vol. I, p. 7; the Mainz Martinusbibliothek handlist is not publicly available. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, e.g. p. 85, note 1, citing Hs. MF 1 (= Frankfurt, Barth. 150): Pflanz s S. 231, 233 actually refers to fols. 231 and 232v.

80

III. Approaches

word).4 Pflanz s uncertainty about these conventions leads him to misinterpret the text of one responsory.5 Elsewhere his misunderstanding of manuscript abbreviations leads him to think that there is a longer and a shorter form of the antiphon Media vita in morte sumus .6 In general, Pflanz s use of liturgical terminology betrays unfamiliarity. He speaks, confusingly, of chants which are verbally identical to biblical passages , or Vulgate texts functioning as liturgical chants .7 He seems to assume the existence of liturgical chants despite the fact that they are not to be found in any liturgical book or index.8 He is capable of describing three different chants as three versions of one chant , or a chant employed as a gradual, a verse and a responsory .9 He tends to use antiphon as a generic term for many kinds of chant (e.g. on pages 56, 58, and 59). Indeed, it is not clear that he has grasped the fundamental difference between antiphons and responsories. Repeatedly, though a direction explicitly identifies a chant as a responsory or antiphon, he needlessly considers an alternative; twice he actually identifies the wrong alternative.10 Pflanz often 4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Cf. Andrew Hughes, Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Office: A Guide to their Organization and Terminology, Toronto [etc.], 1982, pp. 27-28. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 100-01, reading a repetenda incipit as a repeated earlier chant. Ibid., p. 103, note 2. See René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, Roma, 196379, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Series maior, Fontes, 7-12), no. 3732. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, e.g. pp. 136-37: 6, Quis es ; p. 106: 102, Quia tulerunt Dominum meum , 103, Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi . Ibid., p. 136: Obwohl ich einen mit Quis es beginnenden Gesang in der Liturgie nicht auffinden konnte, [läßt sich vermuten,] daß der verwendete liturgische Gesang wörtlich mit dem Evangelientext übereinstimmt. Ibid., p. 108: the chants are in fact the antiphon Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2300 and the responsories 6323 and 5232, all of which contain the words Tulerunt Dominum meum . Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 114: Die Anfangsworte eines in vielen Missalen als Graduale, Versus und Responsorium Anwendung findenden Gesanges . Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 51-52, needlessly considers antiphon Ecce agnus dei (8); ibid., pp. 47-48, wrongly chooses responsory rather than anti-

81


simply looks for a particular text string , and is unclear about how many chants contain it.11 But equally he reads simple verbal variants as different chants, as with variants of the antiphon beginning Rabbi, quis peccavit [ ] and Rabbi, quid peccavit [ ] .12 Though Pflanz s method involves distinguishing local diocesan liturgies, he does not have a firm grasp of this difficult discipline. One of his major methodological errors is to assume that chants are much more distinctive of local uses than is in fact the case. As this study will show, the vast majority of the St Gall Passion Play chants are found in the liturgies of Mainz, Worms and Speyer, and indeed of a great many German dioceses: Pflanz s claims not to find some items in certain uses are thus nearly always mistaken. They cannot be examined in detail here, and since many concern Cologne and Trier, dioceses with which we now know the play had no connection, they need not be. They often result from unfamiliarity with liturgical sources. Typical is the claim that the antiphon Cum appropinquaret is not found in Trier:13 this well-known Palm Sunday processional antiphon14 will indeed have been known in Trier, but is unlikely to be recorded in the missals which Pflanz uses as his sources; it should have been sought in rituals and processionals. Pflanz does, ironically, include one fifteenth-century manuscript Worms breviary as a control text.15 He ex-

11

12 13 14 15

phon Qui post me venit (5); pp. 56-59, 164, wrongly chooses antiphon rather than responsory Ductus est Jesus (14). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 64, ns 2, 3, reads what are in fact three chants (the antiphons 1366 and 5357 in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, and the responsory 6554), as two; on page 95, note 1, he reads two chants, the responsory Velum templi (ibid., 7821) and the antiphon Ait latro (ibid., 1316) as one and fails to note that the antiphon Memento mei, Domine Deus (ibid., 3736) is a different chant, not a simple verbal variant. Ibid., 4571. Chant no. 38; cf. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 70-73. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 118-19. See Chapter VII, no. 51 below. Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. Lu 3a: Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 44; cf. Chapter II above, note 49.

82

III. Approaches

cludes it from consideration because it contains matches for only six of the play s incipits16 but this, of course, is because the breviary is a pars aestivalis, whereas the vast majority of chants in the play, as in German drama as a whole, come from the pars hiemalis. This unfamiliarity with sources is most evident with regard to Mainz. Lacking a clear overview of the use, Pflanz often cites Mainz material from monastic, not diocesan, books, or from sources which present the partially Romanized Mainz rite of the late sixteenth century, or the much more fully Roman liturgy of nearly a hundred years later.17 The actual state of the liturgy in the fourteenth century is, however, fairly readily recognizable from a wide variety of sources of the right period. Pflanz is particularly unfamiliar with the sanctoral liturgy, presumably because there is almost no relevant secondary literature on which he can rely (Reifenberg s work on Mainz, for instance, deals only with the temporale). Thus he cites a communio from the vigil of St Andrew only from modern Roman books, though it is found in medieval sources.18 Three items from the office of Mary Magdalene completely defeat Pflanz: the antiphons 35, Amen dico and 36, Fides etenim , and the responsory verse 34, Dimissa sunt ; this failure is particularly serious because the antiphons prove to be crucial to the localization of the play.19 This fundamental uncertainty about liturgical tradition may explain the rather odd structure of Pflanz s study. He works through the play not chant by chant, but in three main sections which identify items first from printed books (a mixture of early modern Mainz, Cologne 16 17

18

19

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 151. E.g. ibid., p. 60, note 2 and p. 62, note 1, citing as Mainz breviaries several Carthusian books. Ibid., p. 89, note 1, citing Breviarium Moguntinum, 1570. Ibid., p. 117, note 1, citing Rituale Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinae, 1696. Ibid., pp. 15-16, 137-38. The communio, Dixit Andreas Simoni , is found in medieval books: see Chapter VI below, note 91. Ibid., pp. 67-69; 37; 18, 138-39. Cf. Chapter V.

83


and Trier sources and modern Roman books), then from manuscripts (breviaries first, missals second), and finally from other sources: the Bible and some other German plays.20 No rationale for this division is given. Introductory remarks21 suggest that Pflanz began his investigations using printed material, moving on to manuscripts when he had exhausted the possibilities of print. This is a legitimate sequence for scholarly investigation, but as a layout for the completed work it is pointlessly repetitive, as Pflanz treats the same chant, or related chant sequences, in widely separated parts of his study.22 In some cases it actually reflects confusion: in the Quem quaeritis dialogue, a standard item of the Visitatio sepulchri, Pflanz reconstructs the first two elements, Quem quaeritis and Iesum Nazarenum crucifixum from the Visitatio tradition, but deals with the third, Non est hic, quem queritis , in a different section, wrongly identifying it as a liturgical antiphon with altered wording.23 Text A good many of these problems are explained by the other keyword, Textgrundlagen , in the title of Pflanz s study. What Pflanz sees himself as reconstructing are texts, but in fact what he is dealing with are chants: not spoken texts, nor texts to which music can be fitted if wished, but combined textual-musical entities which were used and handed down as such. Yet none of Pflanz s liturgical sources are notated or neumed antiphonals, graduals or rituals: he cites solely textonly breviaries and missals, unaware, it seems, that these represent a reduction of the full text-and-music reality of the liturgy. Pflanz is of 20

21 22

23

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, sections 2.2 (pp. 8-38), 2.3.1 (pp. 39-111), 2.3.2 (pp. 111-31), and 2.4 (pp. 131-50). Ibid., p. 2. E.g. ibid., pp. 136-37: 6, Quis es ; ibid., pp. 48-50: 7, Ego vox clamantis ; ibid., pp. 34-35, 100-01: 91, Tollite portas . Ibid., section 2.4, pp. 149-50, cf. p. 172: 98, [Quem quaeritis,] o tremule mulieres , and 99, Iesum nazarenum crucifixum ; section 2.3.1, pp. 104-05, cf. p. 173: 100, Non est hic, quem queritis .

84

III. Approaches

course aware that chants were sung, yet he never considers the music as an integral part, and hence a defining and limiting dimension, of the chants. This leads him into several erroneous assumptions. Pflanz seems to assume that chant wording is readily alterable. Time and again, he proposes alterations to the wording of chants; very often these are truncations which would have been musically impossible, involving the omission of important melodic passages or ending chants on modally unacceptable notes;24 or else would have required alterations to melodies and cadences, something found only very occasionally in German plays.25 His assumption that the text of the first Quem quaeritis item would have been inverted to O tremule mulieres, quem queritis in hoc tumulo plorantes takes no account of the textual and melodic stability of this chant, or of the fact that a corresponding shift in the melody would be impossible.26 More than once Pflanz assumes that the wording from two different chants would have been combined, which would usually have been melodically, even modally unfeasible.27 Since Pflanz has little sense of the stability and integrity of the chant tradition, he constantly tries to establish the wording of the Latin 24

25

26

27

E.g. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 46-47, suggesting truncation of 3, Quid mihi et tibi est, mulier . Ibid., p. 91, truncation of 69, Solvite templum hoc . Ibid., p. 93, proposing omissions in 71, 72, Ingressus pylatus . E.g. ibid., pp. 48-50, proposing extension of 7, antiphon Vox clamantis to Ego vox clamantis . On infrequency of adaptation of chants in German plays, see Rainer Gstrein, Anmerkungen zu den Gesängen der Osterspiele des Sterzinger Debs -Kodex , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik. Akten des 2. Symposiums der Sterzinger Osterspiele (12.-16. April 1992), Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 91-98, esp. 93-94. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 150. See discussion in Chapter X below (no. 98). E.g. ibid., pp. 123-27, suggesting that Peter s Non lavabis (56) and Domine, non tantum pedes (58) are from Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1431, Ante diem festum Paschae , usually in mode 7 or 8, but that Jesus s reply Si non lavero tibi (57) is from ibid. 2393, Domine, tu mihi lavas pedes , regularly in mode 5. See Chapter V below.

85


chants on the basis of the German dialogue which follows them. The relation of spoken dialogue to chant in medieval religious drama is as yet little examined. Nearly all chants are indeed followed by vernacular dialogue which includes translation, paraphrase or exegesis of the Latin. But it is not safe to assume that the vernacular version is always full and accurate. Several St Gall Passion Play chants which can be reconstructed with certainty are followed by a vernacular passage which is demonstrably not an exact version;28 Pflanz even concedes this on occasion.29 There are various possible reasons for this. Constraints of rhyme and meter may produce vernacular passages which are a loose fit with the Latin chants. Other mismatches may result from scribal or directorial alterations to chant or dialogue. Richard Rastall, who has analysed this phenomenon in English plays, concludes that extensive editorial change may have gone on which is not easy to determine from the surviving manuscripts, and that the principle of correspondence between chants and dialogue can only be adopted cautiously and with the awareness that it admits of exceptions.30 A manuscript like the St Gall Passion Play, where the history of text, adaptations and performances is impossible to reconstruct, calls for special care. But most importantly, chants in plays are not mere Einlagen : they connect the events of the play with, and thus legitimize them in, the 28

29

30

E.g. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 10-11, 47-48: 5, Qui post me venit ; ibid., pp. 19-20, 74-75: 40 Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur ; ibid., pp. 20-21, 75-77: 42, A seculo non est ; ibid., pp. 79-82: 44, Domine, si hic fuisses . Cf. William Louis Boletta, The Role of Music in Medieval German Drama: Easter Plays and Passion Plays (Ph.D. dissertation), Vanderbilt University, 1967, p. 123. E.g. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 76: 42, A seculo non est ; ibid., p. 79: 44, Domine, si hic fuisses . Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, p. 83, conjectures a complex history of performancechanges underlying such chant/dialogue mismatch in the Towneley Ascension play. On pages 253-56 he discusses an example from the N-Town Mary Play where chant and vernacular dialogue clearly do not coincide.

86

III. Approaches

transcendent liturgical dimension. As Traub puts it, sie eröffnen einen Zeit-Raum, in dem sich als eine Schicht der gesprochene Text entfaltet. 31 They announce a fullness of reality which cannot be expressed in speech alone. There is thus no reason why the spoken dialogue should be simply identical to the sung chant; indeed, every reason why it should not be. Pflanz, however, constantly invokes the vernacular dialogue as a guide to the Latin; it is this principle that leads him to suggest some of the melodically impossible alterations to the wording of chants mentioned above. Though he concedes that the German demonstrably does not always translate the Latin chant, he never reassesses the general applicability of his assumption. Pflanz espouses a narrowly realistic assumption that narrative or explicatory text such as hoc est or dicit Dominus will not usually have been sung; this however flies in the face of the demonstrable general practice of medieval plays.32 Pflanz effectively imposes an anachronistic representational verismo on a play which is still deeply rooted in a largely liturgical, sacramental, ceremonial aesthetic; an aesthetic, indeed, which is seen most clearly in the chant stratum. To his credit, Pflanz realizes that the sung items of the St Gall Passion Play are largely liturgical, but he does not often enough consider 31

32

Andreas Traub, Zwischen Aufgezeichnetem und Nichtaufgezeichnetem: Probleme bei der Edition der Melodien der Sterzinger Spiele , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Text und Musik, pp. 211-18, esp. 214. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, e.g. pp. 121-22, p. 128 (omit Dicit Dominus in 54, Hoc corpus and 60, Scriptum est enim ); p. 145 (omit Hoc est in 81, Hely, Hely ). Cf. Hansjürgen Linke, Ist das Tiroler Schauspiel des Mittelalters Volksschauspiel? , in Egon Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel: Beiträge zur Theatergeschichte des Alpenraumes, Schriftenreihe des Südtiroler Kulturinstitutes, 3, Bozen, 1976, pp. 88-109, esp. 100; Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), pp. 147-48. Rastall, The Heaven Singing, vol. I, p. 81: Although this may seem alien to our concept of drama, there is nothing inherently undramatic about it .

87


that certain chants may have non-liturgical sources. This is a particular weakness in the Osterspiel sequences, where, as the dramatic tradition shows, many chants are not directly liturgical, but come from the sung Passion gospels and from the repertoire of liturgical drama , which is only partly composed of actual liturgical items, and developed some specialized chants of its own.33 Pflanz is unfamiliar with the use of sung items in the medieval dramatic tradition. Even such basic resources as Schuler34 are missing from his bibliography and have clearly not been consulted. Only very occasionally does he make comparisons with the use of specific chants in other plays, and he never recognizes the dramatic tradition as a context within which the chants of the play might be understood. His inconclusive attempt35 to identify the chants of the Hortulanus encounter from liturgical books alone, without reference to the usage of Latin and vernacular Easter plays, is a good example of this. In view of all his methodological inadequacies, it is not surprising that Pflanz s liturgical localization of the Play fails to convince.36 In the first place, Pflanz considers two wrong dioceses. Then he applies an extremely simple statistical method: the fact that Mainz books contain the greatest number of chants which correspond to the play s incipits leads to the conclusion that the play was produced in a Mainz liturgical tradition.37 The legitimacy of this is debatable: Pflanz does not, for instance, reflect on the implications of the fact that not all the chants can be located in Mainz. And in any case the basic statistics are fatally flawed. Pflanz often fails to find chants in uses where they 33

34

35 36 37

E.g. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 104-05, wrongly suggests liturgical source for 100, Non est hic, quem queritis . Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 105-08. Ibid., sections 3.1-3.3, pp. 151-61. Ibid., pp. 159, 161.

88

III. Approaches

were demonstrably known. Chants which he claims to find in Mainz alone include material which is biblical, not liturgical;38 items from the sanctorale, of which Pflanz has an uncertain grasp;39 chants from the special liturgies of the Easter triduum, which are not routinely recorded in ordinary mass and office books;40 and chants which can indeed be found in other dioceses if further sources are consulted.41 Lessons from Pflanz: Towards an Adequate Approach A more adequate approach to the St Gall Passion Play chants and the liturgical tradition in which so many of them stand involves avoiding Pflanz s major errors. A clear and historically informed grasp of the relevant diocesan uses is essential, as is a familiarity with the different types of book in which they are handed down. This includes a knowledge of the liturgical placing of different chants, and of the right kind of book in which to locate them. The complex scribal conventions of liturgical manuscripts must of course be thoroughly understood. Above all it must be borne in mind that liturgical chants are precisely that chants, text and music as a unity. Tight musical constraints mean that wording is not readily changeable. The German dialogue cannot be assumed to be a definitive guide to the wording of the sung Latin. The practical implications of different types of chants, too, must be considered. The length and difficulty of plainsong items varies immensely, from simple antiphons which almost anyone could have sung to the often extremely complex responsories, the preserve of trained 38

39 40 41

E.g. ibid., pp. 151 and 152: 7, Ego vox clamantis , and possibly 11, Hic est filius meus dilectus . E.g. ibid., p. 152: 22, Venite post me (St Andrew). E.g. ibid., pp. 154 and 156: 60, Scriptum est enim and 91, Tollite portas . E.g. ibid., pp. 151-52: 5, Qui post me venit ; 8, Ecce agnus Dei ; 9, Baptiza me, Iohannis ; 11, Hic est filius meus dilectus ; and 12, Baptizat miles regem . All found in noted Cologne breviary, fourteenth century, British Library, MS Add. 31913, fols. 106v, 148r-v, 160, 160v, 155, and 162v.

89


singers. Sometimes a long or difficult chant may be an unlikely choice, especially if it is to be performed by a relatively minor character. In such cases a simpler alternative, usually Vulgate material, may be more probable. A player in a major role, however, may well have been able to perform a challenging item. Dreimüller42 in fact draws convincing conclusions about the casting of the Alsfelder Passionsspiel from a correlation of the roles and the difficulty of their chants, and Chapter IV suggests that the same can be done for the St Gall Passion Play. The possibility must also be considered that particular chants are not of liturgical origin, either because they are simply Vulgate text set to a simple reciting tone, or from the textual and musical repertoire of liturgical drama . For all these reasons, it is vital to look beyond the individual play and interrogate the whole tradition of medieval German religious drama, which, despite chronological and regional diversity, shows many interesting regularities and trends in its use of chant. In this study, every chant in the play has been considered against the background of the entire range of German plays which use the same item. All this necessitates a thorough critical engagement with Pflanz in the first place, but also with the other relevant scholarly literature. There is Bergmann s description of the St Gall Passion Play chants, incomplete and not particularly detailed, and Mehler s analysis, extremely sound but not a full-scale study of the play; however the first scholarly treatment of the play s music, by Boletta, is too brief and unspecific to need detailed consideration.43 And pre-eminently there is 42

43

Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. I: Abhandlungen, pp. 223-25. Rolf Bergmann, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele und Marienklagen des Mittelalters, München, 1986, pp. 89-103, 184-235 (cf. pp. 17-18, 26-27,

90

III. Approaches

the work of first recourse, Schuler. This dissertation of 1940 attempted a full listing of the sung items of the German medieval dramatic repertoire. Unfortunately, only the first volume appeared in book form; Schuler s death meant that the second, transcribing the melodies, was never published, and is often unmentioned in the bibliographies even of specialized scholarly works.44 The first volume lists the chants alphabetically, identifying each by a number. The wording of the chant is given first, followed by its biblical and liturgical sources, then by a list of its occurrences in plays, usually including the wording of the direction and often with a reasonably detailed account of the wording of the item. But several factors reduce the usefulness of this ambitious study. As a pioneering attempt, it has, inevitably, been overtaken by the passage of half a century: most of the plays cited in it have since been published with facsimiles or editions of their music. A number of plays unknown to Schuler have also been discovered: the late Admonter Passionsspiel with its full musical notation is the longest and most important of this relatively large group.45 Similarly, some key modern liturgical secondary works postdate Schuler; he could quote office chants only from unsystematic sources like Marbach, the Paléogra-

44

45

38-40, 64-66); Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 185-97; Boletta, The Role of Music in Medieval German Drama , pp. 121-29. Indeed, even the original manuscript of the second volume was long thought to have disappeared: see Hans Blosen, Zum Lied der Wächter im Wiener Osterspiel : Zugleich Bemerkungen zum Refrain in mittelhochdeutscher Lyrik , Orbis Litterarum 29 (1974), pp. 183-215, esp. 205, note 76. It has since been traced, and a small number of copies made. Other plays unknown to Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, include: Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, Feldkircher Osterspiel, Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragment, Füssener Osterspiel, Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, Marienberger Osterspiel, Nottulner Osterspiel II, Osnabrücker Osterspiel, Prager Abendmahlspiel, Saganer Grablegungsspiel, Welser Passionsspielfragment, Zwickauer Osterspiel. Schuler s account of the Sterzing plays is very incomplete: Rabers Passion is not cited; musical information on Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel is usually wrong.

91


phie musicale facsimiles, and modern Roman service books, whereas nowadays there is the reasonably definitive listing in René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, and the extensive and ever-growing CANTUS database of western liturgical chant. The manuscripts of some plays were inaccessible to Schuler, leaving him at the mercy of the extant editions. The St Gall Passion Play, unfortunately, fell into this category. Here Schuler, seemingly unaware of Wolter s edition, relied instead on Mone s early and often unreliable version. On several occasions this led him to follow Mone s garbled version of the play s incipits, or even to miss out chants altogether (e.g. nos. 20 and 96, Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus ). The work is marred by numerous other inaccuracies, omissions and over-generalizations, some of which will be discussed in detail in this study, and by the deplorable proof-reading. The limited availability of the second volume is a further handicap. Scholarship really needs a new Schuler, produced to the highest standards of accuracy and including all the material omitted through necessity or inadvertence. But Schuler s main shortcoming is the fact that his work is not raisonné. It is essentially a list albeit a very large, systematic list which no one had compiled before but repeatedly, the user will miss discussion of the lapidary tabulated data. Again and again Schuler lists biblical, liturgical and other sources without making it entirely clear which were used in which plays, or exactly how; again and again readers must consult the plays themselves to find, and often to query or correct, the results. Discussion is central to the purpose of this book. Identifying the sung items of a play like the St Gall Passion Play, and understanding their effect and purpose, is a constant process of questioning, debating, weighing up. Many can be identified only within a triangle of error , and only discussion can stake out that triangle and make an informed estimate of its size.

92

Chapter IV

Cantat dicat respondeat Directions and Performers

Dicere and Cantare : The Directions of the Play n the St Gall Passion Play, as in other religious plays, the chant directions use a variety of performance verbs: cantare , dicere , clamare , respondere , and others. A detailed understanding of this terminology is obviously crucial to a full appreciation of the play; yet Pflanz does not concern himself with the meanings of performance verbs, beyond assuming at times that dicere could indicate spoken rather than sung delivery.1 In recent decades, though, increasing scholarly attention has been paid to directions. The most detailed study of the German plays is that of Ulrich Mehler, whose main conclusions are as follows. In medieval liturgical books, the verbs dicere and cantare , their cognates ( canere , dicere cantando , etc.) and their vernacular equivalents ( sagen , sprechen , singen , etc.) do not represent the modern say (meaning perform in a normal speaking voice ; Sprechvortrag ) and sing ( perform in a singing voice ; Gesangsvortrag ), as often assumed.2 In the first place, hardly any of the earlier medieval 1

2

Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977, passim, e.g. p. 97, assuming 83, Consumatum est , is spoken. E.g. Walther Lipphardt, Liturgische Dramen des Mittelalters , in Friedrich Blume (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 16 vols., Kassel, 1949-79, vol. VIII, cols 1012-44, esp. 1028 and other scholars, cited by Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), p. 2, note 1, and 10, note 12.


liturgy was actually performed in an everyday speaking voice. The antiphons, responsories, hymns, introits, graduals, and so on were melodic, often elaborately so. The prayers, blessings, acclamations and scriptural readings were not said but almost invariably chanted to tones , recitative formulae of greater or lesser complexity.3 Later musical terminology called this recitative material accentus , distinguishing it from the melodious chant termed concentus .4 For scriptural texts there were various psalm tones, lection tones for readings at the office, tones for epistle and gospel at mass, and most importantly for drama, the special Passion tone for the declamation of the Passion gospel during Holy Week. Dicere simply does not indicate spoken delivery. A study of medieval liturgical rubrics, where both dicere and cantare are applied to liturgical items, suggests that they denote not two different kinds, but rather two different aspects, of performance. Dicere is the more ideal term, referring to the overall performance of a liturgical item, whereas cantare is the more practical or technical word, referring specifically to its musical articulation.5 The same terminology is found in the corpus of liturgical drama and in non-liturgical Latin plays.6 But as Mehler also shows, sensibilities and practices changed. In the early medieval period, accentus was not understood as melody or music as such: these terms were reserved for the melodically more complex concentus , the responsories, graduals and the like 3

4 5

6

Ibid., p. 39, citing also K.G. Fellerer, Kirchenmusikalische Vorschriften im Mittelalter , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 40 (1956), pp. 1-11. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 253. Ibid., pp. 69-70, esp. p. 70: dicere = Die Ausführung des Gregorianischen Gesanges als Ausdruck des liturgischen Wortes und aller mit ihm verbundenen (inneren Gnaden-) Wirkungen ; cantare = Die Ausführung des Chorals als Melodie . Ibid., pp. 98-132 (liturgical plays); pp. 136-42 (Benediktbeurer Emmausspiel, Benediktbeurer Weihnachtsspiel).

94

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

which were the preserve of trained soloists and choristers rather than of clerics in general. But the sources show that this had changed by the early sixteenth century, when the theorist Andreas Ornithoparchus explicitly treated accentus as part of music.7 Mehler plausibly deduces a change in performance practice: that prayers, readings and so on were increasingly being performed in a speaking voice, and that the term dicere had begun to be associated with this Sprechvortrag .8 The seed of the modern opposition of the meaning of the two words was sown. Mehler also notes historical change in the directions of religious drama. In earlier plays, such as the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (1220-30) and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle (early fourteenth century), dicere tends to signify accentus material: scriptural verses sung to recitative, most often the Passion tone, whereas cantare refers to the more melodious kinds: responsories and non-Gregorian melodies such as strophic songs, both Latin and vernacular.9 Antiphons, which in musical complexity are between the simple accentus formulae and the elaborate, melismatic responsories, can be referred to by either term. In earlier plays they tend to have dicere rather than cantare directions,10 but later plays reflect the changing attitudes to what was and was not church music : directions apply cantare and its cognates to an increasingly wide range of material, often including recitative. Thus in the early-sixteenth-century Alsfelder Passionsspiel, cantare introduces melodious chants such as responsories, but is 7

8 9

10

Andreas Ornithoparchus, Musice Actiue Micrologus, Leipzig, 1517, sig. Jiv-Kiiv; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 71-78. Ibid., pp. 71-78, esp. 72. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 146-75, esp. 175); Frankfurter Dirigierrolle (ibid., pp. 184-87); Frankfurter Passionsspiel (ibid., pp. 201-03). Thus in liturgical drama and Latin non-liturgical plays: Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 98-142, 183; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (ibid., pp. 14675, esp. 175); cf. summary table, p. 216.

95


also used, alongside the traditional dicere , for the Passion tone; in the Egerer Passionsspiel (c. 1460) and the late-sixteenth-century Admonter Passionsspiel, cantare is applied to nearly all sung items, including the simplest recitative.11 As a product of the early fourteenth century, and one which may even go back to an earlier original, the St Gall Passion Play could be expected to show terminology typical of the earlier plays. In this light, the most striking aspect is the great preponderance of cantare directions. There are one hundred and four sung items in the play.12 A mere six have dicere directions.13 Eleven have respondere ;14 sixteen have no verb at all;15 orare , clamare and dicere cantando each occur once.16 All the remaining sixty-eight are introduced with cantare . At first sight this suggests a play particularly rich in the more elaborate kinds of chant, with a distinct tendency to avoid recitative, a judgement corroborated by Mehler s brief consideration of the play.17 11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Alsfelder Passionsspiel (ibid., pp. 204-10, esp. 208); Egerer Passionsspiel, Admonter Passionsspiel (ibid., pp. 210-13); cf. table, p. 216. The 108 items in the numbering of this study include three instrumental items (21, 25 and 31, dance music for Mary Magdalene) and one incipit which may not in fact have been a sung item (26, Magister ). 30, Nec ego te condempno ; 70, Peccavi tradens sanguinem iustum ; 83, Consumatum est ; 101, Mulier, quid ploras? ; 103, Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi ; 104, Maria . Respondere : 7, Ego vox clamantis ; 29, Nemo ; 39, Neque hic ; 76, Regem non habemus ; 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum ; 92, Quis est iste rex glorie? 93, Dominus virtutum ipse est rex glorie ; 99, Iesum Nazarenum crucifixum ; 100, Non est hic, quem queritis ; 102, Quia tulerunt Dominum meum ; 107, Sepulcrum Christi . No performance-verb in: 2, 4, 13, 24, 37, 47, 53, 68, 78 (9 of the 11 instances of the silence-chant); 38, Rabbi, quis peccavit ; 52, Gloria, laus ; 66, Ave, ave, rabbi ; 82, Sicio ; 85, Vere ; 86, Sequatur lamentacio Marie ; 108, Scimus Christum surrexisse . Orans : 64, Pater, si possibile est, transeat . Clament : 74, Ave, rex Iudeorum . Dicat cantando : 61, Tristis est . Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 188-97, esp. p. 196; cf. Rolf Bergmann, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele und Marienklagen des Mittelalters,

96

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

But this assumption should not be made automatically. Without notation, a sung item can be identified as a liturgical chant only in the few cases where the direction describes it as an antiphon, hymn, responsory or similar, or if its incipit shows that its wording is that of a liturgical item. This is only clear in the case of chants with distinctively liturgical text,18 for the majority of liturgical chants are of course of scriptural origin. They are based on Latin versions of the Bible which predate, and differ slightly from, the Vulgate, the standard medieval scriptural text, and can sometimes be thus identified;19 but incipits are often too short to differentiate a liturgical chant from the corresponding Vulgate passage.20 What follows here summarizes the results of detailed item-by-item examination of the St Gall Passion Play chants in Chapters V to X. Attention has been paid not only to the internal factors which may identify them, but also to the musical tradition of the German religious plays. Schuler s work has been extended to include the corpus of currently known plays, and his results have been critically evaluated and often revised.21 In many cases, distinct, long-lived musical trends can be discerned. This has permitted identification of the play chants within a reasonable margin of error, and this in turn allows a critical analysis of the play s use of directions.

18

19 20

21

München, 1986, pp. 77-78; Rolf Steinbach, Die deutschen Oster- und Passionsspiele des Mittelalters: Versuch einer Darstellung und Wesensbestimmung nebst einer Bibliographie zum deutschen geistlichen Spiel des Mittelalters, Köln, 1970 (Kölner Germanistische Studien, 4), p. 134. E.g. 12, Baptizat miles regem ; 52, Gloria, laus ; 94, Advenisti [, desiderabilis] ; 97, Media vita . E.g. 27, Si quis sine peccato ; 63, Una hora ; 65, Quem osculatus fuero . E.g. 56, Non lavabis , 57, Si non lavero tibi , 58, Domine, non tantum pedes ; 60, Scriptum est enim ; 61, Tristis est . The corpus of currently known plays, listed in the primary bibliography, is based on the corpus described in Bergmann, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele.

97


This of course also anticipates the results of chant-by-chant investigation, and so in one sense is the conclusion of, rather than the introduction to, the study. But one cannot simply identify all the chants singly, then in a separate operation draw conclusions about the directions. When deciding whether a particular chant is more likely to be a liturgical item or a simpler piece of biblical recitative, one important criterion is its direction, understood within the overall system of the directions of the play concerned. But an understanding of that overall system in large part emerges from the decisions about individual chants. There is a reciprocal, hermeneutical relation between chantby-chant investigation and the developing picture of the system that underlies the play s use of directions. Neither is simply prior to the other. In the St Gall Passion Play, forty-eight chants can readily be identified as liturgical. Only eleven, nearly all in the first third of the play, are explicitly designated as such.22 Twenty have distinctive liturgical wording.23 A further seventeen with wording which could also be bib22

23

3, Respondens Iesus cantans antiphonam Quid mihi et tibi est, mulier (l. 28a); 5, Respondens Iohannis cantet antiphonam Qui post me venit (l. 64a); 8, [Iohannes] cantet responsorium Ecce agnus Dei (l. 93b); 14, Tunc angeli cantent responsorium Ductus est Iesus in desertum [ ] (ll. 123a-b); 19, Respondens Iesus cantet antiphonam Dominum Deum tuum adorabis (ll. 147a-b); 28, Iesus [ ] cantet antiphonam Nemo te condempnavit (ll. 233a-b); 33, Iesus cantat versum Dimissa sunt (l. 291b); 44, Domine, si fuisses hic : cf. 45, [Maria] cantet antiphonam Domine, si hic fuisses ut supra (= 44) (l. 515b); 71, duo angeli cantent responsorium Ingressus Pylatus [ ] (ll. 887a-b); 87, Io[seph] [ ] cantans responsorium Ecce quomodo moritur iustus (ll. 1230a-b). All emphasis supplied. 9, Baptiza me, Iohannis (antiphon); 12, Baptizat miles regem (antiphon); 18, Vade, Satanas, non temptabis (antiphon); 27, Si quis sine peccato (antiphon); 34, Mittens hec mulier (antiphon); 36, Fides etenim (responsory verse); 50, Expedit vobis (antiphon); 52, Gloria, laus (hymn); 54, Hoc corpus (communio); 63, Una hora (responsory); 65, Quem osculatus fuero (antiphon); 73, Tu dicis, quia rex sum (responsory); 80, Memento mei, Domine (antiphon); 90, Resurrexi (introit); 94, Advenisti (antiphon); 97, Media vita (antiphon); 105, Iesu, nostra redemptio (hymn); 106, 107, 108, Dic nobis, Maria, quid vidisti in via , Sepulcrum Christi , Scimus Christum surrexisse (sequence).

98

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

lical are, in the light of clear tendencies in the usage of German plays, almost certainly liturgical.24 Biblical text, by contrast, is a good deal rarer. It can be identified in seventeen chants, either because there is no corresponding liturgical item, or from wording which distinguishes a Vulgate verse from a similar liturgical chant, or in the light of of the consistent practice of the German dramatic tradition.25 There is a small number of items from other sources: sixteen, including eleven silence-chants.26 But this still leaves twenty-three chants whose provenance is not immediately obvious, either because liturgical and biblical wording are identical, or because the incipit is too short to distinguish them.27 24

25

26

27

20 and 96, Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus (antiphon or Te Deum); 29, Nemo (antiphon); 30, Nec ego te condempno (antiphon); 35, Amen dico (antiphon); 43, Lazarus, amicus noster (antiphon); 48, Colligerunt (antiphon); 49, Quid facimus (antiphon); 55, Mandatum novum (antiphon); 75, Exivit ergo Iesus (responsory); 84, In manus tuas (responsory); 89, Terra tremuit et quievit (antiphon or offertorium); 91, Tollite portas (probably antiphon); 95, Venite, benedicti (antiphon); 101, Mulier, quid ploras (antiphon); 102, Quia tulerunt Dominum meum (antiphon); 103, Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi (antiphon). No corresponding liturgical item: 6, Quis es ; 66, Ave, ave rabbi ; 70, Peccavi tradens sanguinem iustum ; 74, Ave, rex Iudeorum ; 82, Sicio ; 85, Vere ; 92, Quis est iste rex glorie ; 93, Dominus virtutum ipse est rex glorie . Distinctive Vulgate wording: 7, Ego vox clamantis ; 62 and 64, Pater, si possibile est, transeat ; 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum . Dramatic tradition: 76 and 79, Regem non habemus ; 81, Hely, Hely ; 83, Consumatum est ; 104, Maria (and also 62 and 64, Pater, si possibile est, transeat ); 66, Ave, ave rabbi ; 70, Peccavi tradens sanguinem iustum ; 74, Ave, rex Iudeorum ; 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum ; 82, Sicio ; 85, Vere ; 92, Quis est iste rex glorie ; 93, Dominus virtutum ipse est rex glorie ). 1, 2, 4, 13, 24, 32, 37, 47, 53, 68, 78, silence-chant; 86, Lamentacio Marie ; 88, Tunc milites vadant ad sepulchrum cantantes aliquid (possibly the Wächterlied); 98-100, Quem quaeritis I dialogue. 10, Sine modo sic enim ; 11, Hic est filius meus dilectus ; 15, Si es filius Dei ; 16, Non in solo pane vivit homo ; 17, Angelis suis mandavit ; 22, Venite post me ; 23, Invenimus Messiam ; 38, Rabbi, quis peccavit ; 39 Neque hic ; 40 and 41, Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur ; 42, A seculo non est ; 46, Lazare, veni foras ; 51, Osanna, benedictus ; 56, Non lavabis , 57, Si non lavero tibi , 58, Domine,

99


These are cases where the German dramatic repertoire is of little help, because the chants are either unique to the St Gall Passion Play, or found only in a small corpus of plays. The attempt to decide whether such material is biblical or liturgical is central to this study. Amongst the decisive criteria are the directions, but the simple assumption that cantare always indicates liturgical material needs to be approached critically. The predominance of cantare directions hardly means that complex liturgical chants such as responsories predominate in this play, for this would be a quite untypical repertoire; rather it suggests that the term applies to a wide range of sung material. This is not incompatible with the usage of the earlier Passion plays analysed by Mehler. They often use cantare for the more elaborate Gregorian items and dicere for the simpler liturgical chants, such as antiphons, as well as for biblical recitative.28 However, some do apply cantare to antiphons: and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, seemingly related to the St Gall Passion Play, does so frequently.29 The play clearly goes a step further in this direction. It uses dicere for antiphons only three times: once for part of Nemo te condemnavit, mulier? and twice in the Hortulanus encounter between the risen Christ and Mary Magdalene.30 Otherwise, thirty-three chants which are definitely or very probably antiphons have cantare directions.31

28

29

30

31

non tantum pedes ; 59, Scitis, quid fecerim ; 60, Scriptum est enim ; 61, Tristis est ; 67, Tamquam ad latronem ; 69, Solvite templum hoc ; 72, Tu es rex Iudeorum . (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 146-75, esp. 175); Frankfurter Dirigierrolle (ibid., pp. 184-87, esp. 187) and table, p. 277, note 224. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle (ibid., p. 187 and table, p. 277, note 224): 13 antiphons with dicere ; ibid., p. 185 and table, pp. 278-79, note 225: 24 antiphons with cantare . 30, Dicat iterum Iesus Nec ego te condempno ; 101, Mulier, quid ploras ; 103, Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi . Antiphona in direction: 3, Quid mihi et tibi est, mulier ; 5, Qui post me venit ;

100

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

Detailed examination of the play s chants identifies fifty-six as definitely or probably liturgical: nearly all have cantare directions.32 There is indeed a distinct reluctance to associate liturgical material with any verb but cantare . None of the few exceptions, however, is a major anomaly. The dicere directions in the Hortulanus antiphons (101-103) follow the usage of liturgical drama, on which this part of the play is closely based.33 Sometimes the beginning of a liturgical item has a cantare direction, with subsequent sections introduced by another verb, as in the three sections of the antiphon Nemo te condempnavit, mulier? (28-30) : Tunc Iesus respiciens mulierem cantet antiphonam Nemo te condempnavit

32

33

19, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis ; 28, Nemo te condempnavit ; 44 and 45, Domine, si hic fuisses . Chants definitely identifiable as antiphons: 9, Baptiza me, Iohannis ; 12, Baptizat miles regem ; 18, Vade, Satanas, non temptabis ; 27 Si quis sine peccato ; 34, Mittens hec mulier , 50, Expedit vobis ; 80, Memento mei, Domine ; 91, Tollite portas ; 94, Advenisti ; 97, Media vita . Chants which are probably antiphons: 10, Sine modo sic enim ; 16, Non in solo pane vivit homo ; 20 and 96, Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus ; 35, Amen dico ; 40 and 41, Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur ; 42, A seculo non est ; 43, Lazarus, amicus noster ; 48, Colligerunt ; 49, Quid facimus ; 51, Osanna, benedictus ; 55, Mandatum novum ; 60, Scriptum est enim ; 65, Quem osculatus fuero ; 89, Terra tremuit et quievit ; 95, Venite, benedicti . Explicitly liturgical items: see note 22 above. Distinctive liturgical wording: see note 23. Wording is very probably liturgical: 17, Angelis suis mandavit ; 91, Tollite portas . Dramatic tradition: 20 and 96, Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus ; 22, Venite post me ; 43, Lazarus, amicus noster ; 48, Colligerunt ; 51, Osanna, benedictus ; 55, Mandatum novum ; 60, Scriptum est enim ; 84, In manus tuas ; 89, Terra tremuit et quievit ; 95, Venite, benedicti ; 101, Mulier, quid ploras ; 102, Quia tulerunt Dominum meum ; 103, Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi . Other criteria: 10, Sine modo, sic enim ; 16, Non in solo pane vivit homo ; 35, Amen dico ; 40 and 41, Ille homo, qui Iesus dicitur ; 42, A seculo non est ; 59, Scitis, quid fecerim ; 75, Exivit ergo Iesus . 101, Tunc Iesus [ ] dicat [ ] Mulier, quid ploras [ ]; 102, Respondet Maria Quia tulerunt Dominum meum ; 103, et dicat Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi (ll. 1331b-c, 1335a-c, emphasis supplied). Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 191, cf. pp. 98-142.

101

The St Gall Passion Play Et tunc respondet mulier Nemo Dicat iterum Iesus Nec ego te condempno .

(ll. 233a-d; emphasis supplied)

The same applies to the dialogic exchange from the Easter sequence Victimae paschali (106-108).34 52, Gloria, laus , a Palm Sunday processional hymn, has no verb, but arguably the item in the direction repeats the cantando in the immediately preceding chant, and is thus effectively a cantare direction.35 The hymn is also clearly identified by its incipit. Material which is definitely or probably non-liturgical nearly always has a direction other than cantare .36 There are ten exceptions, but only in three, which must be biblical verses, is the cantare direction unexpected;37 in four it probably reflects the relatively rich melodic setting.38 Cantare introduces the unspecified item the soldiers sing on the way to guard the tomb: this may well be the traditional German Wächterlied , which is consistent because cantare is the standard direction in plays for strophic vernacular song.39 If some other chant was intended, then cantare is presumably a non-specific direction for sung material of any kind.

34

35

36

37 38

39

106, Dic nobis Maria ( cantet ); 107, Sepulcrum Christi ( respondet ); 108, Scimus Christum surrexisse (no verb). Occurrant pueri cum palmis cantando Osanna, benedictus et prosternant vestimenta sua. Item Gloria, laus et cetera (ll. 568b-d, emphasis supplied). Dicere : 70, Peccavi tradens sanguinem iustum ; 83, Consumatum est ; 104, Maria . Respondere : 7, Ego vox clamantis ; 39, Neque hic ; 76, Regem non habemus ; 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum ; 92, Quis est iste rex glorie ; 93, Dominus virtutum ipse est rex glorie . Clamare : 74, Ave, rex Iudeorum . No verb: 38, Rabbi, quis peccavit ; 66, Ave, ave rabbi ; 82, Sicio ; 85, Vere . 6, Quis es ; 62, Pater, si possibile est, transeat ; 79, Regem non habemus . 1, 32, two of the eleven instances of the silence-chant; 81, Hely, Hely ; 98, [Quem queritis,] o tremule mulieres . 88, Tunc milites vadant ad sepulcrum cantantes aliquid (l. 1262a); cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 175.

102

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

Six cantare incipits cannot definitely be identified as liturgical, and indeed various considerations suggest that they are not.40 Similarly ambiguous, and again quite possibly not liturgical, is 61, Tristis est , with the direction dicat cantando , unique in the play. All these are discussed in detail in Chapters V to X. Overall, then, there is a relatively tight correlation between the identity of St Gall Passion Play chants and their directions. Mehler s conclusion41 that the play shows a clear opposition of dicere for biblical recitative and cantare for plainsong, including antiphons, is thus confirmed as correct, on the basis of a larger selection of chants examined in greater detail than in Mehler s study. To state it fully and precisely: in the St Gall Passion Play, Vulgate material, presumably as recitative, is associated with dicere , its cognates ( respondere , clamare , orare ), and with verbless directions. With a few exceptions, many of which can be plausibly explained, cantare denotes liturgical chants of all kinds, as well as strophic song. There is thus a distinct maximalist tendency in the use of cantare . It is the almost exclusive direction for antiphons; it introduces non-liturgical items which have a certain melodic complexity, and is even attached to several chants which are almost certainly biblical. The very broad range of reference of cantare , and the clear tendency to use dicere and cognates for biblical material, means that cantare incipits with wording that matches both liturgical and biblical items are prima facie likely to be liturgical. Yet this is not automatically guaranteed: in the case of cantare chants whose liturgical status there may be reason to doubt, other criteria need to be invoked, and this has been done in the following chapters. One of these criteria is who performs the chant in question.

40

41

23, Invenimus Messiam ; 56, Non lavabis ; 57, Si non lavero tibi ; 58, Domine, non tantum pedes ; 67, Tamquam ad latronem ; 69, Solvite templum hoc . Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 196.

103


Persone : The Performers of the Play When the individual chants have been identified as accurately as possible, a distinct and rational pattern emerges in the allocation of items to the different players. This in turn throws further light on problematical chants, in much the same way as the directions do. Twenty-seven individuals or groups sing in the play. A tabulation reveals a clear correlation of the characters and the types of chant they sing. Characters and their chants Jesus (Iesus, Christus) 3 9 10 16 18 19 22 27 28 30 33 34 35 36 39 43 46 54 55 57 59 60 61 62, 64 63

104

Quid mihi et tibi est, mulier Baptiza me, Iohannis Sine modo sic enim Non in solo pane vivit homo Vade, Satanas, non temptabis Dominum Deum tuum adorabis Venite post me Si quis sine peccato Nemo te condempnavit Nec ego te condempno Dimissa sunt Mittet hec mulier Amen dico Fides etenim Neque hic Lazarus, amicus noster Lazare, veni foras Hoc corpus Mandatum novum Si non lavero tibi Scitis, quid fecerim Scriptum est enim Tristis est Pater, si possibile est, transeat Una hora

Antiphon Antiphon Antiphon or biblical recitative Antiphon Antiphon Antiphon Antiphon or communio Antiphon Antiphon Antiphon Responsory verse Antiphon Antiphon Responsory verse Antiphon? Antiphon Communio? Communio Antiphon Biblical recitative? Communio Antiphon Biblical recitative? Biblical recitative Responsory

IV. Cantat 67 73 81 82 83 84 90 91 95 101 104

dicat

Tamquam ad latronem Tu dicis, quia rex sum Hely, Hely Sicio Consumatum est In manus tuas Resurrexi Tollite portas Venite, benedicti Mulier, quid ploras Maria

respondeat Biblical recitative? Biblical recitative? Biblical, special melody Biblical recitative Biblical recitative Short responsory Introit Antiphon Antiphon or introit Antiphon Visitatio chant

Groups Angels (Angeli) (a) Number unspecified 1, 2, 4, 13, 24, 37, 47, 53, 68, 78 Silence-chant 14 Ductus est Iesus in desertum 20 Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus

Special melody Responsory Antiphon or Te Deum

(b) Two angels (Duo angeli) 12 Baptizat miles regem 71 Ingressus Pylatus 75 Exivit ergo Iesus 89 Terra tremuit et quievit

Antiphon Responsory Responsory Antiphon or communio

(c) Single angel (Angelus) 32 Silence-chant 48 Colligerunt 93 Dominus virtutum ipse est rex glorie 98 Quem queritis, o tremule mulieres 100 Non est hic, quem queritis

Special melody Antiphon Psalm-tone Visitatio chant Visitatio chant

Boys (Pueri) 51 Osanna, benedictus 52 Gloria, laus

Antiphon Hymn

Good Souls (Adam cum ceteris) 94 Advenisti 96 Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus

Antiphon Antiphon or Te Deum

105

The St Gall Passion Play Three Maries (Mariae; Maria Magdalena, Maria Iacobi, Maria Salome) Antiphon 97 Media vita 99 Iesum Nazarenum crucifixum Visitatio chant Soldiers (Milites) 74 Ave, rex Iudeorum 88 cantantes aliquid

Biblical recitative Strophic vernacular song

Apostles (Apostoli) 108 Scimus Christum surrexisse

Sequence

Jews (Iudei) 76, 79 Regem non habemus 77 Crucifige, crucifige eum

Biblical recitative? Biblical recitative

Individual characters Mary Magdalene (Maria Magdalena, Maria) 45 Domine, si hic fuisses 97 Media vita 99 Iesum Nazarenum crucifixum 102 Quia tulerunt Dominum meum 103 Domine, si tu sustulisti eum 105 Iesu, nostra redemptio 107 Sepulcrum Christi

Antiphon Antiphon Visitatio chant Antiphon Antiphon Hymn Sequence

Virgin Mary (Maria) 86 Sequatur lamentacio Marie

Unidentified

John the Baptist (Iohannis Baptista, Iohannis) 5 Qui post me venit 7 Ego vox clamantis 8 Ecce agnus Dei

Antiphon Biblical recitative Responsory

Devil, Lucifer (Dyabolus, Lucifer) 15 Si es filius Dei 17 Angelis suis mandavit 92 Quis est iste rex glorie

Responsory verse Responsory Shouted

Peter (Petrus) 23 Invenimus Messiam 38 Rabbi, quis peccavit 56 Non lavabis 58 Domine, non tantum pedes 106 Dic nobis, Maria

Biblical recitative? Biblical recitative? Biblical recitative? Biblical recitative? Sequence

106

IV. Cantat 108

dicat

respondeat

Scimus Christum surrexisse

Sequence

God the Father (Persona abscondita voce Patris) 11 Hic est filius meus dilectus

Antiphon or biblical recitative

Judas (Iudas) 65 Quem osculatus fuero 66 Ave, ave, Rabbi 70 Peccavi tradens sanguinem iustum

Antiphon Biblical recitative Biblical recitative

Blind man (Cecus) 40, 41 Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur 42 A seculo non est

Antiphon? Antiphon?

Messenger (Unus nunciorum) 6 Quis es

Biblical recitative

Andrew (Andreas) 23 Invenimus Messiam 108 Scimus Christum surrexisse

Biblical recitative? Sequence

Adultress (Mulier) 29 Nemo

Antiphon

Martha (Marta) 44 Domine, si hic fuisses

Antiphon

Annas (Annas) 49 Quid facimus

Antiphon

Caiaphas (Cayphas) 50 Expedit vobis

Antiphon

Rufus (Rufus) 69 Solvite templum hoc

Biblical recitative?

Pilate (Pylatus) 72 Tu es rex Iudeorum

Biblical recitative or antiphon

Good Thief (Alter Latro) 80 Memento mei, Domine

Antiphon

Centurion (Centurio) 85 Vere

Biblical

Joseph of Arimathea (Ioseph ab Aremathia) 87 Ecce quomodo moritur iustus

Responsory

Instrumental music 21, 25, 31 Dance music for Mary Magdalene

Stringed instruments?

107


Jesus As would be expected, the centrality of Jesus in the play is reflected in the most extensive, varied and demanding singing part by far. Jesus has thirty-seven incipits, representing thirty-three separate chants. Twenty-five are definitely or probably liturgical: most are office antiphons, but there is a good sprinkling of more complex communiones and introits, and even challenging responsory material: one long responsory (63, Una hora ) and two responsory verses (33, Dimissa sunt ; 36, Fides etenim [alternative chant]). Some of Jesus s material is biblical recitative, but this is clearly not a concession to limited musical ability. Most is found where the Passion play tradition uses biblical text as standard (62, 64, Pater, si possibile est, transeat ; 73, Tu dicis, quia rex sum ; 82, Sicio ; 83, Consumatum est ); the biblical Hely, Hely (81), sung to a special part of the Passion tone, has a melismatic melody more challenging than many an antiphon. Two items which might be responsories are ones where the German dramatic tradition has a distinct tendency to avoid the responsory melodies (61, Tristis est ; 67, Tamquam ad latronem ). The two occasions where it is particularly hard to decide whether biblical or liturgical material was intended are explicable. The exchange between Jesus and Peter at the Mandatum (57, Si non lavero tibi ), may well be recitative because the corresponding liturgical chant Ante diem festum Paschae is one of the most complex in the plainsong repertoire; and the item is arranged as a sung dialogue with Peter (56, Non lavabis ; 58, Domine, non tantum pedes ), whose singing role probably accommodates a not particularly gifted singer (see below). Another exchange between Jesus and Peter provides the second example: 38, Rabbi, quis peccavit and 39, Neque hic look as though they are biblical, not liturgical, material. Jesus was almost certainly played by a clergyman, probably a priest, as is regularly the case in religious drama.42 42

Franz Körndle et al., Liturgische Dramen, geistliche Spiele , in Ludwig Finscher

108

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

Groups of Singers The Angels The angels are the second most important musical figures in the play, marked out by their repertoire as a group of trained singers. They perform the silence-chant eleven times (1, 2, 4, 13, 24, 32, 37, 47, 53, 68, 78) and a number of other items, all liturgical or quasi-liturgical, of a fair degree of difficulty: twenty-one incipits in all, representing nine distinct chants. The directions for certain items prescribe an angel soloist, those for others a duo (see table above). The rest do not specify a group size, so it is unclear whether the play used only two angels, or a larger group.43 Nowhere do the logistics of performance actually demand more than two, and German performance traditions are not well understood. However, the silence-chant probably needed a reasonable volume to silence a large audience44 and it is notable that it is consistently given to the unspecified number of angels, never to the duo, and only once to the soloist at a point where the audience may have been quiet already, and where the function of the chant was probably more sacramental than silencing.45 The conjecture that there may have

43

44 45

(ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Kassel-Stuttgart, 1994- [2nd revised ed.], vol. V, cols 1388-1412, esp. 1389; cf. Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Wien, 1935, vol. I: Abhandlungen, p. 225. Cf. Klaus Wolf, Für eine neue Form der Kommentierung geistlicher Spiele: Die Frankfurter Spiele als Beispiel der Rekonstruktion von Aufführungswirklichkeit , in Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (ed.), Ritual und Inszenierung. Geistliches und weltliches Drama des Mittelalters, Tübingen:, 2004, pp. 3-32, esp. 8-9, on three named priests involved in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Rolf Bergmann, F. Interpretation , in Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978, pp. 217-61, esp. 220, generalizes from the references to duo angeli that there were only two. See Chapter VI, no. 1. Only four directions explicitly give the silence-chant to the unspecified number of

109


been more than two angels in all is thus not entirely unfounded. A larger angelic cohort would allow some angels to double other roles (see Good Souls, below). If there were only two, this would be impossible, but would of course also mean that a reasonably-sized church choir would have provided enough choristers to sing the other roles without doubling. It is also notable that the three difficult responsory items are performed by either the whole chorus (14, Ductus est Jesus in desertum ) or by the duo (71, Ingressus Pylatus ; 75, Exivit ergo Iesus ) whereas most of the soloist s numbers are less demanding (93, Dominus virtutum [ ] ; 98, Quem queritis [ ] ; 100, Non est hic [ ]); but the fact that the soloist performs 48, Colligerunt [pontifices] , classed as an antiphon but musically as complex as a responsory, shows that he too was a highly competent singer. The angels must have been trained church singers, probably of a reasonably important ecclesiastical establishment. Were they adults (clerics or singing-men) or boy choristers? Neither the music they sing, nor the directions, give any clues, and German performance-tradition on this point is not well understood.46 Others Six other groups of singers figure in the play, though the chants assigned to them suggest that they are not all on the same level of musical expertise. There seems to be a division between the three groups who would have needed a certain amount of musical training, and the remaining three whose task was much simpler.

46

angels (1, 2, 4, 24); but the careful indication of solo or duo performance of other angel chants (and once of the silence-chant, no. 32) suggests that the whole chorus normally sang the Silete . Brief summary in Körndle, Liturgische Dramen, geistliche Spiele , col. 1389; cf. Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, p. 193: in English plays angels are sometimes men, sometimes boys.

110

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

The Good Souls The chorus of the Good Souls, including Adam, seem to have had a certain musical ability. They sing the reasonably challenging Advenisti (94), that is the section Advenisti, desiderabilis from the Easter antiphon Cum rex gloriae , the so-called Carmen triumphale . Less difficult is 96, Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus , which is probably either an office antiphon or a section from the Te Deum, sung on the Good Souls arrival in Heaven. Since the angel chorus also sing Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus earlier on in the play (20), the possibility that the Good Souls are a subset of the angels suggests itself. And indeed this is logistically possible, since the entire group of angels is not involved in the action at this point: the duo has sung 89, Terra tremuit et quievit just before the Resurrection (ll. 1262b-c), then a single angel has conducted the risen Christ to Hell (ll. 1262e-f, 1270a-b). The full angel choir makes its final appearance several hundred lines earlier, to sing the last silence-chant of the play (78, l. 979c); thereafter only the duo (89) or the single angel (93, 98, 100) appear, so that there would have been ample time for some of the angels to change costume and make-up to double as Good Souls.47 If there were only two angels in toto, these arrangements would have been unfeasible, but also unnecessary. The Boys (Pueri) The group of boys ( Pueri ), who have an important but not extensive musical part, must also have been trained church musicians. During Jesus s entry into Jerusalem they sing two chants, one a familiar hymn from the Palm Sunday liturgical procession (51, Gloria, laus ) and the other (52 Osanna, benedictus ), probably an antiphon from the same rite.

47

Angels often wore gold face make-up: e.g. Rastall, The Heaven Singing, p. 191.

111


The Maries The three Maries are another group who cannot have been lacking in musical ability: they not only perform their part in the Visitatio sepulchri (99, Jesum Nazarenum crucifixum ), but process to the empty tomb singing the long, melismatic antiphon Media vita in morte sumus (97). One of them is of course Mary Magdalene, who, as shown below, must have been played by a singer of no little competence. The performance-tradition of the earlier German Passion plays is not at all clear as regards the casting of female singing roles, but the Maries may well have been played by male actors, possibly by boys.48 This in turn raises the possibility that the Maries were doubled by the Pueri , or could have been if required. The second set of three groups look to have been much less expert musicians. The Soldiers The unspecified number of soldiers who guard Jesus s tomb have only two simple items: 74, Ave, rex Iudeorum (biblical recitative) and the 48

The earlier view that women were excluded from performance of German religious drama (e.g. Wilhelm Breuer, Zur Aufführungspraxis vorreformatorischer Fronleichnamsspiele in Deutschland , Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 94 [1975], Sonderheft: Mittelalterliches deutsches Drama, pp. 50-71, esp. 69) has been relativized by recent scholarship (e.g. Ursula Hennig, Die Beteiligung von Frauen als Darstellerinnen an lateinischen Osterfeiern , in Carola L. Gottzmann & Herbert Kolb (eds.), Geist und Zeit: Wirkungen des Mittelalters in Literatur und Sprache. Festschrift für Roswitha Wisniewski zu ihrem 65. Geburtstag, Frankfurt am Main, 1991, pp. 211-27; and Barbara Thoran, Frauenrollen und Rolle der Frauen in der Geschichte der deutschsprachigen Passionsspiele , in Michael Henker (ed.), Hört, sehet, weint und liebt : Passionsspiele im alpenländischen Raum. Katalogbuch zur Ausstellung im Ammergauer Haus, Oberammergau, 28. Mai bis 30. September 1990, München, 1990 (Veröffentlichungen zur bayerischen Geschichte und Kultur, 20), pp. 113-19). Yet certain female roles including the Maries were still reserved to men or boys in some plays of the sixteenth century, well after women had definitely begun acting in German drama. See Thoran, Frauenrollen , cited by Körndle, Liturgische Dramen, geistliche Spiele , col. 1389.

112

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

unidentified chant they sing as they march off to the tomb (88), which was very likely the Wächterlied , a simple strophic vernacular song. The Apostles The Apostles have only one chant, the brief section Scimus Christum surrexisse (108) from the sequence Victimae paschali , which was both familiar and melodically undemanding. Of all the Apostles, only Peter and Andrew are expected to sing anything else in the play, and even they are evidently of modest musical ability (see below). The Jews The group of Jews who sing three items during Jesus s trial seem to have been given very simple material indeed. The repeated Regem non habemus [nisi Caesarem] (76, 79) and 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum are both short and almost certainly set to easy recitative formulae. Single Characters The many other characters who sing in the course of the play show a similar range of musical abilities. As with the groups, there is a marked difference between the few who clearly needed to be performers of some ability and the majority who did not. Mary Magdalene Dominating the cast of soloists (other than Jesus) in terms of the number of items, but more especially of their difficulty, is Mary Magdalene. All her seven chants are liturgical melodies. None, perhaps, is of the first order of complexity; yet the role as a whole demands a singer of confidence and some presence. The solo performance of the hymn Iesu, nostra redemptio (105) and the lengthy, melismatic antiphon Media vita in morte sumus (97), even though shared with the other Maries, would have been challenging, as would the Hortulanus antiphons in the important climactic scene with the risen Jesus (102, 103). 113


Mary also has to dance lasciviously three times (21, 25, 31). The musical demands made on Mary reflect her importance in the action and the theology of the play, not only in her classic role in the Hortulanus sequence of the Easter play, but also in the numerous episodes depicting her sinful life and the stages of her conversion; these are developed particularly strongly in the St Gall Passion Play, which gives them a striking, quasi-sacramental dignity. Like the other two Maries, Mary Magdalene may well have been played by a man or boy chorister. There is an interesting set of five or possibly six figures whose singing roles are small but involve musically demanding items. The Virgin Mary Though by no means an extensive speaking part, and given nothing at all to sing for most of the play, Mary performs the Lamentacio Marie (86) after Jesus s death. The text and melody of this are entirely unspecified; yet the solo performance of even such standard items as Planctus ante nescia or Flete, fideles animae surely demands a trained singer, again possibly a man or boy. Joseph of Arimathea Joseph also has a small part; but while burying Jesus he sings the long and melodically elaborate responsory Ecce quomodo moritur iustus (87), scarcely a chant for an amateur. Annas, Caiaphas It looks as though Annas and Caiaphas belong to this group of performers: their items, 49, Quid facimus , and 50, Expedit vobis , are very likely to be sections of the difficult antiphon Collegerunt pontifices .

114

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

God the Father He too sings only once: 11, Hic est filius meus dilectus . It is uncertain whether this is liturgical chant or recitative; if the former, it may have been a chant of some complexity. Pilate It is not clear whether Pilate belongs to this group or not; the evidence of his single chant suggests not; but this cannot be certain (72, Tu es rex Iudeorum ; see Chapter VIII). It is interesting that, if necessary, at least two of these parts could have been doubled by singers from one of the groups. Since God the Father remains unseen, he could have been one of the angel chorus, assuming they numbered more than two. In the baptism scene, the antiphon Baptizat miles regem (12) which accompanies the baptism (ll. 111ad) is sung by the angelic duo. Joseph s appearance is short, and late in the play (ll. 1198a-1230c), and the logistics which would allow the chorus of Good Souls to be sung by some of the angels (see above) would also permit one of the angels to take Joseph s part. Mary might have been harder to double, though it is possible that the actor who played her brief non-singing role early in the play (ll. 0a-43, esp. ll. 20a-28) was different from the one who played her singing role much later (ll. 775b-1183a) and who might have been one of the choirboys. Other schemes of doubling are possible. The actor playing John the Baptist, for example, had finished his part by l. 117, and could have sung Annas or Caiaphas. Various other combinations can be imagined, but this is necessarily speculative. John the Baptist Another figure who plays a small but extremely important part in the action is John the Baptist. Jesus s baptism is the crucial initiatory action in the play, and as such is articulated in fairly elaborate chant. 115


Two of John s items are liturgical, and one is a responsory (8, Ecce agnus Dei ). The Devil Though the world of Hell and the Devil is often associated with cacophony,49 the St Gall Passion Play Devil does seem to be conceived as a singing role of some difficulty. Two of his chants may be reponsories: 15, Si es filius Dei and 17, Angelis suis mandavit ; though it is possible that his sections were sung to a simple tone. The rest of the singing roles seem to demand much less in the way of musical competence. Peter Interestingly, Peter, though an important speaking part, has a musical role that seems tailored to an actor of modest musical ability. At six items it is quite extensive, but the only definitely liturgical melodies, 106, Dic nobis, Maria and 108, Scimus Christum surrexisse , are both merely short extracts from the simple, well-known sequence Victimae paschali . All of Peter s other chants (23, 38, 56, 58) are probably biblical. Indeed, despite his dramatic and theological importance, he is scarcely in the first division of the soloists. The Other Individual Roles The remaining ten or eleven individual singing roles are very modest both in extent and in difficulty. Two, Judas and the blind man ( Cecus ), are slightly more demanding. Judas has three items, but only one seems to be liturgical (65, Quem osculatus fuero , an easy antiphon). The other two are the briefest and simplest of recitative lines. The Blind Man s part is if anything slightly more demanding: he sings

49

E.g. Rastall, The Heaven Singing, p. 208.

116

IV. Cantat

dicat

respondeat

two chants which are probably antiphons, though again neither is particularly long or demanding. The remaining eight or nine (Messenger, Andrew, Adultress, Martha, Rufus, Good Thief, Centurion, possibly Pilate, and God the Father), are for the most part given simple biblical recitative; the few liturgical chants involved are short and relatively easy antiphons or extracts from antiphons.50 Most sing only one item; Andrew sings two, but neither is a solo (23, Invenimus Messiam , probably biblical recitative, together with Peter; 108, Scimus Christum surrexisse , together with the rest of the Apostles), so that this actor does not need to be capable of solo performance at all. Conclusions Understanding the nature and distribution of chants in the St Gall Passion Play allows us to build up quite a detailed picture of the sort of musical resources necessary to stage the play. They were considerable, though not excessively ambitious. As well as some instrumentalists, there were possibly just two groups of trained church singers, perhaps one of men and one of boys, perhaps both of boys, who provided the four choruses of Angels, Good Souls, Pueri and Maries. There were two accomplished soloists singing extensive parts (Jesus and Mary Magdalene). There were a maximum of six others who had to be competent but sang only one item (Virgin Mary, Joseph of Arimathea, Annas, Caiaphas, possibly Pilate and God the Father); these could have been doubled, some perhaps by members of the trained choruses. There were two others, John the Baptist and the Devil, who did not need quite the same level of expertise. All the remaining group and individual parts, even the extensive but simple role of Peter, could easily be taught to singers of very moderate ability. 50

Andrew: 108, Scimus Christum surrexisse (sequence). Mulier: 29, Nemo (easy antiphon). Martha: 44, Domine, si hic fuisses (easy antiphon). Good Thief: 80, Memento mei, Domine (easy antiphon).

117


This is exactly the profile which Dreimüller deduces for the Alsfelder Passionsspiel: einige tüchtige Gesangssolisten für die wichtigsten Hauptrollen , and some weniger geschulte stimmbegabte Darsteller for the rest.51 And as with Alsfeld, all this suggests the collaboration of an ecclesiastical establishment of some kind, of a reasonable size and with clerics and choristers who could cope with some of the more elaborate office chants, notably the matins responsories, by no means familiar to most of the secular clergy. In the case of Alsfeld, Dreimüller surmises that by the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century, only monks would have known this repertoire.52 In the early fourteenth century it was probably less exclusively monastic; the resources of a cathedral or collegiate church might well have been sufficient, as in Frankfurt, where the clergy of Sankt Bartholomäus were responsible for the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle.53 This in turn suggests that the St Gall Passion Play was produced in a centre which had such an establishment. What this implies for the localization of the play is explored in the next chapter.

51 52 53

Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. I, p. 225. Ibid. Wolf, Für eine neue Form der Kommentierung geistlicher Spiele , pp. 15-19, 67; cf. ibid., p. 5, conjecturing the involvement of the Dean, Pfarrer and curates, Scholaster, choirmaster and schoolboys of the Bartholomäusstift.

118

A note on the transcription and editing of text and notation

xcept where otherwise stated, the St Gall Passion Play text is cited from the edition by Rudolf Schützeichel,1 but all proper names have been capitalized, and mistakes in the directions, both in the manuscript and in Schützeichel s edition, have been corrected. Such mistakes are always noted and discussed. Liturgical chants have been transcribed, usually from from the books in Frankfurt, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, as detailed in Chapter III: Ms. lat. qu. 48 (antiphonal, pars hiemalis); Ms. Barth. 94 (antiphonal, pars aestivalis); Ms. lat. qu. 44 (gradual). When the relevant chant is not included or adequately given there, other books have been used; the precise source of all musical examples is cited. For reasons of economy of space I have often given the music not of entire chants, but only of those sections which would have been sung in the play. The approach to transcribing and editing chants is similar to that of Renate Amstutz in her Ludus de decem virginibus,2 though my editorial touch is somewhat lighter. The original music is transcribed onto a modern five-line stave. The variable cleffing of the manuscripts, which can place F and C on any convenient line of the stave, is regularized as the modern treble (G) clef. The pitch is usually that of the original (written an octave higher than performance pitch), but in a 1

2

Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978. Renate Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus: Recovery of the Sung Liturgical Core of the Thuringian Zehnjungfrauenspiel , Toronto, 2002 (Studies and Texts, 140), pp. 319-23.


few cases the music has been transposed, usually to allow it to fit more satisfactorily onto the stave, but occasionally for other reasons; this may involve the use of modern key-signatures. All transpositions are noted and explained. The original notation is represented by modern headless notes which have no intrinsic time-value; they are grouped into the neumes of the original by slurs, and for the sake of clarity and economy of space these note-groups are written more closely together than in modern mensural notation. The only medieval note-form which is imitated is the liquescent neume, indicating a smooth pitch-glide on one syllable;3 it is represented by a pair of slurred notes, the second smaller than the first. Modern notation inevitably loses some performance nuances of the original neumes; I have accepted this for the sake of the user-friendliness of familiar present-day forms.4 Readers in search of a higher degree of authenticity must, I am afraid, consult original liturgical sources when they will find that the precise neumes used for the same passage of the same chant vary, often quite considerably, between different manuscripts. This is not a specialized musicological study. The sources used are not of course the original music of the St Gall Passion Play but simply a convenient repertoire of the chants of the play; and they have not been subjected to systematic comparative analysis. In editing the 3

4

Johns Stevens, Words and Music in the Middle Ages: Song, Narrative, Dance and Drama, 1050-1350, Cambridge, 1986, p. 507. E.g. Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, pp. 8-9; idem, Überlegungen zur Edition von Melodien in geistlichen Spielen an Beispielen aus dem Sterzinger Spielarchiv , in Anton Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur: Beiträge der Bamberger Tagung Methoden und Probleme der Edition mittelalterlicher deutscher Texte , Göppingen, 1994 (Litterae, 117), pp. 255-59, esp. 256-57; David Hiley, Western Plainchant: A Handbook, Oxford, 1993, p. 400. Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, pp. 319-20, similarly accepts the limitations of modern notation.

120

Note on Transcription and Editing

musical examples, therefore, I have not aimed at, or tried to give the impression of achieving, a greater degree of accuracy than the sources permit. Additional editorial signs have been been kept to an absolute minimum: the very occasional vertical stroke to separate sections of certain chants; the flat sign to mark the flattened b, often merely implicit in the manuscripts. Mistakes and ambiguities in the manuscripts, in cleffing, modality, notes or words, have in most cases been silently corrected, resolved, or interpreted after careful comparison with analogous sources of the chant concerned. Ambiguous word underlay has been plausibly reconstructed, also with reference to analogues, and also without discussion. The play s incipits spell Latin in a distinctively fourteenth-century way. Given, however, that the reconstruction of the play s melodies has involved numerous sources, whose Latin spelling is far from uniform, I have given complete chants in the standardized orthography of modern Roman liturgical books, the CANTUS database and the Corpus antiphonalium officii.5 The incipits are of course cited using the St Gall Ms 919 manuscript spelling. Reconstructing chants sung to the Passion tone is problematic. No Mainz, Worms or Speyer passionals are extant from the fourteenth, or even the fifteenth century (see Chapter III and the bibliography of liturgical sources). In the late nineteenth century a tone which goes back to medieval German models was adopted as the official Roman Passion tone;6 yet it would be historically questionable simply to transcribe extracts from the current Officium maioris hebdomadae. Most 5

6

See: CANTUS. A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant (URL: http://publish.uwo. ca/~cantus) and René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Series maior, Fontes, 7-12). Karlheinz Schlager, Passion A. Die einstimmige Passion , in Ludwig Finscher (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Kassel-Stuttgart, 1994- [2nd revised ed.], vol. VII, cols. 1452-56, esp. 1455. The tone is found, e.g. in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 8814, a sixteenth-century Franciscan passional from Munich, and resembles German tones of the fourteenth century.

121


other medieval German plays which notate Passion tone settings are late; many are from areas far from the St Gall Passion Play s home, and they realize the tone in a variety of slightly different ways, especially in their choice of final cadences. Given the St Gall Passion Play s Frankfurt connections and its proximity to the Hessian tradition in general, I have usually reconstructed Passion tone settings on the basis of the formulae used in the Alsfelder Passionsspiel, the only Hessian play to notate such settings. These are similar to those found in several fifteenth-century German passionals,7 and given liturgical conservatism will probably not have differed much from those of the fourteenth century. The footnotes also refer to the corresponding, often very similar, versions in the Officium maioris hebdomadae. Occasionally there were convincing reasons for citing Passion-tone settings of some items from other plays; these of course are always noted. The chant reconstructions in Hartl s edition of the St Gall Passion Play are nearly always wrong,8 and with very few exceptions are ignored in this study.

7

8

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6107b, Mulier, ecce filius tuus ; 6111b, Ecce mater tua ; 6159b-e, Hely, Hely [...] ; 6253b, Sicio ; 6267d, Consumatum est ; 6463c, Vere filius dei erat iste . Transcribed by Horst Brunner in Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, 3 vols., Tübingen, 1996-2002, vol. II: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, pp. 711, 717, 733, 735, and 757. Similarities with German Passion tone in such sources as Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, St. Blasien 15 (Antiphonal, St. Blasien), fols. 54-55v; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 7461 (Passional, Indersdorf); St. Florian, Stiftsbibliothek, XI, 150 (St. Florian). See the conspectus of these and other manuscripts in Bruno Stäblein, Passion. A. Die einstimmige lateinische Passion , in Friedrich Blume (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 16 vols., Kassel, 1949-79, vol. X, cols. 886-98, esp. 892-94. See Chapter I, note 17.

122

Chapter V

Localizing the Play

inguistic localization of the St Gall Passion Play has distinct possibilities, but also, as Chapter I explains, definite limitations: the area in which it situates the play is still quite sizeable. Textual comparison of the kind that Wolf undertakes shows connections between the St Gall Passion Play and the Frankfurt dramatic tradition; yet our play is not simply a clone of a Frankfurt play. It is the result of developments which took place somewhere other than Frankfurt. But where? Neither dialectology nor textual scholarship, then, offers a definitive localization. Can a liturgical approach offer anything more? Expectations must not be unrealistically high. As noted in Chapter III, literary scholars, Pflanz included, tend to overestimate the degree to which chants are distinctive of local uses. The St Gall Passion Play chants are in fact nearly all found in all three dioceses of Mainz, Worms and Speyer, and indeed of a great many German dioceses. A small number, however, seem to offer some localization evidence. The picture of the play s provenance they yield is not absolutely consistent; a few slightly contradictory details remain, though nothing, as will be argued, that cannot be satisfactorily resolved, especially if the relative evidential weight of individual items is borne in mind, and localization is not attempted on Pflanz s simplistic numerical basis. Two of the play s chants seem to be unknown in all three diocesan liturgies. In the first of these Jesus triumphantly rebuts the last temptation by the Devil in the wilderness:

The St Gall Passion Play 19 Respondens Iesus cantet antiphonam Dominum Deum tuum adorabis et dicat: Daz ist der heilge[n] scrifte gebot. Gleube aleine an einen Got, vnd but ime dinst alleine, so wirt din lon nit cleine.

(ll. 147a-51)

The direction clearly calls the chant, found only in the St Gall Passion Play, an antiphon.1 Bergmann treats this item very vaguely,2 but Pflanz is undoubtedly correct in identifying this mode 8 antiphon for the First Sunday in Lent:3, 4

Yet this relatively common chant seems not to have been used in any of the three relevant dioceses. Apparently more widespread in southern German dioceses, it is certainly absent from Worms and 1

2

3

4

Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940), no. 161. Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, München, 1972 (Münstersche MittelalterSchriften, 14), p. 209. Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205), p. 62. René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Series maior, Fontes, 7-12), no. 2397. Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936 [numerous reprints], p. 538; cf. Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934, p. 344.

124

V. Localizing the Play

Speyer sources.5 Most of the Mainz breviaries in which Pflanz finds it are Carthusian, and one fifteenth-century Carmelite book contains it,6 but in diocesan books the antiphon seems to be unknown, and is not listed by Reifenberg as part of the Mainz office. The second example is Christ s last Word from the Cross: 84 et cantet In manus tuas et cetera et dicat: Vatter, ez si dir irkant, mine sele geben ich in din hant. Tunc inclinato capite emittet spiritum

(ll. 1174a-76a)

There are three verbally distinctive versions of Jesus s last words: (i) Luke 23:46, Pater, in manus tuas commendo spiritum meum ; (ii) Psalm 29(30):6, the psalm-verse on which Luke is based: In manus tuas commendo spiritum meum: redemisti me, Domine Deus veritatis ; and (iii) the liturgical version, a short responsory for Sunday compline throughout the year: In manus tuas, Domine, commendo spiritum meum. Redemisti nos, Domine Deus veritatis.7

The play s incipit matches only the psalm and the responsory. Bergmann does not identify the liturgical form used here.8 In his cursory treatment, Pflanz correctly rejects Luke 23:46, suggested by

5

6

7

8

CANTUS: A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant. URL: http://publish.uwo.ca/ ~cantus: twenty-eight sources, fifteen from Austria, Switzerland and southern Germany (Bamberg, Reichenau, Weingarten). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 62, note 1, quoting three Carthusian breviaries: Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. I 439 (twelfth-thirteenth century), I 438 (fourteenth century), I 365 (fifteenth century); plus I 433 (dating and provenance uncertain). Also Mainz, Dom- und Diözesanmuseum, Cod. B, fol. 21 (Carmelite antiphonal, Mainz, 1430s). Liber usualis, pp. 269-70 (not in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium). Redemisti me in some manuscripts. Bergmann, Studien, p. 229.

125


Hartl;9 but he seems unaware of the existence of the psalm. Schuler characteristiccally fails to differentiate between the sources used in the single plays; he too does not consider the psalm as a possible source.10 Mehler suggests the responsory.11 The seventeen other plays in which this Word from the Cross is found show a definite consensus. The Lucan verse is rare (Heidelberg, Wolfenbütteler Marienklage), as is the Psalm version (Bordesholm, [Kleines] Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel).12 The distinctive responsory wording is found in the remaining thirteen, the vast majority.13 Apart from the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, they use only the first part, ending at meum .14 But this still leaves a problem. This responsory was not 9

10

11

12

13

14

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 30-31, 98. Eduard Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Halle an der Saale, 1952 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41), ll. 1362-63. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 297, lists both Luke 23:46 and the responsory, which he cites only from the feast of the Appearance of the Blessed Virgin at Lourdes (11 February), introduced only in the late nineteenth century (cf. William J. McDonald et al., New Catholic Encyclopedia, New York [etc.], 1967-, vol. VIII, p. 1032). Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), p. 190. Luke 23:46, Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 5565a-d; Wolfenbütteler Marienklage, l. 159a (l. 155a has only the incipit in manus ). Psalm 29(30):6, Bordesholmer Marienklage, fol. 16v, no. XIV, ll. 594a-b and Anhang, p. 10, in manus tuas commendo spiritum meum , transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 177; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, fol. 4v: in manus t[uas] commendo spiritum m[eum] , not neumed (pl. 7, l. 32). In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6271a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2153a-b; Breslauer Marienklage, ll. 50a-b; Brixener Passionsspiel, ll. 2799-2800; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 6637a-c; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 236; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 4148a-b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2119a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 2391a-b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1087a-88; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1072 ( domine missing); Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 2158a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, fol. 25 (empty stave); Docens Marienklage, ll. 138a-b; Rabers Passion, ll. 1200a-b. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 236: In manus tuas domine commendo spiritum meum.

126


originally part of compline.15 Even by the later Middle Ages it had established itself only in some local liturgies; in the fourteenth century it seems to have been unknown in Mainz, Worms and Speyer.16 This may explain why some plays have the responsory wording, but not set to the proper melody. Of the thirteen, only seven have notation: three have a simple mode 4 or 6 setting similar, though not identical, to the common responsory melody in the modern Roman use,17 but four have a setting with a cadence typical of the Passion tone.18 The

15

16

17

18

redemisti domine deus veritas (wrongly identified as the Psalm wording by Bergmann, Studien, p. 229). Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 4148a-b; manuscript ends at domine ; Breslauer Marienklage, ll. 50a-b, manuscript ends at commendo . Ludwig Eisenhofer, Handbuch der katholischen Liturgik, 2 vols., Freiburg, 193233), vol. II, pp. 550-51; Joseph Pascher, Das Stundengebet der römischen Kirche, München, 1954, pp. 246-47. Hermann Reifenberg, Stundengebet und Breviere im Bistum Mainz seit der romanischen Epoche, Münster, 1964 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 40), p. 68, confirms its absence from Mainz; the responsory is missing in all Worms and Speyer sources consulted; even the late Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. g5vb, has compline in the older form with only the versicle Custodi nos, Domine, ut pupillam oculi but no short responsory. Cf. CANTUS: only four Austrian sources and one fifteenth-century Mainz Carmelite antiphonal. Common Roman melody: Liber usualis, p. 269; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, fol. 67v; cf. Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. I: Abhandlungen, p. 97; vol. II: Das musikalische Szenarium des Alsfelder Passionsspiels, p. 78; vol. III: Die Melodien des Alsfelder Passionsspiels. Übertragungen der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels, Beilage 45, p. 59; transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 177 and identically in Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, II, ll. 6271a-b; Egerer Passionsspiel, transcribed by Schuler, vol. II, p. 177: almost identical to Alsfeld, written a fourth higher; Rabers Passion. Line-numbers as in note 13. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. I, p. 97, erroneously compares the Alsfeld melody to the Advent tone of the responsory, a much more complicated, decorated melody (Liber usualis, p. 270). Bordesholmer Marienklage (line-numbers as in note 12); Admonter Passionsspiel (cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 190, note 234); Bozner Passionsspiel

127


cantet direction is not absolute proof that the St Gall Passion Play used the responsory melody, as Mehler seems to assume;19 nos 6, 23, 62 and 69 are apparently recitative items with a cantare direction. The play, then, could have used the responsory or the Passion tone: 20

If the chant was the short responsory, then it is unclear how a chant foreign to all the relevant diocesan liturgies made its way into this play. Neither possible melody has any clear implications for the localization of the play. A third chant seems to be part only of the Mainz liturgy. Jesus counters the Devil s second temptation, to throw himself off the roof of the Temple and be caught by angels: 18 Respondens Iesus cantet Vade, Satanas, non temptabis et dicat: Virfluchter armer Sathan, von disen reden saltu lan. Die heilge schrift daz saget wol daz nieman Got virsuchen sol.

19 20

(ll. 139a-43)

1495, A, B (cf. Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, pp. 162, 169); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; line-numbers as in note 13. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 190. [i]: responsory, Liber usualis, pp. 269-70. [ii]: Luke 23:46, Passion tone: cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ et octavæ Paschæ [ ] cum cantu juxta ordinem Breviarii, Missalis et Pontificalis Romani. Editio typica Vaticana, Roma, 1922, p. 269.

128


Once again, liturgical type is not specified. Parallels are found only in Alsfeld and Heidelberg, both seemingly biblical text.21 But the St Gall Passion Play has both a cantet direction, and wording which suggests that of a mode 1 antiphon for the first Sunday in Lent: 22

As Bergmann notes, this distinctively liturgical wording conflates two biblical verses (Matthew 4:10 and 4:7),23 and Pflanz is probably right in identifying the antiphon.24 Schuler s comments (no. 626) are misleading. His Leittext is Matthew 4:10: a wording found only in Heidelberg, not in Alsfeld or the St Gall Passion Play, nor in the antiphon, which he also cites.25

21

22

23

24 25

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1185a-b: Vade sathanas et solum uni deo servies , interpreted by Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 23, as an adaptation of Matthew 4:10. Cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 176; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 282a-c: Matthew 4:7; ll. 298a-c: Matthew 4:10. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5303. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, 105v. Matthew 4:10, Vade Satanas: Scriptum est enim: Dominum, Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies . Matthew 4:7, Ait illi Jesus: Rursum scriptum est: Non tentabis Dominum Deum tuum. See Bergmann, Studien, pp. 209-10. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 14, 60-62. Schuler s source: Hartker antiphonal, St Gall, 390, 391 (Pal. mus., II/1, facsimile p. 146). Wording of Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1185a-b and Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 282a-c, 298a-c: see note 16.

129


This antiphon is widespread.26 However, though found in Mainz, it is apparently unknown in Speyer or Worms.27 No. 19 is definitely an antiphon, and even if not a standard Mainz diocesan item, its presence in Mainz Carthusian books at least shows it was known within the diocese. On the evidence of these two chants, the St Gall Passion Play might seem to belong to Mainz rather than to Speyer or Worms. Another set of chants, however, seems to point in a slightly different direction; though the complex problems they present make them extremely difficult to interpret. Whilst Jesus washes his disciples feet, Peter and he sing the following exchange: 56, 57, 58 [56] Tunc precingens se linteo et apprehensa pelvi cum aqua lavet pedes singulorum et cum pervenerit ad Petrum cantet Petrus Non lavabis et dicat: Herre, meister, ez sal nit sin, Daz du waschest die vuze min. [57] Respondens Iesus cantet Si non lavero tibi et dicat: Lezest du dir die vuze nit waschen hie zu dirre zit, so inhast du sicherlich kein deil an mime rich. [58] Respondens Petrus cantet Domine, non tantum pedes et dicat: Herre, die rede sal nit sin. Wasche nit alleine die vuze min.

26

27

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium: ten out of twelve base-manuscripts; CANTUS: thirty-three sources from all over Europe, fifteen from Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Switzerland. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 105v; Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 187v; Barth. 160, fol. 316; Barth. 161, fol. 291; many other Mainz sources cited in Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 61, notes 1 and 2. Missing from Worms and Speyer sources.

130

V. Localizing the Play Wasche mir daz heubet vnd auch die hant, e ich so dure worde gepant.

(ll. 648a-58)

If this is liturgical text, as the cantet directions suggest, and as Schuler, Bergmann and Pflanz assume,28 then it is from a Mandatum antiphon, Ante diem festum Paschae : Ante diem festum Paschae, sciens Jesus quia eius hora venit ut transeat ex hoc mundo ad Patrem, et cena facta, surrexit, linteo praecinxit se, misit aquam in pelvim, coepit lavare pedes discipulorum. Venit ad Petrum. Dicit ei Simon: Non lavabis mihi pedes in aeternum. Respondit Jesus: Si non lavero tibi, non habebis partem mecum. Domine, non tantum pedes meos, sed et manus et caput.29

Ante diem festum Paschae , not found in the Roman use, was widespread in Britain, France and elsewhere; because it was invariably followed by the antiphon Venit ad Petrum , the two were often fused into one.30 Its complex, archaic melody does not conform to modal conventions.31 If this is the intended chant, then it is a localization crux, for the Mandatum antiphons show regional variation.32 But as part, strictly 28

29

30

31

32

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 26, Bergmann, Studien, pp. 221 and 224, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 123-27. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1431. Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, cira (emphasis supplied). The wording Domine, non tantum pedes [meos] is found in numerous medieval sources, including Mainz and Speyer books, rather than the Corpus antiphonalium standard wording Domine, non solum pedes tantum : e.g. British Library, Harl. 2942, fol. 48; Manchester, John Rylands Library, lat. 24, fol. 90; Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 100, fol. 24; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, LXXXv (= sig. k viiiv) (all these with pedes meos ). Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118, fols. 26v-28 ( Domine, non tantum pedes sed et ). Manfred F. Bukofzer, Caput: A Liturgico-Musical Study , in Manfred F. Bukofzer, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Music, London, 1951, pp. 217-310, esp. 226-56. Venit ad Petrum has no separate Corpus antiphonalium number. Often with finalis G (nominally mode 7 or 8), but also frequently E (nominally mode 3 or 4); Bukofzer, Caput , pp. 254-56. Of the twelve CANTUS sources whose modes are known, six are in mode 3/4, three in mode 7/8, three in mode 1. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. I, nos. 72c, 147; vol. II, nos. 72e, 147b;

131


speaking, of neither mass nor office, they are not routinely included in graduals, missals, antiphonals or breviaries.33 Their home is in the ritual; but manuscript rituals are not plentiful, and by no means all contain them, so it is much harder to establish a clear and stable tradition for Mandatum antiphons than for mass and office chants.34 Ante diem festum Paschae combined with Venit ad Petrum is definitely attested in Mainz and Speyer.35 But the only medieval source of the Worms Mandatum is a fifteenth-century manuscript manual from the Augustinian nunnery in Worms, whose sequence of chants diverges considerably from that of Mainz and Speyer. It does not include Ante diem festum Paschae , but only the shorter, melodically simpler and differently worded Domine, tu mihi lavas pedes? 36

33

34

35

36

Bergmann, Studien, p. 221 and note 1795; Thomas Schäfer, Die Fußwaschung im monastischen Brauchtum und in der lateinischen Liturgie: Liturgiegeschichtliche Untersuchung, Beuron, 1956 (Texte und Arbeiten der Erzabtei Beuron, I, 47), passim; Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church, 2 vols., Oxford, 1933, vol. I, pp. 98-99. Thus Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. II, no. 72e; vol. III, p. 51, note 1, cites only the Hartker Antiphonal (St Gall, 390/391) as a source of Ante diem festum Paschae ; CANTUS cites only four antiphonals, three from Germany or Austria; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 123, note 1, cites only one (Cologne) missal. Rituals without Mandatum liturgy include: Mainz ritual, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 488; Mainz missal and ritual, Frankfurt, Barth. 107 (Cena Domini (fols. 14-15) begins after pedilavium); Agenda ecclesie wormaciensis, 1500-10, sig. g iiiir-v. Mainz breviary, psalter, and liber ordinarius, Kassel, 2o theol. 143, 359ra; Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 61v-62; Mainz processional, Aschaffenburg, ms. perg. 32, fols. 37v-38v; processional (Mainz, St Peter), Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118, fols. 26-28; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fols. cvbcira; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, LXXXv (= sig. k viiiv). Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2393, widely known in the Münster diocese. See Emil Josef Lengeling, Missale Monasteriense, 1300-1900: Katalog, Texte und vergleichende Studien, (eds.) Benedikt Kranemann & Klemens Richter, Münster, 1995 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 76), p. 363. Worms manual, Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1, fol. 53: Domine tu mihi lavas pedes? Respondit Jesus et dixit ei: [Et] si non lavero tibi pedes non habebis partem mecum. V. Domine non tantum pedes sed et manus et caput. Also in Mainz gradual,

132


If this single manual adequately represents the Worms tradition, and if the chant in the St Gall Passion Play definitely is the Mandatum antiphon, then this would be a significant example of an item localizable in Mainz and Speyer, but not in Worms. But the dearth of Worms sources suggests caution. The Mandatum antiphons varied not only between, but also within dioceses, for example Münster and indeed Mainz.37 Ante diem festum Paschae appears in a fifteenth- to sixteenth-century processional from St Peter in Mainz, but not in an earlier directory from the same church, though both contain a seemingly identical, standard Mainz ceremony.38 One Mainz liber ordinarius suggests why: there, Ante diem festum Paschae is sung during the symbolic meal after the liturgical washing of feet.39 Its absence from the St Peter directory, along with the two other meal antiphons, is thus probably because that book restricts itself to the pedilavium proper; the rubrics are not detailed enough to know. If this directory were the only surviving Mainz Mandatum, Ante diem festum Paschae would appear to have been unknown in Mainz. There is thus no guarantee that the practice of the Worms Augustinian nuns in the fifteenth century, as found in this single book, is representative of the whole diocese. More fundamentally, however, there is no guarantee that this is liturgical material at all. This is one of the numerous St Gall Passion Play cantare items where it is not clear whether liturgical or biblical

37

38

39

Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 62v. Münster: Lengeling, Missale Monasteriense, p. 363, note 1079. Mainz: e.g. the fifteenth-century Aschaffenburg processional, Aschaffenburg, Stiftsbibliothek, ms. perg. 32, fols. 33v-38v, differs from the mid-fourteenth-century liber ordinarius, Kassel, 2o theol. 143, fol. 359, and the fifteenth-century Frankfurt gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 60-62v. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118, fols. 24v-29v (processional, St Peter, fifteenthsixteenth century); Hs. 233, fols. XXXIVv-XXXVv (directorium chori, St Peter, fourteenth-fifteenth century). Kassel, 2o theol. 143, fol. 359.

133


text is involved (see Chapter IV). Cantare can introduce biblical text in this play (see nos. 6, 23, 62 and 69), and the brief incipits also perfectly match the Vulgate: Dicit ei Petrus: non lavabis mihi pedes in aeternum. Respondit ei Jesus: Si non lavero te, non habebis partem mecum. Dicit ei Simon Petrus: Domine, non tantum pedes meos, sed et manus, et caput (John 13:8-9 [emphasis supplied]).

Can the dramatic tradition help to decide whether the play used the Bible or the liturgy here? A similar exchange is found in another seven plays, not all listed in Schuler.40 Scholarly opinion is divided. Schuler implies that Ante diem festum Paschae is used in all the plays he lists. However, the only play with notation, Admont, unknown to Schuler, uses the Passion tone, and not the precise liturgical wording but most of these differences would not be evident from short incipits:41

40

41

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 26: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3077g-83b; Brixener Passionsspiel, manuscript, fol. 21. See J.E. Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, Graz, 1897 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Litteratur und Sprache Österreichs und seiner Kronländer, 1), p. 367, ll. 646a-67a; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2073d-83b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3386d3402c. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 184a-201; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 486-88; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 693c-711; Prager Abendmahlspiel, ll. 212a-23. Though included by Schuler, Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 1808a24, contains no Latin antiphons for the washing of feet. Ante diem festum Paschae in Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 941b-c, is a choral, not a dialogic performance. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 184a-201, transposed up a fifth to accommodate the tessitura.

134


Generalizing from Admont, Polheim asserts that recitative was invariably used in this scene in German drama, not antiphons.42 This seems plausible: the Bozner Abendmahlspiel chant is unnotated, but textually similar to Admont, and its dicit direction in a play of this date is likely to mean recitative rather than an antiphon.43 In Alsfeld, where the wording is also unlike that of the antiphon, the direction for Peter s rebuke is alta voce clamando dicit ; the rest is sung sub accentu , to a reciting-tone.44 The resemblance between all the Hessian plays treatment of the episode suggests that they all set the exchange similarly.45 The Prager Abendmahlspiel s directions are mainly dicit 42

43

44

45

Admonter Passionsspiel (Karl Konrad Polheim [ed.], Das Admonter Passionsspiel, 3 vols., München [etc.], 1972-80, vol. III, p. 52-57, esp. 54 and note 73 (critique of Schuler), and p. 57. Traub, Kommentar, p. 80, assumes that the Sterzing plays practice was the same as that of Admont). Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 694c-d, 702a-c, 710a-b: Traub, Kommentar, pp. 80-81, 111. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3077g-h, 3079a-b, 3083a-b; identical in Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 486, 488, 490. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3077g-83b; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2073d-83b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3386d-3402c; conspectus in Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, I, pp. 230-31.

135


cantando , which may point to recitative; the wording is almost identical to Admont.46 Only Brixen clearly uses an antiphon; not however Ante diem festum Paschae , but Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2393.47 So far, the weight of evidence in the German plays is against the use of the antiphon. In the St Gall Passion Play, apart from the cantet direction, only one small detail of Jesus s reply to Peter might point towards a liturgical source. The correct reading of line 650a is si non lauero tibi .48 This is liturgical, not Vulgate wording,49 and it is ironic that Schützeichel, unaware of its possible liturgical background, corrects it to te .50 Yet the small difference between tibi and te cannot bear much weight: it could easily have been produced by scribal error. And tibi is not infallibly liturgical: several plays with what seems to be Vulgate text have si non lavero tibi pedes ;51 and 46 47

48

49

50

51

Prager Abendmahlspiel, ll. 212a-23. Brixener Passionsspiel, manuscript, fol. 21, additions of the later sixteenth century in right-hand margin: Petrus Canit Antiphonam Domine tu michi lauas pedes , [etc.]; Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele, p. 368, ll. 649b-59a. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, p. 138, reproduces Wackernell s misreading of An[tiphonam] as Ante . Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2393: see note 36. See the manuscript of the St Gall Passion Play, Sankt Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, 919, p. 205; cf. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 124-25, correctly rejecting Wolter s te . (See Emil Wolter [ed.], Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977] (Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41), l. 650a.) Si non lavero tibi , the reading of the Vetus Latina version of the Bible, is found in only a few early Vulgate versions: see John Wordsworth & Henry Julian White (eds.), Novum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Latine secundum editionem Sancti Hieronymi, vol. I: Quattuor Evangelia, Oxford, 1889, p. 600; cf. Adolf Jülicher (ed.), Itala: Das Neue Testament in altlateinischer Überlieferung, vol. IV: Johannes-Evangelium, Berlin, 1963, p. 149. Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978, l. 650a and note. Admonter Passionsspiel, l. 192; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 3079b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 488; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 2079b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, l. 3398b.

136


three are Hessian, a tradition with which the St Gall Passion Play has a great deal in common. The German plays, then, contain absolutely no musical evidence, and no clear textual evidence, of the use of Ante diem festum Paschae in the foot-washing dialogue. The only trace of liturgical text (Brixen) is the shorter and simpler than Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2393. There are however textual indications and concrete musical evidence of Passion tone settings. This is hardly surprising, for the closing caput melisma of Ante diem festum Paschae is one of the longest and most florid passages in the plainsong repertoire, and probably too challenging for the player who acted Peter, who in the St Gall Passion Play has a rather undemanding musical role (see Chapter IV). This is no doubt why in one Sterzing play the chorus sings Ante diem festum Paschae but the protagonists in the foot-washing do not sing at all.52 A simplified antiphon melody is found in some liturgical books;53 none seem to be from Mainz, Worms or Speyer, but the existence of a simpler melody there cannot be absolutely ruled out. Nonetheless, it is very far from certain that this exchange was sung to its liturgical melody in the St Gall Passion Play; indeed, the likelihood is that it was not; and of course with this the status of the item as a localization crux vanishes. On his purely textual methods, Pflanz concludes that both Peter s passages came from Ante diem festum Paschae , but Jesus s reply from Domine, tu mihi lavas pedes? 54 A mixture of two melodically and modally different antiphons, without a pressing textual reason, would have been musically improbable.55 52 53 54

55

Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 941a-b. E.g. Moosburger Graduale, fol. 65. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 123-27. See Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 1431 and 2393. Ibid., 1431 is usually in mode 7 or 8 (cf. note 31); 2393 is regularly in mode 5 (CANTUS). For an instance of textual demands forcing the juxtaposition of modally different chants, see Chapter X, nos. 101-03.

137


The labour involved in dealing with this chant is daunting; and whilst many others are a good deal easier to identify, they are often just as inconclusive for localization. All this seems to bear out only too clearly Rastall s concerns about getting nowhere . Fortunately, though, the St Gall Passion Play does present one very strong piece of liturgical localization evidence. After Simon the Leper s banquet (ll. 262-315), the penitent Mary Magdalene wastes precious unguent on anointing Jesus s head. Defending her action, Jesus sings a chant. Here the manuscript offers a choice of item, but the text has proved problematical to decipher.56 None of the play s editors has produced an entirely satisfactory interpretation of this text. Mone reads: Et cantet: mittet haec mulier, vel amen dico, fides enim etc. 57 He has missed out the second et symbol: enim should read et enim . Wolter s version brings a great advance in accuracy: Et cantet: mittet haec mulier , vel amen dico, fides etenim .58 Wolter correctly interprets etenim , and inserts quotation-marks to show the boundaries of what he interprets as two chants. Hartl s very inaccurate Et cantet: Mittet haec mulier, fides enim 59 is a retrograde step in both respects: vel Amen dico and the et of etenim have disappeared; where Wolter had realized that more than one chant was involved, Hartl has produced a single item. Schützeichel s interpretation is accurate but two details call for comment:

56

57

58 59

Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, ll. 305a-c; St Gall , p. 200, l. 46. Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, Karlsruhe, 1846, vol. I, pp. 49-132, l. 297a. Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu, l. 305a. Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, l. 357a.

138

V. Localizing the Play Et cantet Mittet hec mulier vel Amen dico , Fides et enim et cetera

(ll. 305a-05c)

The manuscript mt3 is correctly read as mittet ; but as Pflanz realizes,60 the chant to which it must refer, an antiphon from Palm Sunday matins, in fact begins Mittens : 61

This scribal error needed editorial comment.62 The second, and more important, detail is the dash in the manuscript between am dico and fides 7 em : Schützeichel editorially replaces it with a comma, without, however, commenting on the function either of the original dash or of his replacement. Mone, Wolter and Hartl also use a comma, suggesting that they read the dash as a connecting device; Wolter, indeed, explicitly interprets Amen dico, fides etenim as a single chant: but no such liturgical item exists, as Pflanz observes.63 Neither Pflanz, Bergmann nor Schuler can offer any suggestion as to what this chant might have been.64 Mehler suggests Amen dico vobis, quia vos, qui reliquistis omnia, et secuti estis me, centuplum recipie60 61

62 63 64

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 69. See Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3799. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 140v. Bergmann, Studien, p. 188 and note 1523, fails to recognize the item as liturgical. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 69, note 2. Ibid, pp. 67-69; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, following Mone s defective transcription, lists the item as an addendum to no. 148 ( Dimissa sunt ei peccata multa ; see no. 26); Bergmann, Studien, p. 188 and note 1526, does not mention Amen dico or Fides etenim , or identify Dimissa sunt as liturgical.

139


tis ,65 but this chant relates thematically not to this scene, but to the commissioning of the Apostles, where it is found in the Hessian tradition.66 The suggestion also fails to account for Fides etenim . Yet the editorially suppressed dash provides an important clue. Dashes consistently function in the St Gall Passion Play manuscript not as connectors but as separators: for instance, to divide the two lines of verse dialogue usually written on each line of the page.67 So too here: the dash separates the incipits of two distinct liturgical items, both of which can indeed be identified. The first is almost certainly an antiphon: 65

66

67

Ulrich Mehler, [Review of: Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt (etc.), 1977], Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 91 (1980), pp. 120-24, esp. 122). The chant (see John R. Bryden & David G. Hughes, An Index of Gregorian Chant, 2 vols., Cambridge, Mass., 1969, vol. I, p. 41; Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis, Paris [etc.], 1936, p. 1206; Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, neumis Laudunensibus (Cod. 239) et Sangallensibus (Codicum Sangallensis 359 et Einsidlensis 121) nunc auctum, Solesmes [etc.], 1979, p. 436; not in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium) is cited by Carl Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, Strasbourg, 1907 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1963], p. 100, as an antiphon for the Common of Apostles, but is found in German sources only as a communio: e.g. Einsiedeln, Stiftsbibliothek, cod. 121 (Pal. mus., 4), p. 278; Moosburger Graduale, fol. 107; Christian Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Kassel [etc.], 1982 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87), fol. 145. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 643, mistakenly lists Amen dico as the verse of the responsory Verbum caro factum est (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 7838, 7839, or 7840; Karlheinz Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Kassel [etc.], 1985 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88), fol. 13; Liber usualis, pp. 39091. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1242d-e; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 192; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 44; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 361a-b; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 643b. Noted by Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 68, and Rudolf Schützeichel, Zum Mittelrheinischen Passionsspiel der St. Galler Handschrift 919 , in Ursula Hennig & Herbert Kolb (eds.), Mediævalia litteraria: Festschrift für Helmut de Boor zum 80. Geburtstag, München, 1971, pp. 531-39, esp. 532.

140


68

The second is the verse of a responsory:69 Caelestis medicus aegram, quam sanaverat, per pietatis suae sententiam confirmat Fides tua, inquiens, te salvam fecit. Vade in pace. V. Fides etenim salvam eam fecit quae hoc quod postulavit posse se ab eo percipere non dubitavit. Fides tua, inquiens

The direction of this item thus offers an alternative not of two, but of three chants, and an accurate editorial reconstruction would be: [34] Et cantet Mittens hec mulier 68

69

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1382. Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fols. 170v-71. The variant et quod hoc fecit , not recorded in any of Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium manuscripts, is found in some sources, e.g. Orarium Spirense (pars aestivalis), sig. H viiva. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6296. Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fols. 167v-68 (verse only).

141

The St Gall Passion Play [35] vel Amen dico [36] [vel] Fides etenim et cetera: Wuzent, daz des wibes glaube groz hat sie gemaht von sunden bloz. Maria, du salt han auch minen sein. Vnd gang in din hus wider hein.

(ll. 305a-09)

None of the three alternative chants specified here appears in other plays. Nos. 34 and 36 are definitely liturgical chants: Mittens hec mulier is distinctively different from Matthew 26:12 ( Mittens enim haec unguentum hoc in corpus meum ad sepeliendum me fecit ) and Fides etenim is not directly biblical at all. The antiphon Amen dico (no. 35) is verbally identical to Matthew 26:13, so could in theory have been a Passion-tone setting of a verse from the Passion Gospel,70 but all the other music in this episode is liturgical, and Amen dico and Fides etenim are both incipits of chants from the office of St Mary Magdalene (22 July), one of the most important feasts of the medieval Sanctorale. Amen dico is thus almost certainly an antiphon. No. 34, Mittens hec mulier , is found in nearly every European diocese and so is useless for localization purposes.71 The two Mary Magdalene office chants, however, are much more geographically specific. No. 35, Amen dico vobis is restricted to the more southerly German dioceses.72 Though standard in Worms and Speyer, usually as the 70

71

72

Officium majoris hebdomadæ et octavæ Paschæ [ ] cum cantu juxta ordinem Breviarii, Missalis et Pontificalis Romani. Editio typica Vaticana, Roma, 1922, p. 85 (Matthew 26:13). The incipit Amen dico is also that of Mark 14:9; cf. ibid., pp. 200-01. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 140v; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 257v; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 5465), sig. k6r-v. Sole source in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium: thirteenth-century Rheinau Antiphonal (Zurich, Zentralbibliothek, Ms. Rh. 28); see Ibid, vol. II, no. 1464b. CANTUS: seven antiphonals, all from southern Germany and Austria. Frank Labhardt, Das Cantionale des Kartäusers Thomas Kreß. Ein Denkmal der spätmittelalterli-

142


second antiphon in the third nocturn of matins,73 it is not found anywhere in Mainz, where the historia of Mary Magdalene is quite different from the Worms and Speyer versions. No. 36, Fides etenim , the verse of the responsory Caelestis medicus , is similarly distributed.74 Again it is standard in Worms and Speyer,75 but absolutely unknown in sources from any part of the Mainz diocese. Every relevant Mainz service-book listed in the bibliography has been inspected, as have numerous others which have been checked for this chant alone and do not figure there; these represent liturgical material from all parts of this huge diocese from the tenth century to the seventeenth. The complete absence of evidence of Amen dico and Fides etenim in the very numerous Mainz sources amounts to evidence of absence of both chants from the Mainz use.76 Amen dico and Fides etenim thus represent the strongest lo-

73

74 75

76

chen Musikgeschichte Basels, Bern-Stuttgart, 1978 (Publikationen der Schweizerischen Musikforschenden Gesellschaft, Ser. 2, 20), fol. 114 (p. 193). Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 520; Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lu 3a, fol. 231; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 522, fol. 31; printed Worms breviary, 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fol. 64; Speyer antiphonals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 170v-71; Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 65/ 738, fol. 35; Speyer breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 514, fol. 156rb; Orarium Spirense (pars aestivalis), sig. H viiva. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6296. Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 519; Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lu 3a, fol. 230; Vatican, cod. pal. lat., 292, fol. 135v; cod. pal. lat. 522, fol. 31; printed Worms breviary, 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fols. 62v and 63; Speyer antiphonals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fols. 167v-68; Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 65/738, fol. 32r-v; Speyer breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 514, fol. 155va; Orarium Spirense (pars aestivalis), sig. H viv; cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 174. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 100, a processional containing the responsory (fols. lviiiv-lixr), is attributed by Theodor Heinrich Klein, Die Prozessionsgesänge der Mainzer Kirche aus dem 14. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Speyer, 1962 (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 7), p. 70, to Mainz Cathedral; but this is almost certainly mistaken (see Chapter II above). The responsory is not found in genuine Mainz processionals of any date, e.g. Mainz, Stadtbibliothek,

143


calization criteria in the St Gall Passion Play, and suggest that the play was situated not within the Mainz liturgical tradition but rather that of Speyer or Worms. And indeed, the evidence of the preceding chant, Jesus s response to Mary Magdalene s heartfelt repentance (ll. 276-91), can be read as corroboration: 33 Tunc Iesus cantat versum Dimissa sunt et dicat: Alle dine sunde sin dir virgeben. Bezzer vorbaz din leben. Wan dine minne ist also groz, daz ich noch nie vant din genoz.

(ll. 291b-95)

Neither Bergmann, Pflanz, nor Schuler identifies this item as liturgical.77 Pflanz, claiming that no matching item is found in medieval liturgical manuscripts, proposes an adaptation of Luke 7:47; Schuler suggests part of a lection from matins of St Mary Magdalene in the modern Roman use. But the Dimissa sunt incipit differs from Luke 7: 47 ( remittuntur ), and the specified versus indicates liturgical material: the verse of a mode 5 responsory for matins of Mary Magdalene:78,79 Accessit ad pedes Jesu peccatrix mulier Maria. Et osculata est, et lavit lacrimis, et tersit capillis, et unxit unguento. V. Dimissa sunt ei peccata multa, quoniam dilexit multum. Et osculata est

77

78

79

Hs. II 74 (Cathedral, early fifteenth century) and II 303 (Cathedral, late fifteenth century); Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118 (St Peter, fifteenth-sixteenth century). Bergmann, Studien, p. 188 and note 1526; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 18, 138-39; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 148. It is also the verse of the responsory Maria ergo unxit pedes Jesu (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3699), but it is unknown in Mainz and Speyer and found in only one late Worms source: Worms manual, Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1, fol. 53, as part of the Mandatum. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6016. Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 167v (verse only).

144


The actor playing Jesus would have been capable of singing the responsory-verse, melodically richer than a simple antiphon, and ideally suited to its quasi-sacramental function, prepared and underlined by a triple Silete from the angel.80 Accessit , foreign to the Roman use, has not always been recognized as a liturgical item.81 But it is well known in the German local rites.82 The responsory, or its verse, is used in nine other plays, though Schuler does not identify it as the source.83 Accessit alone is used in four.84 Refrain and verse together are found in three.85 Dimissa sunt 80

81

82

83 84

No. 37, l. 291a. See Johannes Janota, Zur Funktion der Gesänge in der hessischen Passionsspielgruppe , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik, Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 109-20, esp. 113 and 115, on the use of Dimissa sunt in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel and Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. Accessit not recorded in Bryden & Hughes, Index of Gregorian Chant; identified as Matthew 26:7 in (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, by Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, p. 523, l. 116; included amongst the non-liturgical pieces newly composed for the play (ibid, p. 534 and note 1). Thomas Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Winterthur, 1982 (Sonderband der Reihe Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, zum 50. Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis), p. 147: not a well-known antiphon [sic!]. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. II, no. 1464b: in Rheinau Antiphonal. CANTUS: sixteen sources, all from Germany, Austria or Slovenia. Moosburger Graduale, fol. 78; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 172. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 5. Ibid: (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, fol. 108, l. 131 (neumed incipit Accessit ad pedes only); Brixener Passionsspiel, manuscript, fol. 4, late-sixteenthcentury addition: Chorus Canit R[esponsorium] Accessit ad pedes (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 354, ll. 82b-c, omits R[esponso-

145


alone is found in Frankfurt, both in the Dirigierrolle and the Passionsspiel.86 It is presumably the second person forms in lines 292 to 295 which lead Pflanz to reconstruct the chant as Dimissa sunt tibi peccata multa, quoniam dilexisti multum .87 Ironically, Pflanz was probably unaware that Eger rewrote the verse in precisely this form; but was seemingly unique in doing so, as it was in recasting Accessit to be sung by Mary Magdalene in the first person; a remarkable, and unparalleled, affective adaptation of liturgical music.88 Accessit can be found in all three dioceses, but whereas clearly long standard in Worms and Speyer,89 it may have entered the Mainz liturgy rather late. Earlier Mainz books often contain only Dimissa sunt as a versicle at first vespers, but not the responsory Accessit in

85

86

87 88

89

rium] ). Not in Schuler: Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 235a-36; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 96c-e. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2760a-b (Chorus: Accessit ); 2826a-b (Disciples: Dimissa sunt ); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 2992i-r ( Accessit ); ll. 3064a-c ( Dimissa sunt ); Erlau IV, ll. 707a-b, marginal addition (Maria: Accessit ); 707cd (Jesus: Dimissa ). Not in Schuler: Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 446, 458. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 136a; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 1363a (not included in Schuler, no. 148). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 139. Egerer Passionsspiel: Chorus: Accessit [ ] Maria (ll. 2992i-j); Mary: Et osculata sum , Et lavi lacrimis , Et tersi capillis , Et unxi unguento (ll. 2992 k-l, mn, o-p) as an accompaniment to these gestures. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 5. Cf. also evidence of a more affective staging of the episode in Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 235a-36; Erlau IV, ll. 707a-b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 96c-e, where Accessit is sung by Mary Magdalene herself, not the chorus. Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fols. 518v-19, 520v; Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lu 3a, fol. 230; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 522, fol. 31; printed Worms breviary, 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fols. 63, 64v. Speyer antiphonals: Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 65/738, fol. 32; Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 167v; Speyer breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 514, fol. 155rb; printed Speyer breviaries: 1478 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5464), sig. mm iii; 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, 5465), sig. Fii; Orarium Spirense (pars aestivalis), sig. Hviva.

146


matins,90 and this is even true of some later ones.91 Those with the whole responsory, not just the versicle, are predominantly fifteenthcentury or later.92 One of the three fourteenth-century books which do contain the responsory is from St Peter in Fritzlar, an outpost of Mainz liturgy in Fulda territory;93 the chant seems to take longer to make its way into the books of the part of the diocese closer to the home of the St Gall Passion Play. This might explain why the whole responsory and its verse are used in the late Alsfelder Passionsspiel, but only the verse in the fourteenth-century Frankfurter Dirigierrolle and the St Gall Passion Play. Since Dimissa sunt is in at least a few fourteenth-century books from the play s area,94 as well in the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, it can only be a corroborative, not an independent localization crux. Nonetheless, it is strong corroboration. The same episode in the St Gall Passion Play uses three chants from the office of St Mary Magdalene: all are standard in Worms and Speyer, but two (35 and 36) are unknown in Mainz and one (33) seems to have made a late appearance there. The two non-Mainz chants and 34, Mittens hec mulier , are used only in this play and are an important part of the material which distinguishes its treatment of the episode from the version in the Hes90

91

92

93 94

E.g. Frankfurt, Barth. 150 (early fourteenth century), fol. 397vb; Barth. 160 (earlier fourteenth century), fol. 442ra; Kassel, 2o theol. 143 (mid-fourteenth century), fol. 377vb. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 233 (fourteenth-fifteenth century), fol. Qiiir; Frankfurt, Barth. 159 (1449), fol. 150v; printed Mainz breviary, 1474 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5394), pp. 273v, 275v. Fifteenth-century or later: Frankfurt, Barth. 44 (1508), fols. 190ra, 190vb; Barth. 83 (1460s), fols. 177va, 178va; Barth. 94 (fifteenth century), fol. 151r-v; MS Leonh. 3, (1469), fols. 164vb, 165va; Kassel, 2o theol. 99 (first half of the fifteenth century), fols. 137v, 138; Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118 (fifteenth-sixteenth century), fols. 98-99v (new numbering); fourteenth-century: Frankfurt, Barth. 131, fol. 368rb; Kassel, 2o theol. 129 (1344-48), fol. 209. Kassel, 2o theol. 129 (antiphonal), fol. 209. Frankfurt, Barth. 131, fol. 368rb; Barth. 150, fol. 397vb; Barth. 160, fol. 442ra.

147


sian plays.95 Taken together, this is compelling localization evidence. It is also, unfortunately, the only really strong evidence of this kind in the play. However, other indications, though vaguer, can be seen as corroborating it. One chant, for instance, seems not to have been known in Speyer. It is sung by the cured blind man, who explains what Jesus did to him: 40, 41 [40] Cecus cantet Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur et dicat: Der mensche, der Iesus ist genant, der leite mir bit siner hant die speicholter vf die augen min. Do von wart mir gnade schin, daz ich gesehen den claren dag, der mir vor gar virborgen lag.

(ll. 355a-61)

The blind man sings and says exactly the same words a second time shortly afterwards: [41] Respondens Cecus cantet Ille homo ut supra et dicat Der mensche ut prius

(ll. 369a-69b).

This is another of the play s cantet incipits about which certainty is impossible. Since a similar item is found only in Heidelberg, there is no evidence of a German melodic tradition; the Frankfurter Passionsspiel, with closely similar dialogue, has no chant at all.96 It could be intoned biblical text from John 9:11: Ille homo qui dicitur Jesus lutum fecit, et unxit oculos meos, et dixit mihi: Vade ad natatoria Siloe, et lava. Et abii, et lavi, et video. 95

96

Cf. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2743-2905; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 130-36a; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1288-1368; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 27372822. See the synoptic edition in Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, 3 vols., Tübingen, 1996-2002, vol. I, pp. 162-69. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 1181a-d; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 929a-35, esp. l. 929a.

148


But a mode 1 antiphon for Wednesday of the fourth week in Lent would be musically almost as simple as a reciting-tone, and verbally more compact than the biblical verse, and hence perhaps an even more likely choice: 97

This is one of the good many St Gall Passion Play chants which Bergmann ignores because he does not treat the relevant episodes. The antiphon, suggested without further argument by both Schuler and Pflanz,98 though not certain, is plausible. Liturgical chant would be fitting to the quasi-sacramental nature of the moment in the play: indeed the Mainz rite, at least in later medieval sources, used a similar form of words as a prayer of thanksgiving after communion.99 The six lines of German which follow are a close translation neither of the antiphon, nor of the Vulgate. Pflanz notes this, but does not revise his general assumption that the German dialogue closely reflects the Latin chants.100 The word-order Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur (l. 355 a), diverging from the qui dicitur Jesus of both Vulgate and antiphon, is probably a scribal error, and Pflanz s assumption that the 97

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3171. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 131. 98 Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 293a, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 19-20, 74-75. 99 Missale Maguntinum, 1507, unsigned gathering (before sig. l), fol. 4v: Lutum fecit dominus ex sputo et liniuit oculos meos; et abii et laui et vidi et credidi deo ; cf. Hermann Reifenberg, Messe und Missalien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Zeitalter der Gotik, Münster, 1960 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 37), p. 84. 100 Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 74-75.

149


antiphon would have been changed to read qui Jesus dicitur is unlikely.101 If Ille homo is liturgical, it is a chant known in Mainz and Worms,102 but not in Speyer, where it is found only in a twelfth- to thirteenth-century book, probably one from another use adapted for Speyer.103 There is more possible corroborative evidence in the play, most of it chants apparently less familiar in Mainz than in the other dioceses. One such is Jesus s reply to John the Baptist, reluctant to baptise the Lord (ll. 101a-03): 10

Tunc Christus cantet Sine modo sic enim et dicat: La die rede sin, Iohan, vnd deufe mich, vil heilger man. So wirt alle gerehtekeit irfullet. Daz si dir geseit.

(103a-07)

The St Gall Passion Play is the sole play with this incipit.104 As with the preceding no. 9, Baptiza me, Iohannis (see Chapter VI), Schuler notes this item under no. 168 ( Ecce agnus Dei ), but offers no identification. Pflanz suggests the second half of the mode 1 antiphon

101

102

103

104

Ibid., p. 75. No deviation from this wording (the only form given in Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 469) in any manuscript cited by Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. III, p. 265, or in the thirty-one CANTUS sources; cf. Bryden & Hughes, Index of Gregorian Chant, vol. I, p. 210; Antiphonale monasticum, pp. 378-79; Liber usualis, p. 1095. The word-order qui dicitur Jesus is consistently found in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 211v; Barth. 154, fol. 113v; Barth. 160, fol. 345. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 131; Mainz breviary, Barth. 160, fol. 345; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 248v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 193v ( qui dicitur Jesus ). Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D. 3, fol. 96rb. See Chapter II above. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 218a-c, Sic enim decet nos implere omnem iusticiam , is probably biblical (Matthew 3:15).

150


Joannes quidem clamabat :105 Joannes quidem clamabat, dicens: ego non sum dignus baptizare Dominum. Respondit Jesus et dixit: Sine modo, sic enim decet nos adimplere omnem justitiam.106

Though the wording also fits Vulgate text (Matthew 3:15), the antiphon is the more likely choice in the liturgically inclined St Gall Passion Play, especially for the musically expert Jesus figure. This then may have consequences for localization. Though found in all three dioceses,107 the antiphon is absent from a good many Mainz books,108 and is not used in any Hessian plays; this again could suggest liturgical material less central to the Mainz use than to that of its southern neighbours. The antiphon does seem a speciality of the more southerly German dioceses.109 105 106

107

108

109

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 53. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3503. Mainz/Fritzlar antiphonal, Kassel, 2o theol. 117, fol. 44v. The usual Mainz, Worms and Speyer sources do not notate this antiphon. Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 153; Reifenberg, Stundengebet, p. 135, note 855 (Magnificat antiphon, Octave of the Epiphany); Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 194v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 107v (antiphon for week of Epiphany Octave); Orarium Spirense, (pars hiemalis), sig. x7va; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. e6v. E.g. Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 161; Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48. Thirteen of fourteen CANTUS sources are from southern Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium: only in the German Hartker and Rheinau Antiphonals; not listed in Bryden & Hughes, Index of Gregorian Chant.

151


Another chant which may not be strongly characteristic of Mainz introduces Jesus s temptation by the Devil in the wilderness: 14, 15 [14] Tunc angeli cantent responsorium Ductus est Iesus in desertum usque [15] Si es filius Dei quod accedens Dyabolus cantet et dicat: Bist du Godes sun alleene, so sprich, daz dise steine zu dirre stunt werden brot. So buzes du des hungers not.

(ll. 123a-27)

This incipit is found only in other Hessian plays.110 It is common to two chants for the first Sunday of Lent, an antiphon and a responsory;111 so it is helpful that the St Gall Passion Play direction precise112 ly identifies the responsory and the mode of performance: Ductus est Jesus in desertum a spiritu ut tentaretur a Diabolo. Et accedens tentator dixit ei si filius Dei es dic ut lapides isti panes fiant. V. Et cum jejunasset quadraginta diebus et quadraginta noctibus postea esuriit. Et accedens tentator ...

110

111 112

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1137g-h; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 167; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 32a. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 256d-f. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 2431 and 6529 respectively. Ibid., 6529. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 106v (relevant section only).

152


This responsory was used in all three dioceses;113 but like Accessit , it may not have been an original part of the Mainz liturgy. Though found in the diocese in the early thirteenth century in Aschaffenburg,114 it is missing from several books contemporary with the St Gall Passion Play and written in the same approximate area.115 It is recorded in this rough locality (Frankfurt) by the fifteenth century, though in one breviary still only as an alternative.116 The evidence of the plays written in the Mainz diocese is consistent with the liturgical data. In the fourteenth-century Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, the incipit has the neumes not of the responsory but of Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2431, known early in Mainz.117 For Alsfeld, Dreimüller s suggestion of the antiphon is convincing:118 the chant precedes the quasi-liturgical procession of Jesus into the desert, itself accompanied 113

114

115 116

117

118

Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 106v; Mainz breviary, Barth. 154, fol. 96v; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 228; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 521, fol. 69v; printed Worms breviary, 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515), sig. z2vb; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 86rb; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. 3rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. hir. Aschaffenburg, ms. perg. 19, fol. 123, cited by Reifenberg, Stundengebet, p. 119, note 777. Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, Barth. 160, Barth. 161. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 106v; Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 154, fol. 96v; Barth. 142, fol. 147v (alternative to Scapulis suis obumbrabit ). Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 32a; neumes not mentioned by Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [first volume of additions to Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002], p. 99. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2431 found (e.g.) in Frankfurt, Barth. 142, fol. 148; Barth. 150, fol. 188; Barth. 161, fol. 292. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1137g-h (no music or liturgical indication); cf. Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II: Alsfelder Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Frankfurter Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments ; Edition der Melodien von Horst Brunner, Tübingen, 2002, p. 167. See also Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 21.

153


by a responsory;119 to add the responsory Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6529 would almost certainly have been too long. Since the St Gall Passion Play chant clearly is the responsory, Pflanz s discussions of antiphon versus responsory are superfluous, and his decision for the antiphon obviously wrong: it contradicts the direction, and it does not include the words which the Devil is directed to sing.120 It is ironic that Schuler too found this this chant with its straightforward direction problematical.121 He cites the text of the antiphon rather than of the responsory; hence the Devil s Si filius dei es ... is listed as a separate chant.122 This is the first of the play s chants to raise a question relevant to several other items.123 The trained angel choir certainly sings the responsory, but did the Devil actually sing his Si filius Dei es to the complex responsory melody? This seems demanding for this role, and the actor could have used a recitative formula in the right mode, especially since his words in the responsory are identical to those in Matthew 4:3. However, his next item (17, Angelis suis mandavit [see Chapter VI]) is almost certainly a responsory or a gradual, so that the play may well have envisaged the part being filled by a competent singer.

119

120

121 122

123

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1137i-j: responsory Te sanctum Dominum (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7757), not identified by Dreimüller. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 13-14, 56-59; pp. 58 and 164 perhaps tacitly following Bergmann, Studien, p. 209 and note 1689, who identifies the antiphon. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 164. Ibid., no. 165(a). Misinterpreting the St Gall Passion Play direction (Mone [ed.], Schauspiele des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 49-132, ll. 117a-b), Schuler thinks that the Devil sings this in German; hence he lists it (no. 10b and vol. I, p. 99) as Bist du godes sun ... ; cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 195. E.g. 49, Quid facimus ; 50, Expedit vobis ; 72, Tu es rex Iudeorum ; 73, Tu dicis quia rex sum ; 76, Regem non habemus .

154


The blind man cured by Jesus responds to hostile questioning from Annas by singing that it is unheard-of for anyone other than the Messiah to work such cures: 42 Respondens Cecus cantet A seculo non est et cetera et dicat: Daz ist ein wunder vffenbare, daz ir nit wuzen konnent vor war, wanne er si bekommen, [ ] So sint auch daz gar vromde mer, daz ein blinde wart gesehen. Daz wunder ist nit me geschehen. Die craft er muz von Gode han, mit der er hat daz wunder gedan.

(ll. 421a-33)

This item, as Schuler records, is found only in the St Gall Passion Play.124 It is in an episode untreated by Bergmann, but both Schuler and Pflanz assume the following antiphon:125,126

124 125 126

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 293b. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 20-21, 75-77. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1194. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 134. Also in: Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 142, fol. 187v (as second antiphon of second nocturn, Passion Sunday); Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 248v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 194; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. i7; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. bb1vb.

155


Pflanz realizes that the German dialogue corresponds not to the antiphon but to John 9 (parts of verses 30 and 31, and all of verses 32-33). But he neither reassesses his general view that the German wording reflects that of the sung items, nor considers the possibility of biblical text (John 9:32-33):127

Since this chant and dialogue have no equivalent in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel, which here shows striking textual parallelism with the St Gall Passion Play,128 there is no external evidence on which to decide between liturgical and biblical text. The cantet direction, which suggests the former, does introduce some biblical material in St Gall; yet as with no. 10, the antiphon, melodically hardly more difficult than recitative, is not improbable. If this is a liturgical chant, it too may corroborate the localization. For in Worms and Speyer, as in most dioceses, this item was the Magnificat antiphon for Wednesday of the fourth week of Lent,129 but in Mainz the fifth antiphon at matins of Passion Sunday.130 A single scene would be likely to use liturgical material from the same office; 127 128

129

130

John 9:32-33, Passion tone. St Gall Passion Play ll. 417a-33 would fit between Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 959 and 959a. Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 248v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 194; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. i7; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. bb1vb. Other dioceses: Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. III, p. 22; all thirteen German, Austrian and Swiss CANTUS sources; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, p. 37. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 134; Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 142, fol. 187v; Reifenberg, Stundengebet, p. 139, note 66.

156


and that found elsewhere in this scene, including what may be the antiphon Rabbi, quis peccavit (nos. 38, 39; see Chapter VI below), is from the fourth week of Lent.131 Conclusions An attempt can now be made to draw all this evidence together. Decisive liturgical localization evidence is provided by the two chants from the anointing of Jesus: no. 35, Amen dico and no. 36, Fides etenim , items standard in Worms and Speyer but, it would seem, completely foreign to the Mainz use. By contrast, there seems little or no material peculiar to Mainz to the same degree. Admittedly, no. 18, Vade, Satanas, non temptabis (probably though not definitely an antiphon), is found in Mainz books, and not in Worms or Speyer: but this is a well-known, widespread Lenten chant,132 which could have become familiar in dioceses where it was not part of the official ordo. Something of the kind must explain how the antiphon Dominum deum tuum adorabis (19) and the short responsory In manus tuas (84), both apparently unused in any of the three dioceses, come to be in the play. In this respect Vade, Satanas is quite unlike the Worms/Speyer specialities , Amen dico and Fides etenim , which were not at all widespread, even within the German territories. The possible connection of the play with these southerly dioceses rather than Mainz is supported by the several chants which seem not to have been known early in Mainz, at least in the area of the diocese closest to the play s home . Relevant here are nos. 14 and 15, the responsory Ductus est Jesus , no. 33, Dimissa sunt ei peccata multa , the verse of the responsory Accessit ad pedes , and no. 10, Sine modo, sic enim from the antiphon Joannes quidem clamabat . If no. 42, 131 132

Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 130v-31. See note 26 above.

157


A seculo non est , is an antiphon it seems to be out of liturgical sequence for Mainz. If Mainz can be excluded, then the St Gall Passion Play can be localized in a tightly drawn area. It would have a clear north-western boundary: the Mainz/Worms diocesan border, running roughly southwest from Oppenheim on the Rhine down to the west of Landstuhl. Significantly, this corroborates Stopp s scholarly instinct that the Rheingau should be excluded, which he could not prove using linguistic criteria alone. Liturgical criteria alone, however, cannot fix the southern boundary, since all the Worms material is also known in Speyer, with only one possible exception: no. 40, Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur if this is an antiphon, not biblical recitative. But liturgy very usefully supplements Stopp s dialectology. Stopp identified the p/pf line as the southern boundary of the play s Heimat, but he could not place that line with great precision. East of the Rhine it was in the Lorsch/ Weinheim vicinity; to the west of the river merely somewhere south of Worms .133 Yet as the map shows, even this rough location strongly suggests that it was within the Worms diocese. And even if the line was shifting southwards in the fourteenth century, other linguistic features of the play manuscript point away from the region of Speyer itself. The form sal in the sollen paradigm, initial d and intervocalic d and ld rather than t and lt, and the almost complete absence of Umlaut signs, are all untypical of the Schriftdialekt of Speyer.134 These facts combined make it very unlikely that the manuscript originated south of the Worms/Speyer boundary; for even if the p/pf line was somewhat further south than estimated, the manuscript could not have been produced very far into Speyer diocesan territory without displaying more Speyer linguistic features.

133 134

Stopp in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 214-15. Ibid., pp. 175-76, 188, 205, and 215.

158


Geographical and demographic considerations point in the same direction. Danger of flooding meant that there was no town of any size on the Rhine between Worms and Speyer, so if the St Gall Passion Play was written somewhere on the Rhine, it must have been in Worms, or Oppenheim, twenty-six kilometres further north. The Worms/Speyer boundary ran west, then south-west, from Mundenheim by the river to the area south of Landstuhl through a distinctly rural region of villages and very small towns, none of which seems a plausible home for a play of the scale of the play. In the very north of Speyer diocese, perhaps only Dürkheim is possible; otherwise one must look considerably further north, well into Worms territory. All these factors strongly suggest a localization within the Worms diocese. The liturgical method has thus delivered a well-grounded localization in the compact triangle Oppenheim-Mundenheim-Landstuhl which is a helpful confirmation of Stopp s purely philological results, and even, pace Schützeichel, goes a step beyond. The lack of archival records of dramatic production in this area makes it impossible to offer anything but the most tentative suggestions of towns where the play might have been produced.135 But its scale surely limits the choice to towns of some size. Though not in the extravagant mould of the late plays like Alsfeld and Eger, the St Gall Passion Play was no mean spectacle. It needed a cast of about eighty-five, occupied sixteen stage loca and made heavy demands on costumes, props and even stage machinery.136 The analysis of the chants in Chapter IV suggests 135

136

No relevant archival entries are recorded in Bernd Neumann, Geistliches Schauspiel im Zeugnis der Zeit: Zur Aufführung mittelalterlicher religiöser Dramen im deutschen Sprachgebiet, 2 vols., München-Zürich, 1987 (Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 84-85). Eduard Hartl, Untersuchungen zum St. Galler Passionsspiel , in Gerhard Eis, Johannes Hansel & Richard Kienast (eds.), Festschrift für Wolfgang Stammler zu seinem 65. Geburtstag dargebracht von Freunden und Schülern, Berlin-Bielefeld, 1953, pp. 109-29, esp. 109-10; cf. Rolf Bergmann, F. Interpretation. I. Der Inhalt

159


that two groups of trained choristers, two excellent soloists and up to six further competent singers were necessary, as well as a good many less vocally gifted performers. The personnel, and the musical, organisational and not least financial resources needed to stage it will have been considerable, and Hartl is clearly right to assume a cultural centre of some importance.137 There is a limited number of candidates: Worms itself, Oppenheim, Kaiserslautern or Landstuhl, as the most important towns in the diocese west of the Rhine. Even slightly smaller centres like Pfeddersheim or Grünstadt look less likely, and towns like Dirmstein, Freinsheim or Westhofen, though the centres of deaneries, would almost certainly not have been large enough.138 Kaiserslautern and Landstuhl are problematical, however: in the far southwest of the diocese, in a region whose written documents (in any case not plentiful) have not been analysed, they may not even lie within the play s dialectal area. The most likely homes for the play must be Worms itself and Oppenheim. This admittedly does not greatly clarify the relationship of the St Gall Passion Play to the Frankfurt plays, other than to suggest that the play s textual basis may have been largely in Frankfurt material, but that its musical stratum was developed in a different diocesan tradition, probably that of Worms. It is notable that there seems to be no stratum of distinctively Mainz chant inherited from Frankfurt. The

137

138

des Spiels , in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, pp. 219-39. Hartl, Untersuchungen , p. 109: [Was] auf einen Kulturmittelpunkt als Aufführungsort schließen läßt. Worms: F.M. Illert, Worms , in Josef Höfer & Karl Rahner (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, 11 vols., Freiburg, 1957-67 [2nd ed.], vol. X, cols. 122429; H. Gensicke, Worms , in Kurt Galling et al. (eds.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft, 7 vols., Tübingen, 1957-65 [3rd ed.], vol. VI, col. 1808, both citing secondary literature. Other towns: Hans Meyer, Topographie der Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Archiv für hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F. 17 (1932), pp. 192, esp. 8-9 (Oppenheim), 37-38 (Kaiserslautern), 38 (Landstuhl), 21 (Pfeddersheim), and 31 (Grünstadt).

160


play has only two exclusively Mainz items: no. 18, Vade, Satanas, non temptabis is found only in Alsfeld and Heidelberg, not in Frankfurt; no. 19, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis is exclusive to the St Gall Passion Play. And here the question must be left, pending further archival finds or other evidence. But in the light of all the localization evidence, one last chant deserves consideration. When Jesus arrives at Bethany after Lazarus s death, it is sung twice in quick succession, first by Martha, then by Mary. 44, 45 [44] Quo veniente Marta cantet Domine si fuisses hic : Herre, weres du gewesen hie, so were min bruder dot noch nie. Doch dut Got, waz du noch wilt. Ich gleube, daz ez in nit bevilt.

(ll. 497a-501)

[45] Quo audito [Maria] vadat ad Iesum et procidens ad pedes eius cantet antiphonam Domine, si hic fuisses ut supra. (ll. 515a-15b)

The identification of an antiphon (l. 515b) is helpful, since the three other plays with a similar chant neither notate it nor indicate its liturgical type.139 Though the directions (ll. 497a, 515b) give two different word-orders, ut supra (l. 515b) shows the same chant is intended each time: a mode 1 antiphon for Friday of the fourth week of Lent: 140

139

140

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 326b. Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1169a-c: sprach ; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2432a-c; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 167 (no neumes). Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2383. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 131v.

161


The music would have permitted stopping at mortuus , but such a short chant would probably have been sung in full. Bergmann and Pflanz identify the antiphon correctly.141 As Pflanz recognizes, the German dialogue (ll. 498-501) translates not the antiphon but the Vulgate (John 11:21-22). The two word-orders present an intriguing problem. Si fuisses hic is the Vulgate form (John 11:21 and 32), and perhaps the scribe confused biblical and liturgical wording here, or, as elsewhere, simply muddled the word order.142 But it is also an alternative wording of the antiphon.143 And whilst si hic fuisses is the consistent antiphon wording in medieval Mainz and Speyer,144 si fuisses hic , which was 141 142

143

144

Bergmann, Studien, pp. 185-86; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 79-82. Cf. no. 15, Si es filius dei (l. 123b); no. 40, Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur (l. 355 a). Si hic fuisses : Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. III, p. 168; Bryden & Hughes, Index of Gregorian Chant, vol. I, p. 135; Liber usualis, p. 1096; Antiphonale monasticum, p. 380; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 37v; Lucca Antiphonal (Paléographie musicale: Les principaux manuscrits de chant grégorien, ambrosien, mozarabe, gallican, publiés en facsimilés phototypiques, vol. IX: Antiphonaire monastique (XIIe siècle): codex 601 de la Bibliothèque capitulaire de Lucques, Solesmes, 1906), p. 165. Si fuisses hic : Breviarium Romanum, 1562, sig. Uviiivb-Xira; melody in Antiphonarii [ ] Pars Hyemalis, 1572, p. CCCCXX; three out of forty-three CANTUS sources, two French and one German, ironically a Carmelite antiphonal from Mainz. E.g. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 131v; Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 213; Barth. 160, fol. 347; printed Mainz breviary, 1475 (Ge-

162


the medieval Roman wording, is standard in Worms,145 and reaches Mainz only with the Romanization of the liturgy in the seventeenth century.146 This chant therefore may display a local liturgical differentia, but it does so in a frustratingly contradictory way. The dramatic tradition is of no help in determining the right form: both wordings are found in the three other plays with a similar chant, and it is unclear whether they are biblical or liturgical text.147 However, scribal inconsistency of this kind could characterize a liminal area where different diocesan uses were familiar, a situation which would apply on both the Mainz/Worms and the Worms/Speyer diocesan boundaries. Given that the play seems to belong comfortably north of the Worms/Speyer border, this points to the Mainz/Worms liminal area. This scenario is speculative, for the first si fuisses hic may be biblical or simply erroneous, but it receives some support from the presence of no. 18, Vade, Satanas , seemingly a Mainz-only chant, and of no. 19, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis , demonstrably known in monastic liturgies in Mainz territory but not recorded in Worms. These could well be examples of the osmosis of diocesan uses which would be explicable in a border area.

145

146

147

samtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5394), pp. 157b-58a; ten manuscript and printed Mainz breviaries, cited Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 81, note 1; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D. 3, 96vb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. i8; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. bb3ra. Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 248v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 195v. Cf. Breviarium Romanum, 1562, sig. Uviiivb-Xira. Cantus Gregoriano-Moguntinus Breviario Romano accommodatus, 2 vols., Mainz, 1666-67, vol. I: Pars hiemalis, p. 325; Roman wording sits uncomfortably on the Mainz melody. Si hic fuisses : Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1169a-c. Si fuisses hic : Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2432a-c (probably biblical) and (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 167 (wording differs from both antiphon and Vulgate; cf. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 148).

163


The obvious town where this might have happened is Oppenheim on the Rhine, wealthy, populous and important, since 1225 a Free Imperial City, with a number of churches and monastic houses. It straddled the two dioceses, with the Altstadt and its church of St Sebastian belonging to Worms, the Neustadt , built in the early thirteenth century, and its magnificent church of St Katharina to Mainz. There were other churches and religious commuities, and in general the town is exactly the kind of centre with the human, material and cultural resources to mount a play like the St Gall Passion Play, and the sense of its own prestige to require such a spectacle.148 Without further evidence, of course, the Oppenheim localization must remain purely speculative. Even if this is the greatest degree of precision that can be attained, it seems clear that the liturgical approach has important insights to offer in the realm of localization. The risk of getting nowhere may in general be considerable, as Rastall says, but in the particular case of the St Gall Passion Play it is possible to reach somewhere distinctly worthwhile.

148

Meyer, Topographie der Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , pp. 8-9, citing secondary literature.

164

Chapter VI

Before the Passion

he rest of the St Gall Passion Play chants can tell us nothing about the localization of the play, but they do present the problem of reliable reconstruction: with what degree of certainty can we say what chant a particular incipit indicates? Using the approaches discussed in Chapter III, the remaining chapters work through the play, attempting as accurate a solution as possible for each chant. Silete! 1 Omnibus personis decenter ornatis cantent angeli (l. 0b)1

The performance opens with the silence-chant, which the angels sing eleven times in all in the play. As is standard in religious drama, it is used to quieten the audience down before important episodes; it thus has the function of structuring the action.2 The directions use several different formulae: 1 2

Cf. 2, 4, 13, 24, 32, 37, 47, 53, 68, 78. Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940), vol. I, pp. 46-48 and note 580; Renate Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus: Recovery of the Sung Liturgical Core of the Thuringian Zehnjungfrauenspiel , Toronto, 2002 (Studies and Texts, 140), p. 107, note 12; Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel (in Elke Ukena [ed.], Die deutschen Mirakelspiele des Spätmittelalters: Studien und Texte, 2 vols., Bern-Frankfurt, 1975 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 115), pp. 313-57, vol. II, p. 354); Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978, pp. 250-52; Hansjürgen Linke, Bauformen geistlicher Dramen des späten Mittelalters , in Karl-Heinz Schirmer & Bernhard Sowinski (eds.),

The St Gall Passion Play Omnibus personis decenter ornatis cantent angeli (1, l. 0b); Iterum angeli (2, l. 16a); Iterum angeli Silete (4, l. 42a; 24, l. 191a); Silete (37, l. 315a); Iterum Silete (13, l. 117a; 47, l. 547a; 53, l. 598c; 68, l. 758b; 78, l. 979c); Hic cantat angelus ter Silete (32, l. 291a).

The fact that the word Silete is not mentioned in the first two directions (ll. 0b, 16a) has parallels in several other plays.3 A silence-chant is a feature of almost all medieval religious plays from the fourteenth century on, and it is hardly necessary to list all all its occurrences here. Schuler s score of examples can be almost doubled, from various kinds of religious drama.4 A melody is recorded in only six Passion or Easter plays, and in the Trierer Theophilusspiel.5

3

4

Zeiten und Formen in Sprache und Dichtung. Festschrift für Fritz Tschirch zum 70. Geburtstag, Köln-Wien, 1972, pp. 203-25, esp. 204-05; William Louis Boletta, The Role of Music in Medieval German Drama: Easter Plays and Passion Plays , Diss. Vanderbilt University, 1967, pp. 126-29. On the structuring of the St Gall Passion Play action, see Rolf Bergmann, F. Interpretation , in Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, pp. 217-61 (table, p. 251). E.g. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2929a, 4241a, 4279a, 5263f, 6678a; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 470, 802, 814, 888, 1154; Redentiner Osterspiel, l. 232a; Wiener Osterspiel, l. 314a. To Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, 321-22, no. 580, add: Passion and Easter plays: Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 0a-1, 86a-87, 234a-35, 417a-18; Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel, ll. 236d-e; Bozner Verkündigungsspiel, ll. 38a-b; Feldkircher Osterspiel, l. 6; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 1-10; Rabers Passion, ll. 2277d-e; Redentiner Osterspiel, l. 228a; Regensburger Osterspiel, ll. 91a-b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 96a-b, 265a, 443b. Other religious plays: Hessisches Weihnachtsspiel, ll. 216a, 828a-b; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt, ll. 44a, 1609a, 2022b; Kasseler (mittelniederdeutsche) Paradiesspiel-Fragmente, ll. 36a-b; Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel, ll. 71a, 97a, 125a, 135a, 172a, 223a, 249a; Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel, pp. 485, 486, 487 (five times); Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Katharinenspiel, ll. 0i-j, 37a-b, 45a-b, 55a-b, 95a-b, 144a-b, 152a-b, 166a-b, 176a-b, 208a-b, 306a-b, 344a-b, 394a-b, 475a-b, 517a-b, 521b-c, 637b-c; Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel, ll. 0o-p, 100d-e,

166

VI. Before the Passion

The wording of this request for silence in the play-manuscripts varies hardly at all. Apart from Silete longam horam , unique to the Mühlhäuser Zehnjungfrauenspiel,6 there is either the single word Silete , as in nine of the eleven instances in the St Gall Passion Play,7 or the four-word rhyming formula Silete, silete, silentium habete .8 The

5

6 7

8

116a-b, 140a-b, 176a-b, 228c-d, 383a-b; St. Galler Himmelfahrtsspiel, ll.1-2; Tiroler Weihnachtsspiel, ll. 0b, 344b. Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 1v, ll. 1-2; Trierer Theophilusspiel, MS, fol. 1r-v, ll. 1-2; Wiener Osterspiel, MS, fol. 188, ll. 1139-40 (melodies recorded in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 331-32). Also Feldkircher Osterspiel, l. 6; Füssener Osterspiel, MS, fol. 137, ll. 1-10; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2470f-m; Regensburger Osterspiel, ll. 91a-b (melodies not in Schuler). All, except Trierer Theophilusspiel and Wiener Osterspiel, now authoritatively transcribed in Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 114, with details of previous transcriptions. Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel, ll. 100d-e. All instances in: Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel, Bozner Verkündigungsspiel, Egerer Passionsspiel, Frankfurter Passionsspiel, Heidelberger Passionsspiel, Hessisches Weihnachtsspiel, Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt, Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, Kasseler (mittelniederdeutsche) Paradiesspielfragmente, Luzerner Passionsspiel (1545, 1571, 1597), Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Katharinenspiel, Redentiner Osterspiel, Tiroler Passionsspiel. Some instances in: Alsfelder Passionsspiel (eleven out of seventeen occurrences), Bozner Abendmahlspiel (three out of four occurrences); Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A and B (each two out of three occurrences); Erlau III (one out of two occurrences); Donaueschinger Passionsspiel (one out of two occurrences); Erlau IV (one out of two occurrences); Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel (five out of seven occurrences); Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel (two out of three occurrences); Luzerner Passionsspiel 1583 (one out of two occurrences); Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel (four out of five occurrences), Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel (five out of six occurrences); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel (three out of four occurrences); Trierer Theophilusspiel (one out of two occurrences); Wiener Ostespiel (two out of four occurrences); Wiener Passionsspiel (two out of four occurrences). Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, l. 2516f; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 1-2; Feldkircher Osterspiel, l. 6; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 1-2 (plus eight-line sung German exhortation); Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 0a-b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2470f-m (additional six-line sung German exhortation); St. Galler Himmelfahrtsspiel, ll. 1-2; Trierer Theophilusspiel, ll. 1-2; Wiener Passionsspiel,

167


Wiener Osterspiel has four Silete s; otherwise the few minor variants on the long formula are almost certainly abbreviations or scribal slips.9 Also found are the more ambiguous forms Silete, silete and Silete, etc. 10 Silete, silete is found in only three manuscripts. The music in the Regensburger Osterspiel shows the formula to be complete, but this is a very late play unrepresentative of the medieval tradition.11 The unnotated Silete, silete in the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle and the Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel may well not be complete, however, since these manuscripts contain only short chant-incipits.12 Cases of Silete, etc. look like incipits of the longer form.13 Is the frequent Silete the whole text used in certain plays, as has been suggested,14 or a one-word incipit for the longer form? Renate Amstutz argues for the former interpretation; she bases this on the chronology of the German plays, noting that the single Silete predominates in manuscripts of the fourteenth century, Silete, silete, si9

10

11 12

13

14

ll. 0a-1. Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 1139-40; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 2522f: Silete, silete, silentium (cf. B, l. 2516f: Silete, silete, silentium habete ; Rabers Passion, l. 2277e: Silete, silencium habete ; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 234a-35: Silete, silete, etc. ; Wiener Passionsspiel, l. 35a: Pueri cantant Silete cum ricmo . Silete, silete : Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 1a; Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel, p. 485; Regensburger Osterspiel, ll. 91a-b. Silete etc. : Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel, ll. 223a, 249a; Erlau III, ll. 942a-b; Erlau IV, ll. 308a-09; Erlau V, ll. 0a-c: ( Silete etc. ut supra ); ll. 246a-b. Regensburger Osterspiel, ll. 91a-b. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 1a (there are no other silence-chants in this manuscript); Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel, p. 485. Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel, ll. 223a, 249a; Erlau III, ll. 942a-b; Erlau IV, ll. 308a-309; Erlau V, ll. 0a-c: ( Silete etc. ut supra ); ll. 246a-b. E.g. Hansjürgen Linke, Zur Auferstehungsszene im Redentiner Osterspiel , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 88 (1977), pp. 28-33, esp. 26: Alleinstehendes Silete ist zu oft belegt, um als unvollständig gelten zu können ; Peter K. Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, Berlin, 1969 (Ausgaben Deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama II), p. 258, note to l. 0a, interprets single Silete as the full formula in some plays.

168


lentium habete appearing only in the fifteenth. The single Silete she sees as the original, possibly central German form, and the longer form as a later development associated with southern Germany. She understands Silete, silete as a variant of the one-word form.15 However, facts which Amstutz herself notes complicate this straightforward view, and suggest that the evidence should be read with regard not primarily to chronology but to the presence or absence of music in the manuscripts. These two aspects are not easy to dissociate, for the presence of music in play-manuscripts correlates with chronology: nearly all earlier manuscripts are without music; notation is found almost exclusively in those of the fifteenth century and after. But music seems to be the crucial factor in the silence-chants. For a start, there is not a simple historical transition from the short to the longer form. The single Silete occurs very frequently in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century sources.16 Indeed, both forms are found together in several plays: they number only seven, but include every single Passion and Easter play which contains the long form and has more than one silence-chant. Nearly all are of the late fifteenth century.17 The long and short forms of the silence-chant are in fact in a structurally significant opposition defined by the presence or absence of musical notation. The single Silete is never recorded with music. In some cases the relevant manuscript has no music for any items;18 15

16 17

18

Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 106: The [ ] short Silete calls [ ] must be considered as complete texts and not as incipits ; cf. ibid., microfiche catalogue, 3 C.1-3, pp. F9-F12. Ibid., microfiche catalogue, p. F9, C.1: Simple one or two word form Silete (silete) . See note 7. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2522f, 2816b, 3087c; B, ll. 2516f, 2809b, 3080 c; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 1-2, 1728d-30; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamesspiel, ll. 0a-b, 684a-c, 2139a-c; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2470f-m, 2540b, 2770a, 3551a; Trierer Theophilusspiel, ll. 1-2, 819-20; Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 195 a, 314a-b, 1139-40; Wiener Passionsspiel (thirteenth century), ll. 0a-1, 35a, 278a, 506a. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, Bozner Abendmahlspiel, Bozner Palmsonntags-

169


but even in those which have some, Silete is always unnotated.19 Most of the long formulae, by contrast, are notated;20 the few exceptions are nearly all in manuscripts without any music.21 The sole deviation from this schema is the notated Silete, silete in the Regensburger Osterspiel, a generally unrepresentative example.22 Otherwise, Silete, etc. and Silete, silete are always unnotated.23 This tight correlation of music and verbal forms strongly suggests that the single Silete is merely the incipit of the four-word formula, and that this is why it is invariably found unnotated. This hypothesis is supported most graphically in the four cases where the opposition between the two forms works within a single manuscript: where the the chant is first given as the full-length formula, notated, followed by a non-notated single Silete for its reprises.24

19

20

21

22 23

24

spiel, Bozner Verkündigungsspiel, Frankfurter Passionsspiel, Heidelberger Passionsspiel, Hessisches Weihnachtsspiel, Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, Luzerner Passionsspiel, Redentiner Osterspiel, Wiener Passionsspiel; cf. Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 106. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, Egerer Passionsspiel, Erlau III, IV, V, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Tiroler Passionsspiel, Wiener Osterspiel. Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 1139-40; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, Feldkircher Osterspiel, Füssener Osterspiel, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Trierer Theophilusspiel: line-numbers as in note 8. Manuscripts without any notation: Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, St. Galler Himmelfahrtsspiel, Wiener Passionsspiel. Line-numbers as in note 8. Manuscripts with some music: Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 2522f; B, l. 2516f; Rabers Passion, l. 2277c. See note 11. Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel, ll. 223a, 249a; Erlau III, ll. 942a-b; Erlau IV, ll. 308a-09; Erlau V, ll. 0a-c, 246a-b; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 1a; Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel, p. 485. Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 1v: long form, notated; fol. 36: Silete item wie das da vor geschriben stat (not notated); cf. Anthonius H. Touber (ed.), Das Donaueschinger Passionsspiel: Nach der Handschrift mit Einleitung und Kommentar neu herausgegeben, Stuttgart, 1985, ll. 1-2, 1728d-30; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2470g-m (additional 6-line sung German exhortation); ll. 2540b, 2770a, 3551a (single Silete ); Trierer Theophilusspiel, ll. 1-2: long form, notated; ll. 819-20: Hyr singet men nu Silete alse te voren [ ] ; Wiener Osterspiel, MS,

170


For these must be reprises; the chant will hardly have varied within a single play, and several plays, indeed, specifically gloss Silete as a repeat of the long chant.25 The same opposition almost certainly operates within manuscripts where none of the silence-chants has notation. This is clearest in Künzelsau, the Bozner Passionsspiel 1495 and the Wiener Passionsspiel, which give the long formula first where a notated manuscript would usually have included the music and a single Silete subsequently.26 But it is also visible in plays where most examples are Silete , but some are slightly longer.27 The manuscript evidence, then, strongly implies that Silete is a single-word incipit, most likely of Silete, silete, silentium habete , the only longer form explicitly recorded. This accords well with practical considerations: the chant s specific purpose was to quieten a large audience,28 yet a single (unamplified) Silete would barely have impinged on a noisy crowd of spectators outdoors. The long formula found in nearly all the notated examples represents a minimum; indeed even this might have needed repetition to make its effect. This is presumably why the silence-chant is performed by the complete angel

25

26

27

28

fol. 188, ll. 1139-40: long form, notated separately at end of manuscript; ll. 195a: Nu singet man: Silete. ; ll. 314a-b: Di engel [ ] singen: Silete. Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 1728d-30: Silete item wie das da vor geschriben stat ; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 684a-c, 2139a-c: Silete ut supra ; Trierer Theophilusspiel, ll. 819-20: Silete alse te voren ; Wiener Passionsspiel, l. 35a: Silete cum ricmo . Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 0c-d: long form, not notated; ll. 684a-c, 2139 a-c: Silete ut supra ; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 2522f (long form), ll. 2816 b, 3087c (single Silete ); Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, l. 2516f (long form), ll. 2809b, 3080c (single Silete ); Wiener Passionsspiel, ll. 0a-1 (long form), l. 35a ( Silete cum ricmo ); ll. 278a, 506a (single Silete ). Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 1, 87, 418: Silete ; l. 235: Silete, silete, etc. ; Erlau III, ll. 942a-b: Silete etc. ; ll. 680a-d: Silete ; Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel, ll. 71a, 97a, 125a, 135a, 172a: Silete ; ll. 223a, 249a: Silete etc. . Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, p. 46.

171


chorus, not the duo or (except once) the soloist.29 It may also explain why plays occasionally use other, longer chants, and even instrumental music, as quieteners ;30 it may even account for the short formula in the Regensburger Osterspiel and (possibly) the Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel. These are plays performed in the context of the liturgy, in an indoor acoustic, before an audience (or rather congregation) smaller and probably quieter and more recollected than those of the typical Passion play. And even the Regensburg melody as written does not end on its finalis F, giving it an open ending which allows it to be repeated almost endlessly, as the staging might require in some cases .31 The likelihood, then, is that the St Gall Passion Play will have used the long silence-chant. The melody must remain conjectural: all that survive are those of other plays; most are monophonic, but the Trierer Theophilusspiel has a two-part setting:

29

30

31

32, Hic cantat angelus ter Silete (l. 291a): see nos. 31-36 below. On the angels, see Chapter IV. E.g. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1545, 1571, ll. 2a-b: darnach fahend die Engel an zu Singen Silete oder Antiphonam de Sancta Trinitate ; Prager Abendmahlspiel, ll. 1a-2, Pro celesti gloria (unidentified); cf. J.H. Kuné, In the Beginning was the Word Das Prager Abendmahlspiel : The Words Rendered into Actions and Images , Neophilologus 87 (2003), pp. 79-96, esp. 94; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 265a, 443b: Silete vel cados ; Kaufbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 0a-d: Nachdem [ ] soll durch ainen TRUMETER silentium geblasen werden . Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 115.

172


32

32

[i]: Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 1v, ll. 1-2 (manuscript reads Dilete, dilete ). [ii]: Feldkircher Osterspiel, l. 6. [iii]: Füssener Osterspiel, MS, fol. 137, ll. 1-10. [iv]: Regensburger Osterspiel, ll. 91a-b (all as transcribed in Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 114). [v]: Wiener Osterspiel, MS, fol. 188, ll. 1139-40. [vi]: Trierer Theophilusspiel, MS, fol. 1r-v, ll. 1-2 (both as transcribed in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 321-22). The mensural melody in Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2470f-m, probably untypical of medieval plays, is not reproduced here.

173


In a detailed melodic analysis of most of these examples, Amstutz notes a similarity between the first Silete phrase in Donaueschingen and Feldkirch and recitation tones for short liturgical instructions (such as Oremus and Levate ), and proposes a similar melody for what she interprets as the short Silete in the Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel.33 The first phrase in Füssen, the second phrase in Donaueschingen and Feldkirch, and the whole melody in Regensburg are also similar to the melismatic passages in the Passion tone.34 Without being so rash as to propose a reconstruction of the St Gall Passion Play melody, it is reasonable to assume something along the lines of Donaueschingen, Feldkirch or Füssen. The quasi-liturgical solemnity of a chant like this would fit well with the atmosphere of the play as a whole, and melodic anticipation of the Passion tone would be tone for the dramatic commemoration of the Passion. The Miracle at Cana (ll. 16a-42) The play proper opens with Jesus s first recorded miracle, introduced by the angels silence-chant: 2, Iterum angeli (l. 16a). Jesus replies to 33 34

Ibid., pp. 114-24, esp. 116, 118, 120. Cf. 81, Hely, Hely , Chapter VIII.

174


Mary, who has told him that the bridegroom has run out of wine: 3 Respondens Iesus cantans antiphonam Quid mihi et tibi est, mulier? : Reines wip vnd mutter min, waz ruret mich der breste sin. Wan min zit inkommet nit noch. Fullent die crvge bit wazer doch. Vnd heizent zu erste schenken an vber dische den hohesten man.

(ll. 28a-34)

Though this is the sole play to contain this incipit, and though Bergmann does not deal with it at all, its identity is not problematical, and both Schuler and Pflanz correctly identify it.35 The antiphona in the direction indicates the mode 7 Magnificat antiphon for the Sunday after the Octave of the Epiphany: Quid mihi et tibi est, mulier? Nondum venit hora mea. Et convertit aquam in vinum, et crediderunt in eum discipuli eius. Hoc initium signorum fecit Jesus, et manifestavit gloriam suam.36

35

36

Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, München, 1972 (Münstersche MittelalterSchriften, 14); Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 518, and Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205), pp. 46-47. René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Rome, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12), no. 4526. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 82; Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fols. 160v-61 (cf. Hermann Reifenberg, Stundengebet und Breviere im Bistum Mainz seit der romanischen Epoche, Münster, 1964 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 40), p. 135, note 856); printed Worms breviary, 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 5515), sig. t2ra; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 79vb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (ibid., no. 5465), sig. f3v, f5v; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. y7rb; cf. Karlheinz Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Kassel [etc.], 1985 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88), fols. 26v-27.

175


But this chant does introduce a musical problem which dogs the reconstruction of the play s sung items. For Jesus to sing only as far as hora mea , as Pflanz assumes from the German of line 31, would make perfect sense textually but not musically, for the melody does not resolve on to its finalis G until the very end of the antiphon. Yet even in the aesthetic of medieval drama it would be unthinkable for Jesus to perform the third-person narrative section et convertit vinum [ ] et manifestavit gloriam suam . There are only three practical performance strategies, none entirely unproblematical: (i) Jesus could have sung only as far as mulier , finishing on G. This is musically impeccable, but gives a decidedly laconic chant; and the omitted phrase nondum venit hora mea is theologically a significant one. (ii) The music of the chant could have been altered. As mentioned before, the limited evidence of play-manuscripts suggests that this was done rarely, involving only minor changes.37 In this case the melody on venit hora mea is a fifth above the finalis G: so radical an alteration would have been highly unlikely. However, (iii) The cadence de-e d-d on hora mea could have been judged acceptable. This may well have been the case, since d is the dominant of mode 7, and the cadence has melodic integrity:38

37

38

Rainer Gstrein, Anmerkungen zu den Gesängen der Osterspiele des Sterzinger Debs -Kodex , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik. Akten des 2. Symposiums der Sterzinger Osterspiele (12.-16. April 1992), Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 91-98, esp. 93-94; see also St Gall Passion Play chants nos. 54 and 55 below for melodic changes in Alsfeld, Admont and Eger. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4526. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 82.

176


The third possibility seems to be the most plausible; but this simple example gives a good idea of the practical performance questions raised even by chants which are intrinsically easy to identify. John the Baptist; the Baptism of Jesus (ll. 42a-117) This episode is also introduced by the silence-chant: 4, Iterum angeli Silete (l. 42a). First, John is interrogated by the Jews. Is he the Christ? He assures them he is not: he is unworthy to unfasten the sandals of the one who will come after him: 5 Respondens Iohannis cantet antiphonam Qui post me venit : Ir vragent, ob ich si Crist. So sprechen ich, daz die warheit ist, daz ich wol gerne wolte, daz ich nach werde solte inknuppen ime die riemelin, die vme sine schuhe sin. Dez bin ich vnwirdig gar. Wan er weset offenbar, so nemen ich abe sere. Des habe er vmer ere.

(ll. 64a-74)

Bergmann does not identify this chant,39 but the antiphon specified in the direction can only be the mode 4 Magnificat antiphon for the second week of Advent:40 39 40

Bergmann, Studien, p. 207. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4493. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 11v. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 112; Barth. 160, fols.

177


Pflanz commits one of his typical errors.41 Overlooking the specification of antiphona , he identifies three chants, two of them responsories.42 He then chooses one of the responsories: Me enim oportet minui, illum autem crescere. Qui post me venit, ante me factus est, cuius non sum dignus corrigiam calciamenti solvere.43

He does so because the German die riemelin, || die vme sine schuhe sin (ll. 69-70), corresponds to the wording of the responsory s corrigiam calciamenti rather than the calciamenta of the antiphon. Knowing that the liturgical text intended here is Hesbert s antiphon 4493 shows how misleading the assumption of a close correspondence between German dialogue and Latin chant can be. For not only the riemelin , but also the lines wan er weset offenbar, || so nemen ich abe sere (ll. 72-73) do indeed correspond closely to the wording in the responsory which Pflanz assumes; yet it is demonstrably not the chant specified. The fact that chant and dialogue do not correspond may have been intentional: John s speech may have been based on biblical rather than liturgical wording. Or possibly a different chant (perhaps indeed Me

41 42

43

221v, 151 v; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 151v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 51vb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. a8v. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 10-11, 47-48. Pflanz cites Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 112: antiphon Qui post me venit ; fol. 119v: responsory Me oportet minui (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7137); fol. 139: responsory Ecce agnus Dei (ibid., no. 6575). Ibid., no. 7137.

178


oportet minui ) was used in an earlier version of the play, whereas in the version recorded in manuscript St Gall MS 919 the chant had been changed, but not the German dialogue.44 A messenger then asks John directly who he is; John describes himself as a voice of one crying in the wilderness to prepare the way for the Lord. These two chants are helpfully considered together. 6, 7 [6] Iterum querat [unus] nunciorum cantans Quis es et dicat: Sit du nit Elyas bist noch der ware heilant Crist, so sage vns, wie du sist genant, daz wir ez vorbaz dun erkant den, die vns zu dir hant gesant. [7] Respondet Iohannis Ego vox clamantis et dicat: Ich bin ez, eine stimme, die do rufet vnd in der wuste get. Ir sollent bereden Godes wege. Wer nu mines rades wil plegen, der sal den dauf inphahen, wil er zu Gode nahen.

(ll. 74a-79)

(ll. 79a-85)45

Bergmann identifies neither chant. Schuler records the question Quis es? only in this play, but does not identify it. Pflanz assumes this is a liturgical chant verbally identical to John 1:22: Quis es ut responsum demus his qui miserunt nos? ; but he admits he can find no such item, and indeed none exists.46 This is one of the very few instances where the St Gall Passion Play s ubiquitous cantare direction demonstrably applies to biblical material.47 44

45

46

47

Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, pp. 83-93, 253-56, discusses analogous instances in English plays. In the manuscript, unus is missing from the direction. See Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, p. 102, l. 74a. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 511b; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 136-37. Others: 62, Pater, si possibile est, transeat and 79, Regem non habemus . See

179


John s reply, found otherwise only in Künzelsau,48 is identified by Schuler (no. 511c) as the antiphon Ego vox clamantis in deserto for the second or third week of Advent. However, this antiphon (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2610), which was not at all widespread, was not used in Mainz, Worms or Speyer; neither was the similar antiphon 1315, which prefixes the words Ait Iohannes , nor indeed was any liturgical chant beginning with or including the words Ego vox clamantis .49 The closest matches in these dioceses are the mode 5 antiphon Vox clamantis (no. 5506): Vox clamantis in deserto: parate viam Domini, rectas facite semitas Dei nostri ,50 and the verbally identical versicle (no. 8246). Pflanz assumes the use of Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5506, with a prefixed ego and ending at viam domini .51 This, unlike many of his suggested alterations, would in fact be melodically feasible, as the phrase ends on the finalis F, and the opening F on vox could conceivably have accommodated an added ego ; however, the conservatism of plays as regards chant melodies makes such alterations unlikely.

48 49

50

51

Chapter IV. Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 2151a-d (not listed in Schuler, 511c). Ego vox clamantis (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2610): found in only two Corpus base manuscripts and five CANTUS (A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant [http://publish.uwo.ca/~cantus]) sources (France, Italy, Spain); John R. Bryden & David G. Hughes, An Index of Gregorian Chant, Cambridge, Mass., 1969, vol. I: Alphabetical Index, p. 155, cites only the Lucca Antiphonal, p. 16 (Schuler s source). Ait Johannes: Ego vox clamantis (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1315): only in one CANTUS source (Italy); not recorded in Bryden & Hughes, Index of Gregorian Chant. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 11; cf. Reifenberg, Stundengebet, p. 131, note 843; p. 132, note 844. Also in: Worms breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 47v; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. a8r. Cf. Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936, pp. 108283. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 48-50.

180


Vox clamantis was probably used, unaltered, in Alsfeld and Heidelberg.52 But there the antiphon is a free-standing introductory chant for John. In the St Gall Passion Play Ego vox clamantis is closely related to the messengers question Quis es [...]? , a point Pflanz overlooks, possibly because he deals with the two items in widely separated parts of his study.53 Question and answer are probably Vulgate verses (John 1:22, 23) performed as recitative: 54

John sings as Jesus approaches him for baptism: 8 Tunc Christus veniens ad Iohannem quo veniente cantet responsorium Ecce [agnus Dei] 52

53 54

(ll. 93a-93b)

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 463d-e; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 42; Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (LandesBibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. II, p. 14; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 26a-f; ll. 132a-c are probably biblical (John 1:23). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 136-37 and 48-50 for 6 and 7 respectively. John 1:22-23, Passion tone.

181


In the manuscript the incipit (l. 93b) reads Ecce magus deus ; but since no such responsory exists, this is clearly wrong and Schützeichel is right to correct it to Ecce agnus Dei . Bergmann notes that the chant is marked as a responsory, but does not identify it.55 What was clearly intended was a mode 7 responsory for the Christmas season:

55

Bergmann, Studien, p. 206.

182

VI. Before the Passion V. Hoc est testimonium quod perhibuit Iohannes. Qui post me venit...56

Schuler, Bergmann and Pflanz all identify the chant correctly,57 but in Pflanz s case for the wrong reasons: despite the explicit direction he also considers the antiphon Ecce agnus Dei , opting for the responsory only because it corresponds to the German dialogue.58 Chants with this incipit are rare in German plays; they are found only in Redentin and in the Hessian plays, without music or indication of liturgical type;59 and despite Schuler s assumptions, it is not clear that any of these plays used the responsory.60 Jesus now requests baptism from John: 9 Tunc Christus cantet Baptiza me, Iohannis et dicat: Ile vnd deufe mich zu hant So gesegen ich dich.

56

57

58 59

60

(ll. 99a-101)

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6575. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 55v. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fols. 254v, 255; Barth. 161, fols. 196r-v (both as responsory in Christmas Octave); Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 179v (matins of the day after St Thomas of Canterbury); Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.23, fol. 65rb (Christmas octave); printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. c5r (Christmas matins) and d7r (matins of the Octave of Christmas); Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 15; Carl Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, Strasbourg, 1907 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1963], p. 462. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 168, Bergmann, Studien, p. 206, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 11 and 51-52. Ibid., p. 51, notes 1-2. Cf. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2490. Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 338a-b; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 490b-c; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 44; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 23; Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragment, l. 64d (not listed in Schuler); Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 188b-g (John 1:29, 33, 34). Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 168, possibly following Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 14. The dicit direction in Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragment, l. 64d, suggests that a simpler kind of chant was also known in the Hessian tradition. Other possibilities: the antiphon Ecce agnus Dei (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2490); end of the antiphon Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem (ibid., no. 2523).

183


Hartl and Schützeichel are surely right to conjecture that line 100 should read Ile zu hant vnd deufe mich , to rhyme with line 101. The St Gall Passion Play is the only German play to contain a chant with this incipit. Schuler deals unsatisfactorily with this item, referring to it only under no. 168 ( Ecce agnus Dei ) but not identifying it; nor is Pflanz s identification clear.61 It is in fact, as Wolter had seen, part of Super ripam Iordanis , a mode 8 rhyming antiphon for Epiphany and its octave written in Leonine verses: 62

The antiphon is particularly characteristic of German uses.63 The play manuscript abbreviates John s name (l. 99a) as iohs . Mone and Wolter expand this to Iohannes , Schützeichel to Iohan61 62

63

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 11-12, 52-53. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5062. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 72v. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 153r-v; Barth. 160, fol. 273v (both read indutus splendore ); Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 194v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 107v; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. e6v; all as antiphon in the Octave of the Epiphany; cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 25r-v. Emil Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977] (Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41), p. 117; see Bergmann, Studien, p. 206 and note 1669. Nineteen of the twenty-six CANTUS sources are from Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, and Slovenia.

184


nis , but Hartl to the vocative Iohanne .64 Pflanz approves Iohannes , the form found in the single Mainz source from which he cites the antiphon.65 However, the text of Super ripam Jordanis is in fact singularly variable. In the third line some sources have Iohanne , which rhymes with te in line 3 and Iordane in line 4 and so might be thought of as the correct version; but others have Iohannes;66 even Iohannes Baptista is found for Iohannes, baptiza 67 and Iordanis for Iordane .68 The chant is too verbally diverse to help the textual editor. Finishing the chant at benedico te , as Pflanz suggests,69 is melodically unfeasible: it must continue to the end to reach the mode 8 finalis G. John is reluctant to baptise the Lord, but Jesus urges him to oblige: 10: Sine modo sic enim 64

65

66

67 68

69

(ll. 103a-07)

Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, 2 vols., Karlsruhe, 1846-48, vol. I, pp. 49-128, l. 93a; Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu, l. 99a; Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, l. 99a; Eduard Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Halle/Saale, 1952 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41), pp. 56-131, l. 114. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 52-53, citing Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 153r-v; noted approvingly by Hansjürgen Linke, [Review of: Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 90 (1979), pp. 154-60, esp. 158. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 72v; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 194v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 107v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 68ra; printed Speyer breviaries: 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. e6v; c. 1500 (ibid., no. 5466), sig. F3ra. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 25r-v. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 72v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 68ra; printed Speyer breviary, c. 1500 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5466), sig. F3ra; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 25r-v. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 53.

185


This chant, from the antiphon Johannes quidem clamabat thew 3:15, is dealt with in Chapter V.

70

or Mat-

At the baptism, a dove appears above Jesus s head, and the Father s voice proclaims Jesus as his own beloved son: 11, 12 [11] Tunc mittatur columba super caput Iesu et cantet ter aliqua persona abscondita voce Patris Hic est filius meus dilectus [12] Et cantent duo angeli Baptizat minister regem

(ll. 111a-d)

Bergmann does not identify either of these chants.71 The first cannot be identified with certainty. Similar sung texts are restricted to Hessia and the Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel;72 none contains notation.73 All, like the St Gall Passion Play, read hic est filius meus dilectus . The direction in Maastricht is sprach ; in the Hessian plays, apart from Heidelberg with its habitual sprichtt , it is cantare , suggesting, particularly from its use in the earlier plays, liturgical chant rather than biblical recitative. Alsfeld and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle deal with the episode identically: during the baptism the chorus sings the antiphon Baptista contremuit ;74 then Maiestas , the voice of God the Father, sings (once only, it would seem) Hic est filius meus dilectus .75 To the 70 71 72 73

74 75

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3503. Bergmann, Studien, pp. 206-07. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 263. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 27; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 224b-d: Hic est filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi complacui ; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 527d-e; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 51; Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragment, ll. 97b-c (not listed in Schuler); Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 651a-b. Cf. Cobie Kuné, Er taufte mit Wasser: Zur Taufe Christi im deutschen religiösen Drama und in der bildenden Kunst des späten Mittelalters , Neophilologus 84 (2000), pp. 241-53, esp. the table on pp. 248-49. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1552. The manuscript of the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 26a, has the first three neumes of the antiphon Baptista contremuit (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1552)

186


wording of the Alsfeld manuscript Dreimüller editorially adds in quo mihi complacui ,76 imported from the Heidelberger Passionsspiel without any explicit rationale. So whilst the St Gall Passion Play is superficially close to the Hessian tradition, the Hessian plays show a different musical treatment, using a different antiphon (St Gall has Baptizat miles regem ; see no. 12 above), and a single rather than a threefold divine pronouncement. There are on the face of it four possible sources: (i) the end of the refrain of the mode 3 responsory Hodie in Jor77 dane : Hodie in Jordane baptizato Domino aperti sunt caeli et sicut columba super eum Spiritus mansit et vox Patris intonuit: Hic est filius meus dilectus in quo mihi complacui[t].

(ii) the end of the refrain of the mode 2 responsory In columbae spe78 cie :

76 77

above Babtista [sic]. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 527a-e; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 50-1. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 16. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6849. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 66r-v ( complacui ); this manuscript sets -placui a third too high; corrected here. Also in Worms breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 98; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fols. 66vb-67ra; printed Speyer breviary, 1478 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5464), sig. F2vb. Cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 23.

187

The St Gall Passion Play In columbae specie Spiritus Sanctus visus est. Paterna vox audita est: Hic est filius meus dilectus in quo mihi bene complacui[t]. Ipsum audite.

(iii) the end of mode 8 (or 5) antiphon Caeli aperti sunt :79 Caeli aperti sunt super eum, et vox facta est de caelo, dicens: Hic est filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi complacui[t].

(iv) Vulgate text (Matthew 3:17):80 78

79

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6892. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 73v-75, which (as reproduced here) transposes the melody up a fifth. Ipsum audite omitted in some sources. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 154, fol. 64 ( ipsum audite added above line); Barth. 160, fol. 277r-v ( dilectus and ipsum audite ); Worms breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 101; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 67vb (including ipsum audite ); Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. x6va. Cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 25v. Note that the section Hic est filius meus dilectus is melodically identical with that in the Transfiguration responsory In splendenti nube (Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 398; no Corpus antiphonalium number) which Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 263, suggests. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1835. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 72r; Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 153 (including dilectus ); Worms breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 106v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 68ra; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. x7va. Cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 25.

188


Pflanz considers various possibilities (though without naming the chants he quotes), concluding that it cannot be known which, if any, was intended.81 In this case, however, considerations of performance may narrow down the choice. The long, complex passages from the responsories Hodie in Jordane and In columbae specie need not have challenged the hidden performer, who could have been one of the angel chorus; but they do not lend themselves to threefold repetition, as the play direction specifies; nor, arguably, would the dramatic impact of so long a chant at this point have been optimal, especially since the baptism is followed by the long antiphon Baptizat miles regem (see no. 12 above). This strongly suggests the use of the short, simple extract from the antiphon Caeli aperti sunt , or of biblical recitative. As Pflanz recognizes, the wording of the section Hic est filius meus in all the liturgical chants is inconsistent. Particularly in textonly service-books there are confusions as to whether a particular chant includes dilectus , bene , or ipsum audite , or has complacui or complacuit (see nos. 54-56 below). The precise form sung in an actual performance of the St Gall Passion Play might thus have reflected the form familiar to the performers. The baptism is also accompanied by a chant of the angel duo: [12] Et cantent duo angeli Baptizat minister regem et unus dicat: Hie deufet einen herren sin kneth. Daz ist der demudikeide reth Der heilge geist in leret, sin vatter in auch eret. 80 81

Matthew 3:17, Passion tone. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 12-13, 54-55.

189

The St Gall Passion Play Der rufet mit ludem schalle daz er ime wole gevalle.

(ll. 111d-17)

The manuscript reading minister (l. 111d) is a scribal error which escaped Schützeichel because of his lack of attention to the liturgical background. The chant clearly intended82 is the mode 8 antiphon Baptizat miles regem for the Octave of the Epiphany: 83

As Schuler notes, the St Gall Passion Play is the only German play to use this chant. Pflanz s argument that only the three words in the incipit were sung here is unconvincing.84 Though musically possible ( regem ends on the mode 8 finalis G), this would have given a very short chant, 82

83

84

Ibid., p. 55; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 40; Bergmann, Studien, p. 207 and note 1676. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1553. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 72v-73. Also in: Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 273v; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 194v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 107v; printed Speyer breviary, c. 1500 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5466), sig. F3ra. Cf. Processionale monasticum ad usum Congregationis Gallicae Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, Solesmes, 1893 [rpt. Paris-Tournai, 1983], p. 44. Variants: protestabatur and protestata est . Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 12-13, 55.

190


hardly adequate to the sacramental solemnity of the baptismal action, perhaps even intrinsically ridiculous. The Temptation of Jesus in the Desert (ll. 117a-61b) The important sequence presenting the temptation of Jesus in the desert is introduced by the silence-chant: 13, Iterum Sile[te] (l. 117a). The episode uses many chants from the liturgy of the First Sunday in Lent. First, Jesus is led into the wilderness; this is accompanied by the responsory Ductus est Jesus sung by the two angels (14-15, ll. 123a27).85 This chant is dealt with in Chapter V. Jesus rejects the Devil s first demand, that he should turn stones into bread: 16 Respondet Iesus et cantet Non in solo pane vivit homo et dicat: Die heilge scrift vns dat vorgith, daz vom brot aleine nith lige des menschen leben, daz ime von Gode ist gegeben. Sin heil baz an deme stat, daz von Godes munde gat.

(ll. 127a-33)

This chant is found elsewhere only in two Hessian plays and in Künzelsau, none of which indicates musical form.86 The Heidelberg sprichtt direction means little, as this play nearly always has biblical material; the Alsfeld respondet is unspecific, and little is known about the general practice in Künzelsau ( dicat ). On this evidence there is no pressing reason to doubt that the St Gall Passion Play cantet direction introduces a liturgical item here, especially in the mouth 85 86

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6529. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1151a-b ( respondet ); Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 171; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 264a-c ( sprichtt ). Not in Schuler: Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 2541b-d ( dicat ).

191


of a competent singer like Jesus. If so, it will have been one of two antiphons for the First Sunday in Lent: [i] Non in solo pane vivit homo, sed in omni verbo Dei. [ii] Non in solo pane vivit homo, sed in omni verbo quod procedit de ore Dei.87

Both antiphons are short and melodically unchallenging, a further reason to doubt that recitative was used. While Schuler s Leittext (no. 165b) is Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3920, Dreimüller asserts that Alsfeld used the shorter antiphon 3919;88 neither offers a rationale. Pflanz adduces lines 132-33 ( an deme ... || daz von godes munde gat ) to identify the St Gall Passion Play chant as the longer antiphon 3920.89 He recognizes it is rarer in Mainz, but he underestimates its rarity. His Mainz sources of antiphon 3920 are largely Carthusian.90 The shorter antiphon 3919 predominates in the diocesan use, as also in Worms and Speyer.91 Mainz diocesan sources of antiphon 3920 are often of the fifteenth century.92 Almost certainly, then, the chant is the shorter antiphon 3919:93 87

88 89 90

91

92 93

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3919 (e.g. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 108v) and 3920 respectively (e.g. Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 142, fols. 148v-49). Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 22. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 59-60. Three of the five Mainz sources cited by Pflanz, p. 60, note 2, are Carthusian: Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. I 365 (fifteenth century); I 438 (fourteenth century); I 439 (twelfth-thirteenth century). Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 108v; Mainz breviaries: Aschaffenburg, Ms. perg. 19, fol. 123; Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 188 (only shorter antiphon); Barth. 160, fol. 317 (only shorter antiphon); printed Mainz breviaries: 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5394), sig. 130; Enchiridion ecclesie Moguntine, 1509, sig. 192; Mainz processional, Aschaffenburg, Ms. perg. 32, fol. 218v; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. 4ra (only shorter antiphon); printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. h1v-h2r; Worms breviaries: Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 518, fol. 88; cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 166; printed Worms breviary, 1490 (ibid., no. 5515), sig. z3rb (only shorter antiphon). Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 142, fols. 148v-49; Barth. 154, fol. 97v. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 108v.

192


The Devil then tempts Jesus to throw himself off the roof of the Temple: 17 Tunc Dyabolus ducat Iesum secum ad pinnaculum templi cantans Angelis suis mandavit et dicat: Bist du der ware Godes sun, sich, so salt du also dun vnd salt dich dohin nider lan. Wan wir von dir gelesen han, daz dich zu hant der engel dreit. Dar vme geschiht dir nummer leit.

(ll. 133a-39)

Schuler records this chant only in Alsfeld, because he follows Mone s grossly erroneous reading, Tunc Dyabolus ducat Ihesum ad pinnaculum templi cum angelis suis malis , and so does not recognize that the same chant is used in the St Gall Passion Play. This misreading was corrected by Wolter and Schützeichel.94 The type of the chant is not given. Liturgical text is suggested by the combination of the cantans direction and the incipit wording, since the two corresponding biblical verses preface Angelis suis with other words: Quoniam angelis suis mandavit de te (Psalm 90 [91]:11) and Scriptum est enim: Quia angelis suis mandavit de te

94

Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 24; Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 49-128, l. 127a; Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu, l. 133a; Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, l. 133a-b.

193


(Mark 4:6). Admittedly, a play which used either biblical verse could dispose of the introductory words and begin at Angelis . There are three liturgical possibilities, all from the First Sunday in Lent: (i) a mode 1 responsory from matins:

V. Super aspidem et basiliscum ambulabis et conculabis leonem et draconem. In manibus portabunt te )

The variant reading Angelis suis Deus mandavit de te seems to be found only in Mainz, and thus will probably not have been used in this play.95 95

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6087. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 106r-v (without deus ). Also in: Mainz antiphonals: Kassel, 2o theol. 117, fol. 64r-v (without deus ); Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 187v (with deus ), Barth. 154, fol. 96v (without deus ); Barth. 160, fol. 316v (with deus );

194


(ii) the mode 2 gradual for mass:

V. In manibus portabunt te ne umquam offendas ad lapidem pedem tuum.96

96

Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fols. 227v-228; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 518, fol. 87v; cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 169 (all without deus ); cod. pal. lat. 521, fol. 69v (incipit only); printed Worms breviary, c. 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515), sig. z2va (without deus ); Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 86ra (without deus ); Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. 3ra-b (without deus ); printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (ibid., no. 5465), sig. h1r (without deus ). Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 25v (final cca cadence wrongly written as ddc in manuscript). Also in: Mainz missals: Kassel, 2o theol. 100, fol. 39vb (neumed), 2o theol. 125, fol. 36rb (both without deus ); Missale Maguntinum, 1507, sig. xxiiira (without deus ); printed Mainz gradual, c. 1500 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 10985), sig. 23v; printed Worms missal, 1488, sig. XXVvb; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. xlira-b; printed Speyer missal, 1501, fol. XXVIra-b (= sig. diira-b) (both without deus ). Without Deus also in St Gall, cod. 339 (Paléographie musicale: Les principaux manuscrits de chant grégorien, ambrosien, mozarabe, gallican, publiés en facsimilés phototypiques, vol. I: Codex 339 de la Bibliothèque de Saint-Gall (Xe siècle): Antiphonale missarum Sancti Gregorii, Solesmes, 1889, p. 35); Einsiedeln, cod. 121 (ibid., vol. IV: Le codex 121 de la Bibliothèque d Einsiedeln (Xe-XIe siècle): Antiphonale missarum Sancti Gregorii,

195


(iii) a versicle used in first and second vespers: 97

The dramatic tradition is of no help here, since a comparable chant is found only in Alsfeld, without any melodic indications: Dreimüller does not identify it at all; Schuler suggests the responsory, but seemingly without having considered the gradual or versicle;98 yet the dicere direction in this play suggests simple material, perhaps the versicle or even recitative scriptural text.99 Pflanz says the St Gall Passion Play chant is the gradual, though he seems not to have found (or perhaps even looked for) the chant in

97

98

99

Solesmes, 1894, pp. 99-100). Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7945. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 110v (words and music of first three words only). Also in: Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 317; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 226; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 162v; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. 1rb-va). No complete melodic source found; the melody here is from Liber usualis, p. 259, based on the incipit notation in Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 110v. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1159b-c. dicit Sathanas Angelis suis deus mandavit de te etc. (not in Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 173). Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 22; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 24, citing Hartker and Lucca Antiphonals, Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934, p. 1067, and Processionale monasticum, p. 193. Johannes Janota, Zur Funktion der Gesänge in der hessischen Passionsspielgruppe , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Texte und Musik, Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 109-20, esp. 116, follows Schuler. Cf. Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), pp. 204-10, esp. 208.

196


the office, since he makes no reference to any office-books.100 It is however impossible to decide between these alternatives. Since part of the chant s function was to cover the movement involved in leading Jesus to the pinnaculum templi , the versicle would probably have been too short; but either the long responsory (probably without its verse) or the slightly shorter gradual, both melodically elaborate, would have been ideal. Elsewhere in the play responsories are used to cover lengthy stage business; for instance 87, Ecce quomodo moritur iustus at the burial of Jesus. Since 14, Ductus est Iesus and 15, Si es filius Dei suggest that in this play Devil had a demanding musical role (see Chapters IV and V), a responsory or gradual melody seems thinkable. Jesus rejects the Devil s temptation to jump off the Temple roof; and also his third temptation, to worship the Devil in return for earthly power: 18 Antiphon Vade, Satanas, non temptabis 19 Antiphon Dominum Deum tuum adorabis

(ll. 139a-43).101 (ll. 147a-51).102

These chants are dealt with in Chapter V. The Devil, vanquished, retreats, to the sound of a triumphal angelic chant: 20 Tunc recedente Dyabolo accedant angeli cantantes Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus [No German dialogue] 100

101 102

(ll. 161a-b)

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 113-14. He does however refer (p. 114) to the incipit as die Anfangsworte eines in vielen Missalen als Graduale, Versus und Responsorium Anwendung findenden Gesanges , showing a certain terminological confusion. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5303. Ibid., no. 2397.

197


Towards the end of the play, the same chant is sung by the blessed souls whom Jesus has led out of Hell into Paradise: [96]

Tunc deducat eos ad paradysum Quo cum pervenerint cantent Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus [No German dialogue]

(ll. 1289a-b)

This item is entirely overlooked by Pflanz, though it is included in Hartl s edition.103 The incipit is found in only a few plays, none of which notates it.104 Bergmann simply refers to Schuler s list.105 Whilst some plays use Sanctus as an introductory chant, effectively as a substitute for the angels Silete ,106 St Gall, like the Wiener Passionsspiel,107 uses it to underscore two moments of Christ s triumph over Satan. In two plays (Künzelsau and Eger) the wording shows that it is part of the Te Deum: 108

103

104

105 106

107 108

Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, pp. 56-131, ll. 199a-200, 1529b-30; though Hartl offers no verbal continuation and thus presumably considers the chant complete. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 559: Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 62a-c; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 128a-k; Luzerner Passionsspiel 1545, 1571, ll. 2a-b; Wiener Passionsspiel, ll. 33a-c. Not in Schuler: Hessisches Weihnachtspiel, ll. 407a-b; Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel, l. 214b. Cf. discussion in Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, pp. 235-39. Bergmann, Studien, p. 210, note 1696. Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 62a-c; Luzerner Passionsspiel 1545, 1571, ll. 2a-b: darnach fahend die Engel an zu Singen Silete oder Antiphonam de Sancta Trinitate . Wiener Passionsspiel, ll. 33a-c. Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 128a-k; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 62a-c. Melody: Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, neumis Laudunensibus (Cod. 239) et Sangallensibus (Codicum Sangallensis 359 et Einsidlensis 121) nunc auctum, Solesmes [etc.], 1979, p. 838; cf. Liber usualis, p. 1832 (solemn tone). See also the simple tone in Graduale triplex, p. 841; Liber usualis, p. 1835.

198


In the Wiener Passionsspiel the words are those of a mode 5 Trinity Sunday antiphon:109

This may also be the chant intended in the Lucerne tradition.110 109

110

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4796. Wiener Passionsspiel, ll. 33a-c. Melody: Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu., 48, fol. 81r. Thus listed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 559. See Luzerner Osterspiel, I, ll. 2a-b: darnach fahend die Engel an zu Singen Silete oder Antiphonam de Sancta Trinitate (1545 and 1571 plays). But this could equally (or more) probably denote the Trinity Sunday antiphon Gloria tibi, trinitas (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2948) used in Alsfeld, Eger and the Frankfurter Passionsspiel (Schuler, no. 224), or conceivably even another Trinity Sunday antiphon: Te Deum patrem (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5117), Tibi decus et imperium (Ibid., no. 5146), or Laus et perennis gloria (Ibid., no. 3601). Marshall Blakemore Evans, Das Osterspiel von Luzern: Eine historisch-kritische Einleitung , [trans.] Paul Hagmann, Schweizer Theaterjahrbuch 27 (1961), pp. 1-275, esp. 73, note 7, is surely wrong to suggest the introit Benedicta sit sancta Trinitas .

199


A third possibility, a stanza from the Corpus Christi hymn Christe caeli Domine , is only used in Lucerne, and is perhaps an unlikely choice for the St Gall Passion Play.111 But either the Te Deum or the office antiphon might equally well have been used. The Te Deum is a standard part of any diocesan liturgy; the antiphon was familiar in Mainz, Worms and Speyer, as elsewhere in Germany, as a lauds antiphon daily per annum as well as on Trinity Sunday.112 In Mainz and Speyer it is also found after the Epiphany.113 German plays use the triple Sanctus in both an introductory and a triumphal function (see nos. 72 and 73), but they show no clear correlation of the Te Deum and the office antiphon with either function which might suggest one or the other as more suitable in the St Gall Passion Play.114 Amstutz, who convincingly reconstructs the threefold Sanctus in the Mühlhäuser Zehnjungfrauenspiel as the antiphon 4796 in Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium, notes that the sweeping, bright and jubilant melody is particularly well suited to its triumphal function. Her suggestion that it would fit several other plays, in111

112

113

114

Luzerner Passionsspiel 1597: Sanctus ut in die Corporis Christi , cited by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 559; the manuscript source is as yet unverified. This chant is regarded as unlikely outside Lucerne by Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 236. Trinity: Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, Barth. 94, fol. 47v; Mainz breviary, Barth. 150, fol. 273v; four German and Austrian CANTUS sources; Reifenberg, Stundengebet, p. 143, note 875. Per annum: Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 35; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. aa7; Psalterium Spirense, 1515, XIII (= sig. B vi); five Austrian and Slovenian CANTUS sources; Reifenberg, Stundengebet, p. 72, note 497. Mainz antiphonal, lat. qu. 48, fol. 81 (Lauds, First Sunday after the Octave of the Epiphany); printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. f3 (Lauds antiphon in the week of the Sunday after Epiphany). Cf. Zutphen antiphonal, Zutphen, Gemeentelijk Archief, 6, fol. 52 ( De regum ). Cf. Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, pp. 237-38. Amstutz (p. 235) distinguishes three uses of the Sanctus chant: (i) angelic adoration of the Lord; (ii) in connection with Christ s life on earth; (iii) praise to God by the redeemed souls. But she too can show no correlation of a particular chant with a particular function.

200


cluding this one, is certainly very plausible.115 If the Te Deum was used, it could have been performed to one of the standard plainsong settings; the solemn tone given above is perhaps the most likely. Interestingly, whichever chant was used in the St Gall Passion Play, it was one typical not of the Hessian plays, or of regions close to the play s homeland, but of much more distant parts (Swabia, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary). Mary Magdalene (ll. 161c-81a; 191a-211a; 239a-43) To point up Mary s eventual conversion (ll. 243a-315), three glimpses are given of her previous dissolute Weltleben . In each case this is expressed in the sexually suggestive motif of dancing with iuvenes : 21 Tunc Maria Magdalena cum una puella et duobus iuvenibus curizet dicens: Ich bin [ein] vledig iunges wip vnd dragen einen stolzen lip. Ich wil mit freuden vrolich sin. Zu danzen stet das gemude min. Weme freude ist swere, daz ist mir gar vnmere.

(ll. 161c-67)

Schützeichel wrongly gives the manuscript ii iuu ib3 as duo iuvenibus .116 Mary s second appearance is introduced by the silence-chant 24, Iterum angeli Sil[ete] (l. 191a). See no. 1 above. 25 Tunc veniat Maria Magdalena secundo [et] dicat tripudians: Wie stolz ist nu min mut, Mich dunket der werlete freide gut.

115

116

Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel, l. 214b; Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 238 and note 13. Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel, p. 199, l. 161c; St Gall MS 919, p. 199, l. 8.

201

The St Gall Passion Play Wir sollen springen und danzen vnd auch bit den knappen ranzen. Der vns nit gerne sehe vro, der muze virbornen als ein stro. 31 Tunc terci[o] Maria Magdalena tripudians dicat: Wir sollen abir vorbaz me bit freude leben, reht als e. Vns kummet des suszen megen zit, die mangen herzen vreude git.

(ll. 191b-197)

(ll. 239a-43)

There is no indication of the melody of Mary Magdalene s dance; about all that can be said is that the German plays seem to have used stringed instruments, traditionally associated with lasciviousness, for similar scenes.117 These instances of Mary s Weltleben are placed in significant counterpoint with other episodes: the first follows Jesus s routing of the Devil (ll. 123a-161b) and precedes the calling of Peter and Andrew (ll. 181b-191). The second follows the summoning of the apostles and precedes the forgiveness of the adultress (ll. 211b-239). The third follows the adultress episode and precedes Mary s own conversion (ll. 243a-315; see nos. 33-36 below and in Chapter V). The Summoning of Peter and Andrew (ll. 181b-91) After baptism and temptation in the wilderness, Jesus s first act is to call disciples, represented in this play by the pair Peter and Andrew. Seeing them cleaning their nets, he summons them: 117

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 1789a; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 215: Et sic vigellator incipit wigellare et corisant Luciper cum Maria Magdalena et alii demones . In the Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, Mary s paramours have a lutten (l. 110) and a gigle (l. 130); cf. ll. 130a-b: Nu fachent sÿ an mit dem / seitten spil ze hoffieren (no notation). No instruments are specified in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel, but see l. 972: phijf vff and l. 984: ach, meister, lasze vns din phiffen horen . Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, pp. 48-52: II. B. Die Instrumentalmusik .

202

VI. Before the Passion 22 Tunc videns Iesus Petrum et Andream lavantes retia cantet Venite post me et dicat: Peter vnd Andreas, komment. Vnd volgen ir mir sollent. Stellent nach luden vwer garn. Vnd lazent daz vischen varn. Ir sollent der lude vischer wesen, wie sie zu der selen genesen.

(ll. 181a-87)

Bergmann only goes as far as suggesting that the cantet direction could mean liturgical rather than biblical material (Matthew 4:19); he suggests no specific chant.118 No fewer than five items from the liturgy of St Andrew could in principle have been intended. (i) The mode 1 introit for the vigil mass:119 Dominus secus mare Galileae vidit duos fratres Petrum et Andream et vocavit eos: venite post me, faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum.

(ii) The mode 8 communio for the feast:120 118 119

120

Bergmann, Studien, p. 212. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 105v. Also in Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 118, fol. 104v (with fieri ); Kassel, 2o theol. 100, fol. 223vb; 2o theol. 125, fol. 113va; Missale Maguntinum, 1507, sig. clxx; printed Worms missal, 1488, sig. CXXV; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522, sig. CCXXVra; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. ccxiiiva; printed Speyer missal, 1501, sig. CXLIIIIrb (= sig. B viiirb) (with fieri ). Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 106. Also in Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 118, fol. 106 (for vigil; neumed); Kassel, 2o theol. 100, fol. 225ra (neumed); printed Worms missal, 1488, sig. CXXVv; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522,

203


Venite post me, faciam vos piscatores hominum: at illi, relictis retibus et navi, secuti sunt Dominum.

(iii) The mode 1 Magnificat antiphon from first vespers:121 Ambulans Jesus juxta mare Galileae, vidit Petrum et Andream fratrem eius, et ait illis: Venite post me, faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum. At illi, relictis retibus et navi, secuti sunt eum.

121

sig. CCXXVIra. Speyer missals: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fol. 141ra; Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. ccxvvb; printed Speyer missal, 1501, sig. CXLVrb (= sig. C irb). Cf. Christian Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Kassel [etc.], 1982 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87), fol. 118v; Liber usualis, p. 1306. The vigil offertorium in some dioceses also begins with Venite post me , but Mainz, Worms and Speyer sources consistently contain Gloria et honore coronasti et constituisti eum : Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 118, fol. 105v; Kassel, 2o theol. 100, fol. 224rb; 2o theol. 125, fol. 114rb; 2o theol. 126, fol. 144vb; Missale Maguntinum, 1507, sig. clxxrb; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522, sig. CCXXVva; Speyer missals: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fol. 140v; Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. ccxivrb; printed Speyer missal, 1501, sig. CXLIIIIvb (= sig. B viiivb). Cf. Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense, fol. 117v; Liber usualis, p. 1306. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1366. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 164. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 154, fol. 141 (with fieri ); Barth. 160, fol. 499; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 271; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 223 (Magnificat antiphon, feast: faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum ); printed Worms breviary, c. 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fol. 305; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 45vb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. t4v (Benedictus antiphon, Lauds).

204


(iv) A mode 8 antiphon from matins of the vigil:122

(v) A mode 4 responsory: Dum deambularet Dominus juxta mare secus litus Galileae vidit Petrum et Andream retia mittentes in mare. Vocavit eos dicens: Venite post me, faciam vos piscatores hominum. V. Erant enim piscatores et vocavit eos. Venite post me ...

122

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5357. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 164v. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 461v; Barth. 154, fol. 141; Barth. 160, fol. 499; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 271v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 218v (2nd antiphon, 1st nocturn, vigil; faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum ); printed Worms breviary, c. 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fol. 302; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 46ra; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. t3r. Cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 81.

205


The precise wording of the beginning of this chant varies: dum is often replaced by cum ; ambularet and perambularet are found as well as deambularet .123 Pflanz deals only with office chants, ignoring mass liturgy.124 He identifies what he thinks are two, but are actually three chants: his first is both part of the antiphon Ambulans Jesus (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1366) and part of the responsory Dum deambularet (no. 6554); his second is the antiphon Venite post me (no. 5357).125 There is no hard evidence on which to choose between these five equally suitable, verbally similar but musically different chants. Schuler lists only antiphon 5357 and the communio, ignores other chants, and makes no concrete suggestions as to what may have been used in individual plays.126 A similar incipit is found only in five other plays. The (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel seems to use the communio, not antiphon 6554 as Binkley asserts.127 The evidence of four Hessian plays 123

124 125

126 127

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6554. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 164v ( Dum perambularet ). Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fols. 461v-62 ( Dum deambularet ; Venite post me faciam vos piscatores hominum ); Barth. 154, fol. 141v ( Dum deambularet ; Venite post me faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum ); Barth. 160, fol. 499; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 271v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 219 ( Dum deambularet ; Venite post me, faciam vos piscatores hominum ); printed Worms breviary, c. 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fol. 302 ( Cum deambularet ); Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 46ra; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. t3r ( Dum ambularet ; faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum ). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 14-15, 52-64. Ibid., p. 64, notes 2 and 3, cites Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 154, fol. 141 (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1366); fol. 141v (no. 6554), and fol. 141 (no. 5347). Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 642. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 107, l. 2; cf. Thomas Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter

206


may be more helpful than it looks at first sight. The close textual and structural similarity between all these plays version of the episode128 strongly suggests that the chant was identical in all four, and that the truncated incipits in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel and Frankfurter Dirigierrolle correspond to Venite post me faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum in Alsfeld and Heidelberg.129 All four plays have a dicere direction, which could indicate biblical, or the simpler kinds of liturgical, material. Admittedly, the Gospel text (Matthew 4:19) reads Venite post me, et faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum , only a small difference, but surely the fact that none of the five Hessian manuscripts contains the word et means that the biblical text was not used. The plays thus probably used a liturgical chant which included the words faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum , but which was of a relatively simple melodic form. This effectively reduces the field to the antiphons Ambulans Jesus and Venite post me (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1366 and 5357), with the introit, technically a responsory but not in fact melodically demanding, as a third possibility. In both Alsfeld and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle another chant from the liturgy of St Andrew is sung after the calling of Peter and Andrew: both plays suggest Ambulans Jesus as one possibility.130 Perhaps the most likely (though not the only possible) meaning of this

128 129

130

Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Winterthur, 1982 (Sonderband der Reihe Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, zum 50, Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis), pp. 144-57, esp. 145 and 153. The neumes resemble the communio: cf. Einsiedeln 121, p. 310, reproduced in Graduale triplex, p. 267, and Paléographie musicale, vol. IV, facs. p. 310. Responsory melody in Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 81v. Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, I, pp. 88-89. Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 332a-c (l. 332b): Venite post me faciam vos ; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 38: Venite post me fa ; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1197f-h; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 142; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 326b-d (l. 326c). Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1211a-c; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 144; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 39.

207


is that Jesus s call to Peter and Andrew had not been taken from that antiphon. Dreimüller concludes that, if not a biblical verse, the Alsfeld chant is from the communio;131 this overlooks the fact that the communio correctly reads faciam vos piscatores , without fieri . Admittedly, some text-only Mainz missals do include fieri , though the few extant graduals and neumed missals which contain the communio presumably in the definitive form do not.132 Whilst certainty about Venite post me in the St Gall Passion Play is impossible, the play s general closeness to Hessian tradition suggests that the antiphon Venite post me (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5357) or the introit are the most likely choices. Peter and Andrew now express their faith in Jesus as the expected Messiah: 23 Tunc Petrus et Andreas cantent simul Invenimus Messiam et cetera et dicat Andreas: Peter, wir han bi warheit wol virnommen, daz Messias nu ist kommen, Christus, von dem die scrift vns saget. Ein selig dag hat vns bedaget.

(ll. 187a-91)

This chant is found only in the St Gall Passion Play. Schuler, following Mone s misreading of the direction, lists Invenimus Messiam not as a separate item but as part of no. 642, Venite post me .133 Pflanz 131 132

133

Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 23. With fieri : Mainz missals: Kassel, 2o theol. 125, fol. 115vb; 2o theol. 126, fol. 146va; Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 186v; Missale Maguntinum, 1507, fol. clxxira. Without fieri : see note 120 above. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 642, following Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 49-128, l. 181a: Tunc Petrus et Andreas cantent similiter et Petrus: messiam ; cf. Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, pp. 56-131, p. 45, note 1, and Pflanz, Lateinische Text-

208


identifies without explicit argument the communio for the vigil of St Andrew:134,135

Though it is found in medieval sources, Pflanz locates it only in a modern missal, further evidence of his uncertainty about Sanctorale material. Here he seems to follow Bergmann s identification of the chant uncritically.136 Melodically however, this communio is problematical. It is in mode 8. There is a modally correct ending on the finalis G neither on Invenimus Messiam (d-a) nor qui dicitur Christus (c-b); and the inclusion of the narrative phrase et adduxit eum ad Jesum would be unlikely in this case. Admittedly, almost nothing is known about the

134 135

136

grundlagen, p. 15. Ibid., pp. 15-16, 137-38. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 105v (transposed up one octave to accommodate the low tessitura of the melody). Also in Mainz missals, e.g. Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 186; Barth. 118, fol. 107; Kassel, 2o theol. 100, fol. 224rb; 2o theol. 125, fol. 114rb; Missale Maguntinum, 1507, sig. clxxra; printed Worms missal, 1488, sig. CXXVva; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522, sig. CCXXVva-b; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. ccxivva; printed Speyer missal, 1501, sig. CXLIIIvb (= sig. Bviiivb). Cf. Moosburger Graduale, fol. 117; Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense, fol. 118r; Graduale triplex, p. 263. Bergmann, Studien, p. 212 and note 1719, interprets the cantare direction as indicating liturgical material; he cites the communio only from Carl Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, Strasbourg, 1907 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1963], and the modern Missale Romanum.

209


toleration of wrong cadences in medieval drama, or the extent to which chants might have been altered to avoid them (see the discussion of chant no. 3 above), so the communio cannot simply be ruled out. Indeed, the section Invenimus Christus alone, without the rest of the melody to establish its actual mode, might sound acceptable, almost like a short mode 3 melody: 137

But these musical reservations are interestingly supported by the casting: as Chapter IV shows, Peter, and even more so Andrew, have decidedly modest singing roles, and recitative seems more probable material for them to perform. Both considerations together suggest that the chant could well have been biblical (John 1:41):138 Invenit hic primum fratrem suum Simonem, et dicit ei: Invenimus Messiam quod est interpretatum Christus.

The et cetera specified after the incipit makes it almost certain that the chant included the explanatory quod est interpretatum Christus , despite Pflanz s general assumption that such interpretative material would not have been performed.

137

138

Central section of communio, Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 105v, transposed to give the effect of a mode 3 melody. John 1:41, Passion tone.

210


The item is thus important evidence that the St Gall Passion Play cantare directions need not always refer to the more melodious types of liturgical chant. The Adultress (ll. 211b-39) A woman caught in the act of adultery is hauled before Jesus. 26 Tunc Iudeis ducentibus mulierem Rufus dicat unus Magister : Gib vns dinen rat. Dise frauwe ir e gebrochen hat. Moyses e, nach der wir leben, hat vns solich gebot gegeben, daz man die huren steine. Der selben ist sie eine.

(ll. 221a-27)

Since all St Gall Passion Play editors treat Magister as part of a stage-direction, and thus implicitly as a chant-incipit,139 it is unclear why Schuler, Bergmann and Pflanz ignore the item. The editors are presumably influenced by the fact that in the manuscript, approximately a quarter of a line is left blank after the word Magister ; the next line (l. 222) begins with Gib vns dinen rat .140 In this manuscript, such incomplete lines usually stop at the end of a direction, including a chant-incipit.141 As it stands, line 222 is hypometrical. This is unusual in the context both of the play s consistent four-stress metre,142 and of the Hessian plays, whose dialogue is similar: 139

140

141 142

Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, pp. 56-131, l. 265; Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 49-128, ll. 213a-b; Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu, l. 221a. St Gall MS 919, p. 199, ll. 43-44; see Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, p. 108, note 221b and p. 333 (facsimile). E.g. St Gall MS 919, p. 197, ll. 18, 22, 32; p. 198, ll. 21, 29; p. 199, l. 20. Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, pp.

211

The St Gall Passion Play Adultera adducta M a n n e s dicit Cristo: Ihesus, gib vns dinen rat, die frau ir ee gebrochen hat. [ ]

(Frankfurter Passionsspiel)

Et sic accipiunt mulierem adulteram et ducunt eam ad Saluatorem in templum. S i n a g o g a dicit ad Ihesum: Meynster, gib vns dynen raid viel balde, wie mer es myt disser frawen solden halden. [ ] (Alsfelder Passionsspiel) Magister, hec mulier modo deprehenssa est [in] adulterio [ ] Meister, sich die fraw zcu dieser frist Als einn ehebrecherische gefangen ist, [ ] (Heidelberger Passionsspiel)143

Line 222 is surely incomplete; but is Magister the missing element? There are effectively two possibilities: (i) Magister is not an incipit, but the first word of line 222. The wording of the direction is consistent with this interpretation. The verb is dicat ; no et cetera shows Magister is merely an incipit, no et dicat marks a transition between sung Latin and spoken German. Nothing in the direction positively prescribes singing. Against this there is the fact that this Latin word is unusual in medieval German plays, which, like the examples above, use the vernacular meister . Magister could of course be a scribal error for meister , either by the St Gall MS 919 scribe or a previous one, mistaking part of the German dialogue for a chant-incipit. (ii) Scribal confusion of a different kind could mean that, whilst a word is missing from line 222, magister is not that word (which could have been meister or Jesus ) but is indeed a chant-incipit. There is still the objection that no et cetera suggests the continuation of the chant, all the stronger since there is no tradition of a chant with this incipit in German drama, so that a one-word incipit would not

143

72-88, Metrik , esp. 74. Ibid. §1a, p. 73, lists l. 222 as having no anacrusis, but does not include it amongst his examples of three-stress lines (§2b, p. 74). Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 779a-81 (dialogue continues to l. 785); Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2703a-05 (dialogue continues to l. 2711); cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 433; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2216b-18.

212


immediately suggest a well-known item. If anything was sung here, it was not liturgical, since no liturgical chant is suitable.144 It would have had to be biblical (John 8:4-5) as in Heidelberg if the Heidelberg direction does in fact indicate singing, which is by no means certain. Overall, the balance of probablilities is against this being a sung item. Jesus s response is to write on the ground, and declare that the first stone should be cast by someone who is sinless: 27 Tunc Iesus inclinans se in terram scribat et cantet Si quis sine peccato et cetera et dicat: Wer ane sunde ist vnd ane meyne, der werfe an dise fraue einen stein.

(ll. 227a-29)

A similar chant is found otherwise only in Heidelberg, where it is biblical: Qui sine peccato est vestrum, primus in illam lapidem mittat (John 8:7).145 Schuler assumes that St Gall MS 919 used the same version;146 Bergmann, who does not deal with this episode in detail, does not mention the chant. But the cantet direction and, as Pflanz observes,147 the wording Si quis ... rather than the Vulgate Qui ... suggest liturgical material from a mode 1 Benedictus antiphon for the third week of Lent:148,149 144

145 146 147 148 149

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3657: Magister dicit: tempus meum prope est ; 3658: Magister, quid faciendo ; 3659: Magister, quod est mandatum ; 3661: Magister, scimus quia verax es . Heidelberger Passionsspiel, l. 2226b-c. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 574. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 16, 64-65. As assumed by Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 195. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3320. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 124. Also in Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 339; other Mainz sources in Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 65, note 1; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 244; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 94rb; printed Speyer breviaries: 1478 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5464), sig. K4vb ( Inclinabat se ... ); 1491 (Ibid.,

213


The German text is not an infallible guide to the Latin, but Jesus s spoken couplet does indeed reflect the wording of the antiphon (without primus ) rather than that of the biblical verse. By contrast, the German in Heidelberg der werff vff sie denn erstenn steyn corresponds to that play s biblical wording primus in illam lapidem mittat .150 Thus the antiphon seems the more likely choice in the St Gall Passion Play. Jesus engages in a brief sung and spoken dialogue with the freed adultress: 28, 29, 30 [28] Tunc Iesus respiciens mulierem cantet antiphonam Nemo te condempnavit [29] Et tunc respondet mulier Nemo [30] Dicat iterum Iesus Nec ego te condempno . Tunc dicat Iesus: Vrauwe ist ieman hie, der dich virsteine? [Mulier]: Gnade, lieber herre, nein. [Jesus]: Vrauwe, auch ich dich nit virsteine, wie ich doch si der allein, der keine sunde hat gedan. Ganc, du salt vorbaz sunde lan.

150

(ll. 233a-39)

no. 5465), sig. i4v ( Inclinabat se ... ). First word also found as Inclinans , but not in German sources (CANTUS). Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2228, 2226b-c.

214


Schuler notes this item otherwise only in Heidelberg, where it is probably not an antiphon;151 Bergmann does not deal with it. In the St Gall Passion Play, as the direction clearly states, this is a dialogic performance of an antiphon, probably the mode 3 Magnificat antiphon for first vespers of the fourth Sunday in Lent:152 The direction does not absolutely exclude the identically worded but melodically different communio for the same Sunday, also technically an antiphon.153 Here one can only note the tendency, observable from Schuler s results, for plays to use much more material from the office than from the mass. The woman s Nemo, Domine in the communio is also slightly more demanding than the very easy passage in the office antiphon; and the woman seems to have one of the easiest singing roles in the play.154 Schuler identifies the antiphon, as does Pflanz, albeit after needlessly considering biblical text.155 The manuscript reading condempno (l. 233d) is erroneous, since condemnabo is the consistent reading both of the antiphon and of John 8:11 in the Vulgate.

151

152

153 154 155

See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 378a-c. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2234, 2228d-e: Mulier, vbi sunt, qui te accusabant? Etc. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3873. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 124 (cleffing of noli peccare corrected). Also in Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 339v; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 244v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 94rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. i4v; cf. Liber usualis, p. 558. Mainz missal, Kassel, 2o theol. 100, fol. 62va; Graduale triplex, p. 124 (mode 8). See p. 106. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 16-18, 65-66. His view, expressed on pages 17-18, that dicit (l. 223d) might indicate spoken biblical text is dismissed by Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 188-89.

215


The Conversion of Mary Magdalene (ll. 239-315) Mary s repentance is a centrally important scene of the earlier part of the play. It relates to the ecclesiastical sacrament of confession and absolution much as the Last Supper relates to the Eucharist, and as such is generously provided with musical items. First, Mary is shown dancing with her iuvenes for the third and last time: 31, Tunc tercio Maria Magdalena tripudians (l. 239a; see no. 21 above). An earnest conversation with Martha convinces her to repent and turn to Jesus. At the banquet of Simon Leprosus Mary makes a long and moving act of repentance (ll. 275a-291). The solemn, quasi-sacramental climax of the scene is preceded by the silencechant: 32, Hic cantet angelus ter Silete (l. 291a). This is the only silence-chant explicity given to a single angel rather than to the unspecified number of angeli (see no. 1 above). This may reflect the fact that the chant comes not at the start of the scene but in mid-episode, between Mary s long confession (ll. 275a-291) and Jesus s act of absolution , chant 33, Dimissa sunt ei peccata multa quoniam dilexit multum (l. 291b) from the responsory Accessit ad pedes .156 This item is dealt with in Chapter V. The palpably sacramental nature of the moment is emphasized by the solemn melisma of the responsory verse; and Mary s response: Tunc surgat Maria [et] fundat unguentum super caput eius (l. 295a) is also solemn and semi-ritualized. At such a moment it is hard to see the Silete as really necessary to quieten the audience: its function, surely, was to underscore the sacramentality of the action. The direction cantat ter Silete (l. 291a) is ambiguous. It might refer to the threefold occurrence of silete and silentium in the long chant (see no. 1 above); or it could possibly mean that the whole long formula was sung three times, which, given the solemnity of the moment, is not completely unthinkable. 156

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6016.

216


Jesus then approves Mary s waste of the unguent by singing one of three alternative chants: 34, Mittens haec mulier (l. 305a); 35, Amen dico vobis (l. 305b); or 36, Fides etenim salvam eam fecit (l. 305b) from the responsory Caelestis medicus . These chants, all with relatively elaborate melodies expressive of the solemnity of the moment, are dealt with in Chapter V. The Healing of the Blind Man (ll. 315a-449) This long episode is introduced with the silence-chant: 37, Sil[ete] (l. 315a; see no. 1). Seeing the blind man, Peter asks Jesus if his blindness is due to sin: 38, 39 [38] Tunc Petrus ad Christum Rabbi, quis peccavit : Meister, wie ist diz geschehen, daz dirre man nit sal gesehen? Weder ist sin vatter schuldig dar an, oder hat er selber missedan? [39] Respondet Iesus Neque hic : Wuzent, daz des vatter dat an ime keine schulde hat. So hat er auch nit gedan, dar vmme er solle zu buze stan. Ez geschach dar vmme sunder, daz Got an ime schufe wunder.

(ll. 327a-37)

On page 201 of the play manuscript, a second Neque has been erased after Neque hic in line 331a. Bergmann ignores this incipit, because he does not treat this episode in detail; Schuler and Pflanz both assume a mode 8 antiphon for Wednesday of the fourth week in Lent:157

157

See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 49, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 19 and 70-73.

217


158

But in fact it is particularly hard to decide whether the St Gall Passion Play used liturgical chant or biblical recitative here. The incipits are not distinctively liturgical. Number 38 is too short to contain the words homo iste , which are peculiar to the antiphon. The incipits are consistent with the Vulgate wording of John 9:2-3:159

158

159

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4571. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 130v-31. John 9:2-3, Passion tone.

218


The directions do not specify any type of liturgical chant and interestingly include no kind of cantare performance-verb. As already established, the St Gall Passion Play hardly ever associates liturgical material with directions other than cantare , and the few exceptions can be convincingly explained (see Chapter IV). In this case, however, there is no obvious rationale for the verbless and respondet directions, which suggests that the item may not in fact be liturgical. Analogies from other plays are inconclusive, since this is yet another item restricted to St Gall and two Hessian plays: Alsfeld and Heidelberg, both without notation.160 Alsfeld, though ambiguous, seems to point to liturgy: Peter s question includes the words homo iste , specific to the antiphon.161 It has a dicit direction, which in Alsfeld can indicate biblical recitative and antiphons; Jesus s reply, which contains no distinctive liturgical wording, has cantat , which usually introduces more elaborate liturgical items.162 Overall, Dreimüller s suggestion of Hesbert s antiphon 4571, whilst unprovable, seems plausible.163 Heidelberg, as usual, almost certainly uses biblical wording; and in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel, where the dialogue of the whole episode closely parallels the St Gall Passion Play, neither Peter nor Jesus sings anything.164 If St Gall s musical stratum here were similar to that of Frankfurt, this might mean that a liturgical 160

161 162

163 164

Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 1144a-c, 1148a-e (both reconstructed by Milchsack as biblical text); Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1522a-b, 1524a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 235, 238. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1522a-b, 1524a-b. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 1522a, 1524a; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 205-08. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels", vol. II, pp. 27-28. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 1144a-c, 1148a-e; the wording hic aut parentes eius reflects the Vulgate, but not the antiphon, at least not in the Mainz diocese where the play was almost certainly written. Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 892965a, St Gall Passion Play, ll. 315a-449. The speeches of Peter and Jesus in Frankfurt, ll. 894-97, 898-903, are almost identical with their counterparts in the St Gall Passion Play, ll. 328-37. Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 893a: Petrus interrogat Saluatorem ; l. 897a: Saluator dicit .

219


chant was not intended. But this cannot be known. This is one of the places where the St Gall dialogue is closely similar to that of the Frankfurter Passionsspiel, but these textual similarities seem to refer to a variant of St Gall differing from that preserved in the surviving manuscript.165 In that different version of the play the use of chant could well have been different from that of the play as we know it. For example, in the next item, 40 and 41, Ille homo qui Iesus dicitur , St Gall and the Frankfurt dialogue is also virtually identical, yet the St Gall Passion Play direction clearly specifies a sung, possibly liturgical, text where Frankfurt has none (see Chapter V). A further consideration, however, is that the first part of the chant is sung by Peter, a role which in the St Gall Passion Play does not seem to demand much musical ability. Many of his chants seem to be biblical (see Chapter IV). A definite identification here seems impossible; but the directions and the performer do hint at biblical recitative. If the antiphon 4571 was used, however, it is worth noting that its textual tradition shows several variants, most significantly quid for quis , and [homo] hic aut parentes eius for homo iste .166 Pflanz, locating five verbal variants of the antiphon in seventeen breviaries, wrongly describes them as different chants.167 He also fails to see that these sources show the standard wording Rabbi, quis peccavit homo iste to be that consistently found in Mainz. The eight with this wording represent the me165 166

167

See Chapter I, note 6. For quis peccavit three manuscripts cited in Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium, and four out of thirty-nine CANTUS sources read quid peccavit (as in Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 469); for homo iste three Corpus antiphonalium manuscripts and eighteen out of thirty-nine CANTUS sources read hic aut parentes eius ; for quod five Corpus antiphonalium manuscripts read ut ; for natus est one manuscript reads nasceretur ; in Respondit Jesus et dixit , et is missing in one source; in illo sometimes reads in eo . See Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. III, p. 437, cf. John R. Bryden & David G. Hughes, An Index of Gregorian Chant, 2 vols., Cambridge, Mass., 1969, vol. I, p. 358. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 19 and 70-73, esp. 71.

220


dieval Mainz diocesan tradition;168 the five with hic aut parentes eius do not.169 The wording standard in Mainz is also that found in Worms and Speyer, and indeed in German sources generally.170 Pflanz however rejects this version in favour of one reading Hic aut parentes eius , which, he argues, is reflected in Peter s Weder ist sin vatter schuldig dar an, || oder hat er selber missedan? (ll. 3301).171 The weakness of the argument from the German is well demonstrated in this case: liturgical usage virtually guarantees that if an antiphon was used in the play, it will not have read hic aut parentes eius . The German is a direct translation of John 9:2, not of the antiphon; and in any case sin vatter does not translate parentes eius . Reporting his miraculous cure to the Pharisees and High Priests (ll. 343a-439), the blind man twice sings the chant explaining what Jesus did to him: 40, 41, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3171: Ille homo, qui dicitur Jesus (ll. 355a, 369a), or possibly biblical text (John 9:11). Later he responds to Annas s aggressive questioning with another 168

169

170

171

Ibid., p. 71, note 1, citing Aschaffenburg, Ms. perg. 19 (c. 1200); Ms. perg. 32 (after 1300); Frankfurt, Barth. 150 (fourteenth century); Barth. 160 (fourteenth century); Barth. 154 (mid-fifteenth century); Barth. 142 (late fifteenth century); printed Mainz breviary, c. 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5394); Enchiridion ecclesie Moguntine, 1509. Cf. also Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 130v-31. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 71, note 4, citing Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, I 438 (Carthusian, fourteenth century); I 439 (Carthusian, thirteenth to fifteenth century); I 365 (Carthusian, probably fifteenth century); I 433 (provenance and dating uncertain); and Breviarium Moguntinum, 1570, containing the reformierter Mainz-römischer Ritus of 1570 (see Reifenberg, Stundengebet, pp. 20-21 and 225-52, esp. 225 and 251). Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 248; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 193v ( homo ille ); Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 96rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. i7r; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. bb1va. CANTUS confirms Rabbi, quis peccavit homo iste as representative of the German territories as a whole. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 72.

221


chant: 42, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1194: A saeculo non est auditum (l. 421a), or possibly biblical text (John 9:32-33). Both these chants are dealt with in Chapter V. The Raising of Lazarus (ll. 449a-547) Jesus announces to the disciples that Lazarus is dead. 43 Tunc Iesus ad discipulos cantet Lazarus, amicus noster : Ich sagen vch an dirre vrist, daz Lazarus dot ist. Nu wol of, gen wir dohin mit ein ander vnd wecken in.

(ll. 486a-90)

The direction does not positively identify this as liturgical, but the cantet direction, and the testimony of the four other plays in which it is used strongly suggest that it was a mode 1 Benedictus antiphon for Friday of the fourth week of Lent: 172

Whilst Heidelberg has biblical text as usual (John 11:11), the antiphon is clearly indicated by the notation in Alsfeld, the neumes in the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, and the Frankfurter Dirigier-

172

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3603. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 131v. Also in Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 347; printed Mainz breviary, 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5394), p. 157b; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 249v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 96rb.

222


rolle direction.173 The identification of the same chant in the St Gall Passion Play by Schuler, Bergmann and Pflanz is thus almost certainly correct.174 Pflanz s argument that the plural gen wir dohin in line 489 reflects the antiphon s eamus rather than the Vulgate vado is probably applicable in this instance; though the German dialogue in this speech generally seems to have been altered: dot (l. 488) was surely originally entsloffen . The two Hessian plays which contain this dialogue in full show the same plural form: Alsfeld, where the antiphon is sung, and the Frankfurter Passionsspiel, which specifies no chant, but where the earlier Frankfurt tradition, witnessed by the Dirigierrolle, used the antiphon.175 By contrast, in Heidelberg, with the biblical wording ( sed vado ), the following German is cast in the first176 person singular. Mary Magdalene and Martha both tell Jesus that he has arrived too late: Lazarus is already buried: 44, 45, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2383: Domine, si hic fuisses (ll. 497a, 515a-b). This chant is dealt with in Chapter V.

173

174

175

176

Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2382a-c; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2222a-d; cf. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 35 and Beilage 4; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 346; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 166a-67; cf. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 148 and 154; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 102: Statimque Ihesus cantabit antiphonam. Lazarus amicus noster dormit . Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 326a, Bergmann, Studien, p. 185, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 21, 77-78. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 2222c; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 346; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1481-84. Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [first volume of additions to Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002], p. 139, note 233. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2382a-86.

223


Jesus has the stone removed from Lazarus s grave, prays to the Father and commands Lazarus to rise from the dead: 46 Deinde cantet Iesus Lazare, veni foras et dicat: Vil lieber vront min, Lazare, stant vf, vnd lebe also e.

(ll. 533a-35)

Line 535 on page 204 of the play manuscript reads labe . Of the nine other plays which include this call to the dead Lazarus,177 only the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel specifies how it was sung: as part of the mode 1 communio Videns Dominus for Friday of the fourth week of Lent:178 Videns Dominus flentes sorores Lazari ad monumentum lacrimatus est coram Judaeis et clamabat: Lazare, veni foras. Et prodiit ligatis manibus et pedibus qui fuerat quatriduanus mortuus.179

The melody of Lazare, veni foras in this communio is short, simple, but undoubtedly affecting: 180

177

178

179

180

In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 654: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 2280a; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 169-71; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 117; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2468a-b; Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1207a-b. Not in Schuler: Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel, ll. 1052a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 44v; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 946a-b; Tiroler Dramatisierung des Johannes-Evangeliums, II, ll. 1979a-81. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, fol. 108v, ll. 169-71. Neumation only of Lazare, veni foras , discussed by Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 148. The neumes resemble those of Einsiedeln 121, p. 161, given in Graduale triplex, p. 124; cf. Processionale monasticum, p. 348 (as antiphon, same melody). Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 44. Also in printed Worms missal, 1488, fol. XLVII; Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxiiva; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fol. 85ra. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 44.

224


Scholars have perhaps been rather uncritically ready to generalize from this one instance and to assume that Videns Dominus was the source of Lazare, veni foras in all the other cases.181 The undoubted power of the simple melodic phrase may have exercized a certain seduction. Schuler certainly makes this assumption: even his division of no. 654 into three parts (a, b, c) describes the Benediktbeuern arrangement, where Jesus s call to Lazarus (b) is sandwiched between the two choral sections (a, c).182 Yet this is the only play in which Lazare, veni foras is demonstrably performed in this way. The clamare directions in most of the others183 are compatible with sung performance, as with the Jews Crucifige, crucifige eum ,184 though they suggest a simpler and rougher melody than the communio. Nonetheless, Dreimüller assumes the communio in Alsfeld, Bergmann in the St Gall Passion Play; and Traub, reconstructing the Sterzing music, prints the communio, then comments in a way that recognizes that this may not have been the melody used.185 181

182

183

184 185

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 654a-c; Bergmann, Studien, pp. 185-86 and nos. 1507 and 1508. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, fol. 108v, ll. 169 ( Videns dominus ), 170 ( Lazare, veni foras ), 171 ( Et prodiit ). Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, p. 73, even lists Videns dominus flentes in the Heidelberger Passionsspiel, although these words do not appear in the play at all. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 2280a, and Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 365 ( clamat ); Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 117 ( clamabit ); Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel, ll. 1052 ab, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, fol. 44v, Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 946a-b (all clamat alta voce ); Tiroler Dramatisierung des Johannes-Evangeliums, II, ll. 1979a-81 ( Da schreit JHESUS laut ); Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2468a-b ( rufft ). Exception: Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1207a-b (no verb). See no. 77, Chapter VIII. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 36; Bergmann, Stu-

225


For the St Gall Passion Play, the communio, though not as certain as Pflanz assumes,186 is plausible. Liturgical material is strongly suggested by the cantet direction, which contrasts interestingly with the clamare of most of the dramatic tradition and is entirely consistent with the play s marked tendency to use liturgical chant. A liturgical item, as with the other chants in this scene, would have been eminently suited to the sacramental quality of the events depicted. Videns Dominus was the only liturgical source of Jesus s exhortation in Mainz, Worms and Speyer.187 And the setting of the three words in the communio, as simple as a reciting-tone, will have presented no difficulty for the actor playing Jesus.

186 187

dien, p. 185 and nos. 1507 and 1508; Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, p. 74: Dies trifft weniger den Vortrag im Spiel selber, doch wird diese liturgisch geprägte Formulierung des Rufes den Spielern, die im Choral lebten , gegenwärtig gewesen sein. Damit ist allerdings die Grenze eines Kommentars zu den Spielen überschritten. Cf. idem, Zwischen Aufgezeichnetem und Nichtaufgezeichnetem: Probleme bei der Edition der Melodien der Sterzinger Spiele , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Text und Musik, Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 211-18, esp. 212; idem, Überlegungen zur Edition von Melodien in geistlichen Spielen an Beispielen aus dem Sterzinger Spielarchiv , in Anton Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur: Beiträge der Bamberger Tagung Methoden und Probleme der Edition mittelalterlicher deutscher Texte , Göppingen, 1994 (Litterae, 117), pp. 255-59, esp. 259. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 21-22, 114-15. See note 178. The antiphons Ad monumentum Lazari (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1248) and Clamabat Dominus Jesus (no. 1818) and the verse of the responsory Occurrerunt Maria et Martha (no. 7309) are not used in the three dioceses.

226

Chapter VII

The Passion (1)

The Plotting of the Authorities (ll. 547a-68) he council of the Chief Priests is introduced by silence-chant 47: Iterum Sil[ete] (l. 547a). See no. 1 above. There follow three chants which must be considered together. 48, 49, 50 [48] Et cantet angelus Colligerunt [49] Quo finito Annas cantet Quid facimus et cetera: Radent, ir herren, wie sollen wir dun? Ir sehent wol, Marien sun dut groze zeichen also vil. Beiden wir it langer zil, daz volg gleubet an in gar. Werdent die romer daz gewar, si virdribent vns von dem land. Do von werden wir gesant. [50] Respondens Cayphas cantet Expedit nobis [et] dicat: Ir herren, horent minen rat, daz beide nuz vnd warheit hat. Ez ist weger, einer sterbe, dan alle die werlet virderbe.

(ll. 554a-66)

For chants with these incipits, German dramas never use Vulgate text (John 11:47-53) but always the antiphon Collegerunt pontifices (Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1852), the most frequently used of the Palm Sunday processional antiphons.1 The chant, probably Gal1

Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, München, 1972 (Münstersche MittelalterSchriften, 14), pp. 218-20 and note 1768; Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der


lican in origin, is similar to a responsory in form and elaboration.2 Collegerunt pontifices et Pharisaei concilium et dicebant: Quid facimus, quia hic homo multa signa facit? Si dimittimus eum sic, omnes credent in eum. Ne forte veniant Romani et tollant nostrum locum et gentem. V. Unus autem ex ipsis Caiaphas nomine cum esset pontifex anni illius prophetavit dicens: Expedit vobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat. Ab illo ergo die cogitaverunt interficere eum dicentes: Ne forte venient Romani ... 3

Pflanz s treatment of this item is seriously defective. Because lines 556-57, Marien sun | dut groze zeichen also vil diverges from the hic homo multa signa facit of the antiphon, he argues that the play

2

3

Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940), no. 62. Schuler, vol. I, p. 150, prints the section Unus autem (no. 62c) with wrong wording, drawn from the antiphon Unus autem ex illis (cf. René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Rome, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12), no. 5276); correct reading in vol. II, p. 30. Clyde W. Brockett, Osanna! New Light on the Palm Sunday Processional Antiphon Series , Plainsong and Medieval Music 9 (2000), pp. 95-129, esp. 105, table 3, and p. 117 on frequency of use of Collegerunt . Brockett, Osanna! , pp. 117-19. Philippe Bernard, Le cantique des trois enfants (Dan. III, 52-90) , Musica e storia 1 (1993), pp. 231-72, esp. 263, also cited by Kenneth J. Levy, A New Look at Old Roman Chant - II , Early Music History 20 (2001), pp. 173-97, esp. 190-192, who reads the scrolling torculi on Romani et tollant nostrum locum as a Frankish parody of Roman chant style. Brockett, Osanna! , p. 117: Collegerunt as an antiphon with added verses and repetenda sections. It is classed as a responsory in Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936, pp. 579-80 and implicitly (as gradual, Saturday, week 5 of Lent) in Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, neumis Laudunensibus (Cod. 239) et Sangallensibus (Codicum Sangallensis 359 et Einsidlensis 121) nunc auctum, Solesmes [etc.], 1979, pp. 135-36. Cf. Hermann Reifenberg, Sakramente, Sakramentalien und Ritualien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Spätmittelalter, Münster, 197172 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 53-54), pp. 642-58. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1852. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 49v-50. Cf. Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxira-b.

228

VII. The Passion (I)

used a slightly different Latin wording, including the formulation quia hic homo signa magna facit and other slight alterations. This version he mistakenly calls a different chant rather than a variant; and, since he can locate it only in the Mainz ritual of 1696, he concludes that the play follows Mainz liturgical tradition.4 Nothing could be further from the truth. The 1696 ritual presents a partially Romanized Mainz liturgy;5 earlier Mainz books invariably read multa signa .6 Speyer has the same wording; the only Worms source shows the minor variant et forte venient romani et tollent nostrum locum et gentem .7 The liturgical text reads expedit vobis ;8 the St Gall Passion Play s expedit nobis (l. 562a) is probably scribal error and not, as 4

5

6

7

8

Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205), p. 117, note 1, citing the Rituale sive Agenda, Ad usum Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinæ edita jussu et auctoritate [...] D. Lotharii Francisci, S. Sedis Moguntinæ Archi-Episcopi [...], Mainz, 1696, pp. 324-25. Reifenberg, Sakramente, vol. II, pp. 1-5; idem, Vom Missale Moguntinum des Jahres 1602 zum Missale Romano-Moguntinum von 1698 , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 13 (1961), pp. 432-39,esp. 433, note 8. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 49v-50; Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 82; Darmstadt, Hs. 3183, fol. 68r-v; Würzburg, M.p.th.f. 85, fol. 61; Mainz missal and ritual, Frankfurt, Barth. 107, fol. 10; Missale Maguntinum, 1507, fol. lxixra-b; Mainz processional, Aschaffenburg, Ms. perg. 32, fols. 22v-24r; Mainz rituals: Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, 1492, fol. xxxivr; Agenda Maguntina, 1513, fol. LVIIv-LVIIIr; Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis, 1551, fol. XCIXr-v. This wording also in numerous other sources, e.g.: St Gall, cod. 339 (Paléographie musicale: Les principaux manuscrits de chant grégorien, ambrosien, mozarabe, gallican, publiés en facsimilés phototypiques, vol. I: Codex 339 de la Bibliothèque de Saint-Gall (Xe siècle): Antiphonale missarum Sancti Gregorii, Solesmes, 1889, vol. I, facsimile, p. 64); Einsiedeln, 121 (Ibid., vol. IV, facsimile, pp. 378-79); Strasbourg antiphonal, thirteenth century, British Library, MS add. 23922, fol. 25r-v. Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxira-b; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fol. 96ra; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, fol. LXVIr (= sig. iiir). Worms manual, Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1, fols. 43v-44r, emphasis supplied. Nobis in two of Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium manuscripts (vol. III, p. 103); but vobis seems uniform in Mainz, Worms and Speyer sources.

229


Pflanz suggests,9 intentional, since vobis is also uniformly found in the numerous plays which use all or part of Collegerunt .10 The antiphon, mode 2 in modern books, is set it in mode 8 in many medieval sources, giving a very different melodic effect.11 A detailed consideration of Collegerunt in drama would go beyond the bounds of this study. The chant makes an ideal accompaniment to the beginning of the High Priests council, and nearly all the 9 10

11

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 117-18. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 62. Schuler mentions: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2424c-l, 2460a-b; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 206-209; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 74a-b, 218a-g, 276a; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452a-q; Erlau V, ll. 20a-d; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 122a; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1571a-c, 1618a-b; Haller Passion, ll. 143a, 227a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3016c-g ( Quid faciamus ), ll. 3088a-c ( Expedit vobis ); Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1281a-b ( Quid faciamus only); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 74a-b, 218a-c, 276a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 73a-b, 217a-b ( Unus autem ), 275a ( Expedit vobis ); Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift (Maundy Thursday), ll. 280a, 474a-b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 84a-85 ( Expedit vobis pereat only); Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 380-84, Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 31a-32, 87a-88, 142a-43; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 74a-b, 218a-c, 276a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fols. 4 and 7; music fol. 26; Osnabrücker Passionsspielfragment, l. 51a ( [Quid] facimus ), l. 73a ( Cayphas: Expedit vobis ); Rabers Passion, ll. 0g-h, 58a-b, 64a-b, 1897a-c; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 0a-b, 46a-b, 72a-c. Apart from Erlau V, Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, Haller Passion and Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, whose manuscripts do not contain the phrase, all read expedit vobis . Mode 8: Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 55 (clef in last phrase probably wrong: melody ends on b instead of G); Karlheinz Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Kassel [etc.], 1985 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88), fol. 58r-v; Moosburger Graduale, fols. 56v-57; Worcester Antiphonal (Paléographie musicale, vol. XII, facsimile fol. 105); Mode 2: Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 5v-6, ll. 84a85; Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 49v-50; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxira-b; Graduale triplex, pp. 135-36, Liber usualis, p. 579. Cf. Brockett, Osanna! , pp. 118, 119 (ex. 5): Collegerunt , like other mode 2 antiphons, is often written out transposed up a fifth from D to a. CANTUS: A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant (http://publish.uwo.ca/~cantus) also records two mode 1 settings.

230


plays use it, similarly to the responsory Ingressus Pilatus (see no. 71 below) to cover their procession into the acting area.12 But whilst some plays do not use it as a processional antiphon,13 a completely non-dialogic exploitation of the antiphon seems to be restricted to Erlau V and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle;14 in almost every other play some at least of the dialogic sections are found. In its choice of sections, the St Gall Passion Play shows affinity with the Hessian group. Its avoidance of both the narrative sections, Unus autem ex ipsis and Ab illo ergo die , fits the broad Hessian pattern. Both sections are used relatively rarely in drama, mainly in Sterzing and other south German plays.15 They are found in Alsfeld, but not in the other Hessian plays.16 Pflanz suggests that the angel s part is not from Collegerunt , but that Annas s and Cayphas s is.17 The precise opposite is the more likely default assumption, since the angel is a trained singer, whereas 12

13

14 15

16 17

Rabers Passion, ll. 1897a-c, uses Collegerunt for a second procession of the Jewish council after the Crucifixion. Admonter Passionsspiel; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 122a (later addition): the antiphon is sung after the council (119-22); Frankfurter Passionsspiel; Heidelberger Passionsspiel; Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel; Osnabrücker Passionsspielfragmente (but text incomplete). The second use in Rabers Passion, ll. 1897ac, is during a procession of priests after the crucifixion. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 122a; Erlau V, ll. 20a-d. Unus autem : Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2424g-h; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 218a; B, ll. 218a-d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 7; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452f-h; Haller Passion, ll. 227a-b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 218a-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1493/1503, ll. 217a-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, l. 474a. Ab illo ergo die : Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2424k-l; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 209; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 276a; B, l. 276a; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452m-q; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 276a; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, l. 275a. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2424g-h, k-l. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 82, note 1, suggesting the verse Collegerunt ergo pontifices of the Maundy Thursday responsory Seniores populi (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7636); Ibid., pp. 115-17.

231


the expertise of the actors playing Annas and Caiaphas is not certain: they sing nothing else in the play (see Chapter IV). Were they expected to perform the complex antiphon melody, or use simple recitative formulae? Interestingly, the evidence of German drama points firmly in the liturgical direction. The wording of 49, Quid facimus , is almost identical in the antiphon and the Vulgate (John 11:47), and only two of the eight plays which contain this section have music yet both have the liturgical melody.18 For 50, Expedit vobis , all the fourteen relevant plays have the antiphon wording, which does differ from the Vulgate (John 11:50: Vos nescitis quidquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit vobis ). All plays with notation have the antiphon melody.19 German plays thus show no evidence at all of the use of Vulgate text or recitative in these sections, which means that in the plays where Annas and Caiaphas sing them, the relevant actors must have been musically competent. This probably explains why not many plays give Annas a singing part here; in nearly all, Quid facimus is sung by a chorus of Jews. Of the five exceptions two are Hessian: Heidelberg and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, which both give the question almost certainly spoken rather than sung to a (differently named) individual.20 The St Gall Passion Play s unusual setting of Quid facimus as a solo by Annas may thus be a Hessian feature.

18

19

20

(Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 109, l. 207; Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 54v, ll. 3452c-d (not dialogic here); transcription in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 30. Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 5v, ll. 84a-85; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 109, l. 208; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 218a-g; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 26; Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 54v, ll. 3452i-k; transcription in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 30. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 119: Sandir , no chant-incipit; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3016c-g: Selem , probably spoken biblical verse. Cf. Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452i-k: Cayphas; Rabers Passion, ll. 58a-b: Archisinagogus ; Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1281a-b: Ein phariseus .

232


By contrast, Caiaphas has a solo role somewhere in the antiphon in the vast majority of plays.21 Annas and Caiaphas thus take their place in that interesting category of St Gall Passion Play actors who sing only one chant, but a complex one (The Virgin Mary, Joseph of Arimathea, John the Baptist, the Devil, possibly God the Father). Stage logistics would probably not, however, have allowed them to be doubled from the ranks of the angels, as in the case of Joseph. The possibility that John the Baptist doubled the role of Annas or Caiaphas is discussed in Chapter IV, but certainty is of course impossible. The play s directions leave open a few questions as to exactly how the antiphon was sung; and the evidence of other plays, only five with music,22 is not conclusive. Does Quo finito (l. 554b) mean that the angel finished at et dicebant , with Annas continuing from Quid facimus (49), as Schuler interprets it, and as in Alsfeld, Eger and the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel?23 The Sterzing plays, which use Collegerunt as a choral item to cover the assembly of the Jews, will probably have needed to sing beyond et dicebant to accommodate the processional movement and to reach a musical and textual conclusion; thus in the two which later have the dialogic section Quid facimus , this section would have been repeated.24 The St Gall Passion Play might have done this; though the fact that the beginning of Collegerunt is sung by a single angel rather than the chorus could 21

22

23

24

Of the plays in note 10, Caiaphas does not sing in a dialogic setting of Collegerunt pontifices only in the Haller Passion and Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 84a-85; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 206-09; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 218a-g; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 26; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452a-q. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, p. 151; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2424 c-f; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 380-81; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452c-e; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 206-07, all with Collegerunt sung by the chorus; Quid facimus is sung by the whole council in Alsfeld, Benediktbeuern and Eger. Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 31a-32, 87a-b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 0a-b, 46a-b.

233


imply that only a short part of the antiphon was used, as a brief narrative introduction rather than as a long processional chant. Did Annas s Quid facimus (49) include the repetenda Ne forte veniant Romani , as in liturgical performance? The German dialogue (ll. 560-62) corresponds to this phrase, but this may not be decisive. Here, perhaps, the dramatic tradition is helpful: not one of the plays in which Quid facimus is a separate dialogic section (rather than part of a choral performance of the beginning of Collegerunt ), explicitly includes the Ne forte clause,25 and the two plays with notation explicitly leave it out.26 Thus Annas s part could have ended at credent in eum as in Benediktbeuern and Eger,27 or even as early as multa signa facit . A likely form for the musical settings in the St Gall Passion Play, then, is given on the next page.

25

26

27

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2424e-f; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 381; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 207; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 87a-b; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1571a-c; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3016c-g; Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1281a-b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 46a-b. Anomalously, Rabers Passion, ll. 58a-b, includes Ne forte veniant but not Quid facimus . (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 207; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452c-e; both plays add Ne forte veniant Romani only at the end of the Ab ipso ergo die section: (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 209; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452n-q. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 207; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3452c-e.

234


Christ s entry into Jerusalem (ll. 568a-75) Christ s ceremonial entry into the city is accompanied by two songs of welcome by the pueri : 235

The St Gall Passion Play 51, 52 [51] Post hoc ascendat [Iesus] asinum Quo veniente occurrant pueri cum palmis cantando Osanna, benedictus et prosternant vestimenta sua. [52] Item Gloria, laus et cetera

(ll. 568a-d)

The first item is problematic. The cantare direction suggests liturgical text, and several antiphons from the Palm Sunday procession allude to the Hebrew children welcoming Christ as he entered Jerusalem, and contain words similar to the incipit. Most, however, do not match the incipit precisely:28 Hosanna Filio David: benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini. Hosanna Filio David: benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Rex Israel: Hosanna in excelsis. Ante sex dies solemnis Paschae, quando venit Dominus in civitatem Jerusalem, occurrerunt ei pueri et in manibus portabant ramos palmarum, et clamabant voce magna dicentes: Hosanna in excelsis. Benedictus qui venisti in multitudine misericordiae. Hosanna in excelsis. Turba multa quae convenerat ad diem festum clamabat Domino benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, hosanna in excelsis. Pueri Hebraeorum tollentes ramos olivarum obviaverunt Domino clamantes et dicentes Hosanna in excelsis. Pueri Hebraeorum vestimenta prosternebant in via, et clamabant dicentes: Hosanna Filio David; benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini.29

The only one which exactly fits the incipit Osanna, benedictus is the last section of the long mode 7 processional antiphon Cum [or dum] appropinquaret : Cum [dum] appropinquaret Dominus Hierosolimam [ ] Alii expandebant vestimenta sua in via, alii ramos de arboribus prosternebant et qui sequebantur clama-

28

29

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1852. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 49v-50, transposed up a fifth to accommodate the tessitura. The antiphons quoted here have the following numbers in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 3141, 3142, 1437, 5266, 4415 and 4416.

236

VII. The Passion (I) bant: Hosanna, benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, benedictum regnum patris nostri David, hosanna in excelsis; miserere nobis, fili David.30

The identification of this chant by Bergmann and Pflanz cannot be certain.31 It receives no support from dramatic tradition: the St Gall Passion Play would in fact be unusual in using an extract from Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1976 for the children s welcome to Jesus. The Hessian plays use all or part of that antiphon, but before the disciples go off to find a donkey for Jesus, not during the entry into the city.32 The only other play to include it at all is the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, at the beginning of Jesus s triumphal entry.33 Most plays use other Palm Sunday processional antiphons, typically Hic est qui venturus est , from Cum audisset populus (Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1983), Pueri Hebraeorum vestimenta prosternebant (no. 4416), Pueri Hebraeorum tollentes ramos (no. 4415), and Oc30

31 32

33

Cf. Ibid., no. 1976. This wording in Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxivra-va (mode 7); Christian Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Kassel [etc.], 1982 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87), fols. 58v-59v (mode 8). Also Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 50v-51; Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 83v; Würzburg, M.p.th.f. 85, fol. 62; Missale Maguntinum, 1507, fol. lxxvb; Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, c. 1492 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 469), fols. xxxiii-xxxivv; Agenda Maguntina, 1513, fol. LXIv; Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis, 1551, fols. XCVIIv-XCVIIIv; Agenda ecclesie wormaciensis, 1500-10, sig. g ir; Worms manual, Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1, fols. 47v-48; Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxivra-va; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fol. 100ra; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, sig. k iir. Bergmann, Studien, p. 206; Pflantz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 118-19. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 126; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1796a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2672c-g; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2511a-e, 2531a-f; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 395-396, 399-400. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 11, followed (l. 12) by the antiphon Cum audisset populus (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1983); cf. Thomas Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, Sonderband zum 50. Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, Winterthur, 1982, pp. 146 and 153, and Bergmann, Studien, p. 216.

237


currunt turbae (no. 4107).34 Plays using chants which actually begin with Hosanna or Benedictus are quite rare, and show no consistency in choice of sources. Donaueschingen uses Benedictus Mariae filius .35 The Lucerne plays, and possibly the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, use the Sanctus from the Mass.36 The Heidelberg wording would fit Corpus antiphonalium nos. 3141, 3142 or 4416 as well as the Vulgate text of Matthew 21:9.37 Gospel text from either Mark or John would precisely fit the incipit: Et qui praeibant et qui sequebantur clamabant, dicentes: Hosanna! Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini; benedictum quod venit regnum patris nostri David. Hosanna in excelsis. (Mark 11:9-10.)

34

35

36

37

See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 493 and 494. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 13-14 (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 4415 and 4416; order uncertain); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3358a-3396d (antiphons 1983, 4415, and 4416, and the responsory Ingrediente Domino [no. 6961]); Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1812a-55 and Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 127a-e (antiphons 1983, 4416, 4415, and 4107). Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 431-33, melody p. 253; cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 494. Chant as yet unidentified. Luzerner Passionsspiel, ll. 6416b-c (Latin); cf. Hans Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel. Gestützt auf die Textabschrift von M. Blakemore Evans und unter Verwendung seiner Vorarbeiten zu einer kritischen Edition nach den Handschriften herausgegeben. I. Text des ersten Tags. II. Text des zweiten Tags. III. Textteile 1597, 1616. Anmerkungen, Quellen, Glossar, Bern, 1967, 3 vols. (Schriften herausgegeben unter dem Patronat der Schweizerischen Geisteswissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft, 7), vol. III, p. 212 (German). Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 127b. Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [first volume of additions to Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002], p. 147, suggests Cum appropinquaret (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6251) or Turba multa (no. 7978). Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2708b-d: Osanna filio Dauid. Benedictus, qui venit .

238

VII. The Passion (I) Acceperunt ramos palmarum, et processerunt obviam ei, et clamabant: Hosanna, benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, rex Israel. (John 12:13.)38

This, however, is also unknown elsewhere in drama, and seems an unlikely choice for the procession given that the correct processional chants, and the personnel to perform them, were readily available. For here as elsewhere (e.g. 52, Gloria, laus ), liturgy informs and interpenetrates the dramatic. It is liturgical texts which speak of boys or children welcoming Jesus.39 The pueri of the play (l. 568b) play a part in a mimesis that is heavily influenced by liturgy; and they are also the pueri cantores , the choirboys who would have been used to singing in the Palm Sunday procession, where some of the hymns and antiphons were their special responsibility.40 The section from Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1976, then, may indeed have been used, since its relatively complicated melody would have presented no problem to the performers.41

38

39

40

41

Rolf Steinbach, Die deutschen Oster- und Passionsspiele des Mittelalters: Versuch einer Darstellung und Wesensbestimmung nebst einer Bibliographie zum deutschen geistlichen Spiel des Mittelalters, Köln, 1970 (Kölner Germanistische Studien, 4), p. 138, note 44, thinks Mark 11:9-10 more probable, since the St Gall Passion Play s version of the Last Supper is basically Marcan. Emil Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977] (Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41), p. 109. Cf. Steinbach, Deutsche Oster- und Passionsspiele, p. 138, note 43, points out Matthew 21:15: [ ] pueros clamantes in templo et dicentes: Hosanna filio David . Cf. Wolf, Kommentar, p. 71, on the same phenomenon in the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 1a and 127b-c. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1976. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 50v-51r.

239


Pflanz seems to assume that the whole passage given here was used.42 This would in fact have been musically necessary to reach the mode 7 finalis G. Another possibility, of course, is that there is scribal error in the direction and that Osanna, benedictus is a truncated version of the wording Hosanna Filio David: benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini found in one of the other antiphons listed above: Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 3141, 3142, or perhaps most likely no. 4416, Pueri Hebraeorum vestimenta prosternebant , a mainstay of the dramatic tradition, particularly in Hessia:43 Pueri Hebraeorum vestimenta prosternebant in via, et clamabant dicentes: Hosanna Filio David; benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini.

42 43

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 118-19, p. 167. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4416. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 52v-53.

240


On the current state of the evidence this question seems unlikely to be resolved. By contrast, there is no doubt whatever about the next item: 52 Item Gloria, laus et cetera et dicant: Iesus, du wunderere, wir sagen dir lob vnd ere. Du maht der Iuden kunig sin wol, der Israel irlosen sol. Vns ist die warheit wol irkant, daz dich Got selbe hat her gesant. Du bist der werlete heilant.

(ll. 568a-75)

This is the mode 1 hymn Gloria, laus et honor by Theodulf, the nineth-century bishop of Orleans,44 another staple of the Palm Sunday procession in Germany and elsewhere:

44

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 8310; Clemens Blume & Guido M. Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica medii aevi, 55 vols., Leipzig, 1886-1922 [rpt. Frankfurt, 1961]; Register, ed. by M. Lütolf, 2 vols. in 3 parts, Bern-München, 1978, vol. L, no. 117; Ulysse Chevalier, Repertorium Hymnologicum: Catalogue des chants, hymnes, proses, séquences, tropes en usage dans l église latine depuis les origines jusqu à nos jours, 6 vols., Louvain-Bruxelles, 1892-1921 (Subsidia hagiographica, 4), no. 7282; Hermann Adalbert Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus sive hymnorum canticorum sequentiarum collectio amplissima, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1855-56, vol. I, pp. 215-17 (no. 186); vol. IV, pp. 153-57; John Julian (ed.), A Dictionary of Hymnology Setting Forth the Origin and History of Christian Hymns of All Ages and Nations, London, 1908 [rev. ed.], p. 426; Graduale triplex, pp. 141-42; Officium majoris hebdomadæ et octavæ Paschæ [ ] cum cantu juxta ordinem Breviarii, Missalis et Pontificalis Romani. Editio typica Vaticana, Rome, 1922, pp. 74-76; Liber usualis, pp. 588-89; Herman A.P. Schmidt, Hebdomada sancta. I. Contemporanei textus liturgici, documenta Piana et bibliographica. II. Fontes historici. Commentarius historicus, 2 vols. in 3 parts, Roma-Freiburg-Barcelona, 1956-57, vol. II, pp. 656 and 696.

241


Verses: 2. Coetus in excelsis te laudat caelicus omnis, Et mortalis homo et cuncta creata simul. (Refrain) 3. Plebs Hebraea tibi cum palmis obvia venit: Cum prece, voto, hymnis adsumus ecce tibi. (Refrain) 4. Hii tibi passuro solvebant munia laudis; Nos tibi regnanti pangimus ecce melos. (Refrain) 5. Hi placuere tibi, placeat devotio nostra, Rex bone, rex clemens, cui bona cuncta placent. (Refrain).45

The verbless direction is unusual for liturgical chants in the St Gall Passion Play, but in this case the item (l. 568d) can be seen as referring to the cantando in the previous chant (l. 568b; see Chapter IV). 45

Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 52v. There are thirty-four further verses in Blume & Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica, vol. L, no. 117.

242


The hymn is identified by Bergmann, Pflanz, and Schuler, though Schuler s discussion of it under two numbers is slightly misleading.46 It is sung in eleven other plays, not all listed by Schuler.47 But what of the exact length and form in which the hymn might have been performed in this play? Pflanz s argument, on pages 119-20, that the German dialogue indicates the first two verses is vulnerable to the standard objections. It also overlooks the generally loose fit between the German dialogue and the Latin of the hymn: lines 573-75 seemingly correspond to none of the hymn wording. And it ignores two other important determinants: the length and elaboration of the stage procession which it accompanied, and liturgical performance-practice in the Palm Sunday procession. Few German plays have detailed directions for Gloria, laus et honor .48 Some specifics of dramatic performance probably derived from 46

47

48

Bergmann, Studien, p. 215 and note 1746; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 119-20; and Schuler, Musik der Osterfeieren, nos. 222 and 223 In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2615a-b, 2625a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 415, 417; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 15; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1824-1842; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2698b-c; Luzerner Passionsspiel, ll. 6416d-j, cf. Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. III, p. 213; Luzerner Passionsspiel. Musiktafeln, pl. 12; Luzerner Passionsspiel-Regiematerialien 1583, 2. Teil, fol. 108v; Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1243a-b. Not in Schuler: Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 310, 311; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 51r-v; Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel, ll. 1396a-1416d; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift (Palm Sunday), ll. 1236a-56d; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 127d, written partly over an erasure: It[em] pueri. Gl[ori]a r. (or more probably ). Read by Richard Froning (ed.), Das Drama des Mittelalters, 3 vols., Stuttgart, 1891-92 (Deutsche National-Litteratur, 14:1-3) [repr. Darmstadt, 1964], vol. II, p. 351, l. 160, as Gloria laus ; by Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, p. 16, l. 176, as Gloria rex . Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2615a-b, 2625a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 415, 417; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 15; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 127d; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2698b-c; Luzerner Passionsspiel, ll. 6416d-j; cf. Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. III, p. 213; Luzerner Passionsspiel. Musiktafeln, Tafel 12, see the illustration in Gustave O. Arlt, 4. Musik. B. Die Judengesänge , in Marshall Blakemore Evans, Das Osterspiel von Luzern. Eine historisch-kritische

243


liturgical practice: Gloria, laus represents the historical event within the drama, but is itself from the procession which commemorates and liturgically stylizes that event. The hymn describes the original entry as having happened in the past. As with the Osanna chants, the pueri are simultaneously the pueri Hebraeorum of the dramatic mimesis and the pueri cantores of the choir. Liturgical details familiar to church musicians did not of course need to be included in the play manuscripts. Liturgical performance began with the full refrain Gloria, laus et honor hosanna pium , sung by the whole choir; there followed the verses, sung alternately by the two sides of the choir. Each verse, including the last one sung, was followed by a refrain. This is a pattern which takes time to establish itself; liturgical books usually stipulate five or six verses of the total of thirty-nine.49 It is also longer than stage practicalities would have required. An absolute minimum, to establish the alternating pattern, would be the opening and closing refrain, with one verse sung by each side, plus the refrain between them, lasting a minimum of one and a half minutes. But two verses from each side would make the pattern clearer and more satisfying; this would take at least about two and a half minutes. Even the shorter form would have been more than ample to cover the stage movement in the St Gall Passion Play: some of the procession had already been accompanied by 51, Osanna, benedictus .

49

Einleitung , [trans.] Paul Hagmann, Schweizer Theaterjahrbuch 27 (1961), pp. 7583 (p. 79 and ills. 11 and 12); cf. Luzerner Passionsspiel-Regiematerialien 1583, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 108v (with notation); Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel, ll. 1243a-b. Julian (ed.), Dictionary of Hymnology, p. 426. The Palm Sunday procession is described in numerous missals and rituals: e.g. Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, c. 1492, fols. xxxiii-xxxix; cf. Brockett, Osanna! .

244


The three Sterzing plays with detailed directions nonetheless imitate the liturgical procession precisely.50 They prescribe five verses, plus refrains, and making the whole episode even longer than its liturgical model five spoken vernacular quatrains, translating the Latin verses. This would have taken at least about four minutes, a length dictated surely not by the exigencies of performance but by the need to give the procession a fitting degree of prominence and solemnity. Whilst this cannot be automatically supposed for the whole of the German dramatic tradition, there is at least a strong precedent for it. These Sterzing plays illustrate a further practical performance detail: the refrain. The whole refrain Gloria, laus ... hosanna pium follows each verse in the modern Latin rite,51 but not in all medieval and early modern sources: in some the refrain is always Gloria, laus ... pium ; in others, it is alternately Gloria, laus ... and Cui puerile decus , the two halves of the whole refrain; others do not make this 52 clear. Stage practice very likely followed local diocesan use. For the St Gall Passion Play, however, absolute certainty is impossible. In 50

51

52

Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel, ll. 1396a-1416d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 51r-v; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift (Palm Sunday), ll. 1236a-56d. Liber usualis, pp. 588-89; Graduale triplex, pp. 141-42; Officium majoris hebdomadæ, pp. 74-76. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 146, seems to assume that the alternating refrain was standard in medieval German uses. Alternating refrain: Budapest, National Széchényi Library, Cod. lat. m. ae. 330 (ritual, Biburg, Bavaria, late twelfth century), fols. 62v-63; edition by Walter von Arx, Das Klosterrituale von Biburg, Fribourg, 1970 (Spicilegium Friburgense, 14), p. 194; Moosburger Graduale, fol. 57v; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 61r-v; Rituale Trevirense (1767), pp. cxxvi-cxxvij. Refrain always Gloria, laus : Augsburg: Obsequiale sive benedictionale secundum ecclesiam Augustensem, Augsburg, 1499, sig. biiijr; Ritus ecclesiastici Augustensis episcopatus, Dillingen, 1580, pp. 499-502. Sarum: Processionale ad Usum Sarum, London, 1502, fol. 46rv , cf. Julian (ed.), Dictionary of Hymnology, p. 426; Daniel, Thesaurus, vol. I, no. 186. Unclear: Einsiedeln, 121 (Paléographie musicale, vol. IV, facsimile, pp. 38182); St Gall, cod. 339 (Ibid., vol. I, facsimile, pp. 64-65).

245


general, Mainz seems to have had alternating refrains, and Speyer always to have used Gloria, laus ... .53 The very sparse evidence for Worms, however, contains one example of each. One manuscript manual has Gloria, laus albeit added by a later hand; the printed ritual of c. 1500, however, records the alternating refrain, and this may reflect the more general diocesan tradition.54 Since the St Gall Passion Play is probably from Worms, the alternating refrain, known and possibly even predominant there, seems the more probable choice. The Last Supper I: The Eucharist (ll. 575a-638) As Jesus enters Jerusalem, he instructs the disciples to prepare the Passover in the house of a man carrying a water jar whom they will meet (ll. 575a-98; cf. Mark 14:12-16, Luke 22:7-13). The Supper itself is preceded by the silence-chant: 53, Iterum Silete (l. 598c). See no. 1 above. At the end of the meal, Jesus blesses the bread and wine: 54, 54a [54] Tunc Iesus accipiens panem cantans Hoc corpus et dans eis dicat: Daz ist min lip, der nu wirt gegeben in den dot durch vwer leben. [54a] Similiter calicem dicens: 53

54

Alternating refrain: Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 52v; Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 84, Missale Maguntinum, 1507, fol. lxxirb; Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, c. 1492, fols. xxxiiir-xxxixv; Agenda Maguntina, 1513, fol. LXIIr-v; Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis, 1551, fol. CVIv. Theodor Heinrich Klein, Die Prozessionsgesänge der Mainzer Kirche aus dem 14. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Speyer, 1962 (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 7), p. 132: comparative table of Mainz melodies. Refrain always Gloria, laus : Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxvra-b; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fol. 110va; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, fol. LXXVr-v (= sig. k iiir-v). Worms manual, Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1, fol. 49 ( g¬a and g added by later hand); Agenda ecclesie wormaciensis, 1500-10, sig. g iir.

246

VII. The Passion (I) Drinkent alle, diz ist min blut. Daz ist vor vwer sunde gut. Ir dunt minen dot do bide irkant, swo ir dis ammet hie nach begant.55

(ll. 632b-38)

Mone, Hartl, Bergmann, and disappointingly also Schützeichel, assume that 54 is a Gospel quotation: Hoc est corpus meum, quo pro vobis datur [ ] (Luke 22:19) and interpolate an est .56 Only Wolter correctly transcribes the incipit as hoc corpus , which, as realises, is that of a mode 7 communio: not however for Palm Sunday, as he states, but the preceding Passion Sunday.57 Pflanz58 correctly identifies the chant and notes its full wording:59

55 56

57

58 59

See St Gall MS 919, p. 205. Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu, l. 632b; Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, 2 vols., Karlsruhe, 1846-48, vol. I, pp. 49-128, l. 625b; Eduard Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Halle/Saale, 1952 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41), pp. 56-131, ll. 746bc; Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978, l. 632b. Cf. Bergmann, Studien, p. 224 and note 1824. See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 271a, b. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 46; Mainz missal, Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, II 163, fol. 16v; Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxivvb; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10076, fols. 87ra-87va; printed Speyer missal, 1501, fol. XLIXva (= sig. g iva) ( noui testamenti est ; dicit dominus ). In Worms used also on Good Friday: printed Worms missal, 1488, fol. XLVIIIva; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522, fol. LXVv. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 22-23, 120-22. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 46. Variants include: novum testamentum est ; dixit Dominus .

247


The plays with similar incipits at the Communion are few. Most use different chants. Common choices are the Corpus Christi responsory Homo quidam , as well as other chants and biblical text.60 The com60

Homo quidam as antiphon: Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934, p. 557; Carl Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, Strasbourg, 1907 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1963], p. 451; Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4536 ( Quidam homo ). As responsory: Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 126; Processionale monasticum ad usum Congregationis Gallicae Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, Solesmes, 1893 [rpt. Paris-Tournai, 1983], p. 105; Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 451; not in Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium. Used in: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 174a-84; Bozner Himmelfahrtsspiel, ll. 674a-f; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4102a-08e; Haller Passion, ll. 539a-b, 543a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 275c-d. Other chants: Calicem salutaris (antiphon 1754): Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 730-39 (alternative chant). Cenantibus il-lis (either Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1781, or Corpus Christi responsory; Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 407; John R. Bryden & David G. Hughes, An Index of Gregorian Chant, Cambridge, Mass., 1969, vol. I, p. 87; not in Hesbert s Corpus antiphonalium): Prager Abendmahlspiel, l. 121. Discubuit Jesus (responsory, CANTUS, gra0637): Freiburger Fronleichnamspiel, B, ll. 104a-c. Biblical text: Accipite et comedite [ ] and Bibite ex hoc omnes [ ] (Matthew 26:2628): Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 730-39; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhand-

248


munio is found only in Hessia, and only Alsfeld definitely uses it.61 The Frankfurt evidence is ambiguous. The first incipit in the Dirigierrolle, Hoc est corpus , sounds biblical (Luke 22:19), but the second, Hic calix noui testamenti , distinctively liturgical; possibly the communio was intended for both parts, and the intrusive est is a scribal error.62 The Passionsspiel has Hoc est corpus meum , but specifies no chant before the distribution of the cup.63 The ambiguous directions in the St Gall Passion Play make it impossible to know precisely how the chant might have been performed. Only for the bread are the directions given in full. Jesus takes it ( accipiens ), singing the chant; and distributes it ( dans eis ), speaking the German dialogue. He must also take and distribute the cup. The direction Similiter calicem [ ] (l. 634a) could very well be an elliptical way of indicating the same sequence of music, words and actions as for the bread; an arrangement as dramatically effective as it is faithful to the Gospel accounts of Jesus speaking a separate blessing over each element (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20). Such split performance is extremely common in plays.64 The communio

61

62

63 64

schrift, ll. 1001a-05b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 641d-f, 647a-c. Hoc est corpus meum [ ] (Luke 22:19) and Hic est sanguis meus [ ] (Matthew 26:28): Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3372b, 3376c-g. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3087a-95; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 143, 144; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1967a-b. However, Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3372ac, 3376a-c, is probably biblical: Luke 22:19: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis datur . Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 143, 144 (Janota editorially inserts est in Hic calix noui testamenti ). Bergmann, Studien, pp. 224-25, suggests the communio as the basis. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 271. Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1967a-b. E.g. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 174a-79a, 179a-84a; Augsburger Passionsspiel, ll. 386a-90, 390a-98; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 728a-29a, 730-39; Brixener Passionsspiel, ll. 749a-53a, 753b-63; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 143, 144; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 1967a-71, 1971a-75; Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, A, ll. 738a42, 742a-49; B, ll. 104a-12, 112a-18a; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3372a-76a,

249


could readily have been performed in two sections, as tradetur ends on its mode 7 finalis G. Alternatively, though, Similiter calicem dicens (l. 634a) might simply be a close reflection of the New Testament narrative: Similiter et calicem, dicens: Hic calix novum testamentum est in meo sanguine [ ] (1 Cor. 11:25; cf. Luke 22:20): this would imply that the whole communio was sung before the distribution of the bread. Performance tradition for this chant is extremely thin. Pflanz s view that the St Gall Passion Play will have omitted the words dicit Dominus need not be accepted automatically.65 However, it is interesting that Alsfeld, the only play to include the communio with notation, does indeed truncate it. Distributing the bread, Jesus sings Hoc corpus quod pro vobis tradetur , to the conventional melody, ending on the finalis G; this is followed by German dialogue. As he takes the chalice, he sings Hic calix novum testamentum est , and again addresses the disciples.66 The music in the manuscript shows that the communio has been melodically adapted to end at the end of this phrase, on the final G:67

65 66

67

3376a-86a; Luzerner Passionsspiel, ll. 6948a-52, 6952a-62; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 641a-47, 647a-51. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 121-22. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3087c-91b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 493, 495. The melody given in Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II, l. 3087e, wrongly ends on a. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 35r, l. 3091b, as correctly transcribed by Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. III, p. 17, and Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II, p. 461.

250


instead of on a as in the received form transcribed above. The Alsfeld music thus specifically avoids prolonging the chant, either to the end of the phrase dicit Dominus or to the end of the chant, the only points where the melody again concludes acceptably on its finalis. The German dialogue actually paraphrases the part of the communio which was not sung. The omission in the St Gall Passion Play of the phrase dicit [dixit] Dominus and of the concluding part of the chant cannot simply be assumed, but has an interesting precedent in a play which is fairly closely related, though from a later period when such alteration may have been more widespread. If the St Gall Passion Play did truncate the chant, some such melodic adjustment would have been needed. The Mandatum (ll. 644b-87) Immediately after the Eucharist, there is a brief interlude when Judas leaves the upper room to negotiate a reward for betraying Jesus (ll. 638a-44a); then the Mandatum part of the Supper begins. Jesus sings of his new commandment of love: 55 Post hoc Iesus cantet Mandatum novum et dicat: Ich wil vch geben ein nuwe gebot, daz ir nit brechent dorch keine not. Ir sollent ein ander lieb han, rehte als ich vch han gedan.

(ll. 644b-648)

Whilst this item could plausibly be either a biblical verse (John 13: 34), the cantet direction suggests the antiphon based on it:68

68

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3688. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 60v. Also in processional (Mainz, St Peter), Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 118, fol. 28; registrum chori (Mainz, St Peter), Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 233, fol. XXVv; Worms manual, Worms, Stadtarchiv, Abt. 106/1, fol. 52v; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, fol. LXXXr-v (= sig. k viiir-v).

251


Mandatum novum was a staple of the series of antiphons sung during the Maundy Thursday ceremony of the Mandatum or Pedilavium, when parish priests and monastic superiors washed the feet of their parishioners or brothers in religion in memory of Christ.69 Schuler, Bergmann and Pflanz all identify the chant as the antiphon; though Pflanz on the dubious criterion of the German dialogue.70 The chant is found in over a dozen other plays.71 Only Admont and Eger have notation, but in the case of such a well-known item, the absence of notation can almost be taken to indicate the liturgical chant; and indeed, the few plays where the music is recorded or can be reliably deduced do use the antiphon. The Frankfurter Dirigierrolle per69

70

71

Thomas Schäfer, Die Fußwaschung im monastischen Brauchtum und in der lateinischen Liturgie: Liturgiegeschichtliche Untersuchung, Beuron, 1956 (Texte und Arbeiten der Erzabtei Beuron, I, 47); Schmidt, Hebdomada Sancta, vol. I, pp. 76676; Franz Haffner, Der Gründonnerstag im alten Speyer , Die Rheinpfalz 19/ 20.4.1973, p. 15; cf. Emil Josef Lengeling, Missale Monasteriense, 1300-1900: Katalog, Texte und vergleichende Studien, (eds.) Benedikt Kranemann & Klemens Richter, Münster, 1995 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 76), pp. 350-65, esp. 363. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 333, Bergmann, Studien, p. 224, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 23, pp. 122-23. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3297a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 358a-b; Brixener Passionsspiel, l. 646c (later addition); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4004a-d; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 151a-e; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2073a-c; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 358a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 357a-b, 379a; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 947a-b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 242b-43; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 578; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 688b-89; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 358a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 13v; Prager Abendmahlspiel, ll. 211a-12.

252


forms it almost exactly as in the Mandatum ceremony: sung three times with its versicle Beati immaculati in via (Psalm 118:1) and a doxology; two further Mandatum antiphons follow.72 The directions in plays where no other chants are prescribed for the foot-washing also suggest a similar performance.73 It is interesting that both Eger and Admont, the only two plays with notation, adapt the text and melody to end before dicit Dominus .74 How widespread such textual and melodic alteration of Mandatum novum was is impossible to say on the limited evidence from these two late plays, which have a greater tendency to write out their music for a secular clergy increasingly unfamiliar with the plainsong corpus.75 It is unknown, and probably now unknowable, whether earlier plays like the St Gall Passion Play adapted melodies in this way. To the disciples surprise, Jesus begins to wash their feet. Peter initially refuses, but is persuaded to allow it: 56, 57, 58 (ll. 648c, 650a, 654a), possibly sections from the antiphon Ante diem festum Paschae (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1431), but more probably biblical verses to the Passion tone:76

72

73

74

75

76

Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 151a-e. There follow Diligamus nos invicem (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2231) and In hoc cognoscent omnes (Ibid., no. 3239) (151f-g). Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 13v: lauat pedes incipiens a iuda cantans mandatum nouum ; Prager Abendmahlspiel, ll. 211a-12: Item lauantur pedes discipulorum et etiam cantatur Mandatum nouum do vobis . Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4004c-d, ends sicut dilexi vos set to a rewritten version of the melody of sicut dilexi vos, dicit Dominus giving a satisfactory ending in the mode (3) of the antiphon. Admonter Passionsspiel, l. 243, stops at invicem , on an a-G cadence which gives the impression of a modally complete piece in mode 7. Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), p. 256. John 13:8-9, Passion tone. A Gospel tone setting, as in the Alsfelder Passionsspiel, is also possible: see Chapter V, note 43.

253


These chants are dealt with in detail in Chapter V. Afterwards Jesus asks the disciples if they understand the significance of what he has just done: 59 Post locionem resedeant [Iesus] cantet Scitis, quid fecerim : Ir sprechent herre und meister zu mir. Dar an nit vbel redet ir. Sit ich vwer vuze gewaschen han, daz han ich dar vme gedan, daz ir nit vorbaz sollent lan, ir wesent inander vnderdan. Diz zeichen sollent ir von mir han.

(ll. 658a-65)

Though Schuler records this incipit otherwise only in Heidelberg, it is also found in the Bozner Abendmahlspiel, an example which has also escaped Traub.77 Schuler and Bergmann78 list only biblical text (John 77

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 562. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3412 b-g: biblical wording (John 13:12-15). Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 720a-b: Deinde sedit JHESUS ad locum cene, cantans: Scitis quid fecerim . The chant is not listed in the indexes in Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, pp. 15-129, 131-38, 139-56.

254


13:12b-14) as a source; however, a mode 2 Maundy Thursday communio, also used as an office or Mandatum antiphon (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2413), is consistent with the cantet direction and entirely fitting for the quasi-liturgical solemnity of the foot-washing scene. It is also much more compact than the biblical text, which is lengthy and not easily shortened.79,80 Dominus Jesus postquam coenavit cum discipulis suis, lavit pedes eorum et ait illis: Scitis quid fecerim vobis, ego Dominus et Magister? Exemplum dedi vobis ut et vos ita faciatis.

Pflanz recognizes the communio as a possible source, but mistakenly describes the modern Roman version as too short to fit the German dialogue; it is in fact identical to that in the medieval missals which Pflanz quotes in preference.81

78 79

80

81

Bergmann, Studien, p. 221 and note 1793. John 13:12b-14: Scitis quid fecerim vobis? Vos vocatis me Magister et Domine, et bene dicitis, sum etenim. Si ergo ego lavi pedes vestros, Dominus et Magister, et vos debetis alter alterius lavare pedes . Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2413. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 59r-v. Also in Mainz missal, Würzburg, M.p.th.f. 85, fol. 75v; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522, fol. LXXXVIrb; Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. cra; Darmstadt, Hs. 889, fol. 78vb; printed Speyer missal, 1501, fol. LXIIIIva (= sig. h viiiva); cf. Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense, fol. 68; Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 473; Liber usualis, p. 657. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 23-24; cf. p. 127.

255


Jesus then sings and speaks of how his own death, and the dispersal of the disciples, have been foretold: 60 Postea cantet Iesus Scriptum est enim : Ir werdent alle dirre nath von mir flihende bit math. Wan ir hant gehoret wol sagen, so der hirte wirt geslagen, so werdent die schefelin viriaget. Doch si vch vor gesaget, ich zu galylea vor vch gen, so ich von dem dode ersten.

(ll. 665a-73)

This chant could be either another mode 8 antiphon from the Palm Sunday procession:82

82

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 4835. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 59r-v. Also in: Missale Maguntinum, 1507, fol. lxxiva; Agenda Maguntina, 1513, fol. LXIIIr; Agenda ecclesie wormaciensis, 1500-10, fols. giiv-giiir; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. lxxxvrb; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 101vb; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, fols. LXXVv-LXXVIr (= sig. k iiiv-k iiiir); Liber usualis, p. 602.

256


or else the biblical passage (Matthew 26:31-32) on which the antiphon is based: Tunc dicit illis Jesus: Omnes vos scandalum patiemini in me ista nocte. Scriptum est enim: Percutiam pastorem, et dispergentur oves gregis. Postquam autem resurrexero, praecedam vos in Galilaeam.83

Bergmann does not deal with the episode or the chant. The evidence of a mere three other German plays is limited.84 Heidelberg has Marcan biblical text; Admont and Eger both use the antiphon.85 Pflanz chooses the antiphon on the grounds of the St Gall Passion Play s general tendency to use liturgical chant;86 a partly circular argument, based on many other instances when he has assumed the use of liturgical material on inadequate evidence (and ignoring the fact that the dialogue here does not translate the ibi me videbitis [ ] of the antiphon). However, systematic evaluation does suggest that St Gall Passion Play cantet chants are predominantly liturgical, and the antiphon is not melodically challenging, making it a highly plausible choice, especially for the competent singer playing Jesus (see Chapter IV). Pflanz is however probably wrong to assume that the concluding dicit Dominus was omitted. Musically, it is feasible to stop only at gregis , as in Admont,87 Galileam , or at the very end of the antiphon, as in Eger.88 An ending on Galileam would be thinkable: indeed, on Pflanz s (generally dubious) criterion of the German dialogue, might even be plausible: nothing in the German corresponds to Ibi me videbitis in the antiphon.

83 84 85

86 87

88

The synoptic parallel, Mark 14:27-28, has Quia scriptum est . Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 563. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3702a-e; Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 305b-06; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3406a-g. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 128-29. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 305b-306 (C-clef wrongly entered in manuscript, fol. 24); ll. 315-16 translate the unsung part of the antiphon. Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 3406a-g.

257


The Agony in the Garden (ll. 687a-758) Jesus and the disciples go to the Mount of Olives (l. 687a), a movement, it would seem, unaccompanied by any chant. Meanwhile, Judas has slipped away again to discuss the betrayal of Jesus (ll. 687b-89). Jesus takes Peter, James and John with him. To them he confesses his overwhelming sadness: 61 Tunc dicat Iesus cantando Tristis est et dicat: Ir dri, ich clagen vch mine not. Mine sele ist drurig biz an den dot. Nu sollent ir beden vnd wachen, wollent ir dem diuel widersachen.

(ll. 691a-95)

This incipit matches a mode 8 Maundy Thursday responsory: Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem. Sustinete hic et vigilate mecum. Nunc videbitis turbam quae circumdabit me. Vos fugiam capietis et ego vadam immolari pro vobis. V. Vigilate et orate, dicit Dominus. Nunc videbitis turbam

89

Bergmann does not mention this chant. Schuler groups all the instances of this incipit under the responsory; Pflanz assumes that this is the St Gall Passion Play chant, and this is also Mehler s conclusion.90 For once, however, there are good reasons to believe that the responsory may not have been used in this instance. First there is the evidence of the play itself. The direction does not specify any kind of liturgical chant. The dicat cantando direction is 89

90

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7780. Mainz: see Hermann Reifenberg, Stundengebet und Breviere im Bistum Mainz seit der romanischen Epoche, Münster, 1964 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 40), p. 120, note 787 (2nd responsory, Maundy Thursday); Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 261v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 103vb; cf. Liber usualis, p. 630. The similarly worded antiphon 5187 is not found in Mainz, Worms or Speyer. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 613; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 24-25, 82-84; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 192-94.

258


the only instance of this verb in the play, making firm conclusions about its meaning impossible. It is plausible, however, that it signifed a kind of chant less elaborate than a responsory, for which cantare is unambiguously the standard play s verb.91 Pflanz s argument that lines 694-695 reflect the Vigilate et orate of the responsory verse is open both to the general critique of this argumentation, and to the specific objection that wollent ir dem diuel widersachen does not correspond closely to the Latin of the verse.92 Then there are the eleven other plays with the same incipit.93 In one where it is a choral item, it presumably will have been the responsory.94 But in the rest, where Jesus sings the chant, the evidence points very distinctly towards the use of the Passion tone. Of the four plays with notation, three use a reciting tone.95 In nearly all the others, the abbreviated wording could be either liturgical or biblical (Matthew 91

92 93

94

95

Cantare direction in all St Gall Passion Play chants which are definitely or probably responsories: 8, Ecce agnus Dei ; 14, Ductus est Iesus in desertum ; 17, Angelis suis mandavit ; 48, Colligerunt ; 63, Una hora ; 71, Ingressus Pylatus ; 84, In manus tuas ; 87, Ecce quomodo moritur iustus ; and in the responsory verses: 33, Dimissa sunt ; 36, Fides etenim . See also Chapter IV. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 83. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3307a-c; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 185; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 559a-c; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4227b, 4243b, 4251b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3756a-d; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 756b-d; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 1197b-c. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 349a-50; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 582; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 813b-14; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 559a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 17; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 701g-i. Schuler (no. 613) lists Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 153; but this prescribes only the incipit Sustinete h[ic et] o[rate] , and may not have included Tristis est ; Wolf, Kommentar, p. 171 and note 344 is indecisive. Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 17; yet in the earlier Bozen tradition Jesus sang this chant: Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 559a-c; B, ll. 559a-c. Admonter Passionsspiel; Egerer Passionsspiel, transcribed in Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 151 and Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 335 (in both plays stops at mortem ); Tiroler Passionsspiel (with distinctively biblical wording, Matthew 26:38, 41). Line numbers as in note 93.

259


26:38, Mark 14:34), but nothing in wording or directions positively prescribes the responsory. The dicat direction in several plays suggests biblical text, and the cantat in the late Alsfelder Passionsspiel can denote recitative.96 Dreimüller s reconstruction of Alsfeld here is uncharacteristically vague and non-committal; as Mehler recognizes, the play could have used either the responsory or biblical text.97 So far, this reasonably large and varied corpus offers no explicit signs that the responsory melody was used, and a good many implicit ones that it was not. There remains the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, which Mehler cites as possible evidence for the use of the responsory in St Gall.98 But Benediktbeuern is a very problematical case. Its dicere direction is hardly ever associated with responsories, either in this or in any other play.99 The wording, Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem. Sustine [sic] hic et orate ne intretis in temptationem , is not precisely that of the responsory. It could be part of the refrain ( Sustinete hic et vigilate mecum ) conflated with the verse in certain local uses: Vigilate et orate, dicit Dominus, ut non intretis in tentationem ;100 but it is more probably biblical (Matthew 26:38, 26:41 or Mark 14:34, 14:38). The chant carries the responsory neumes, but only as far as Sustine , after which they stop completely. Whilst this manuscript evidence is extremely hard to interpret, it almost certainly does not mean that the chant was performed in a hybrid form, beginning with the responsory melody and continuing with 96

97

98

99 100

Dicat : Bozner Abendmahlspiel; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, B; Heidelberger Passionsspiel; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503. Line numbers as in note 93. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3307a-c; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 208-09. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, pp. 50-51, 151; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 211-12. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 108v, l. 185; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 160, 169, 193. Ibid., pp. 150-75, esp. 169 and 175, and 193. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. IV, p. 437. However Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 149-50, is over-optimistic in thinking this might be a distinctive local variant which could help to localize the play.

260


a reciting-tone; for if the performer was capable of singing the difficult responsory, why abandon it halfway through? And even if this had been done, the responsory melody would have had to end on the finalis G on mortem , not in mid-phrase on sustine . Binkley ingeniously suggests that Sustine[te] hic et orate may have been erroneously copied from the verse of a different responsory, adjacent in an antiphonal.101 But just as plausibly the dicat direction, the nonliturgical wording and the strangely truncated neumation could indicate that a responsory had not originally been intended here, and that scribal error was involved. This would fit well with Bischoff s thesis that this part of the Carmina Burana manuscript was written not by a monk but in a non-monastic milieu, possibly at an ecclesiastical dignitary s court, where there was not the same intimate familiarity with liturgical chant.102 In this situation a scribe could very well have been misled by the incipit and begun entering the responsory neumes, realizing his mistake only at Sustine , where the wording diverged from that of the liturgical text; then he might simply have stopped writing in the neumes, without however deleting or altering what he had already entered. This scenario is given added credibility by a striking parallel later in the same play: the chant Tamquam ad latronem , which follows biblical, not liturgical wording, begins with responsory neumes but continues with a simple syllabic setting. And so the one piece of prima facie evidence for the use of the responsory Tristis est in German drama emerges as problematical and ambiguous. The St Gall Passion Play may very well have used a Passion tone setting here rather than the responsory. There is no way of knowing whether it was from Matthew or Mark, or whether it stopped 101

102

Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 149, suggests In monte Oliveti or Una hora . Otto Schumann & Bernhard Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana: Mit Benutzung der Vorarbeiten Wilhelm Meyers kritisch herausgegeben von Alfons Hilka und Otto Schumann, vol. I,3: Die Trink- und Spielerlieder. Die geistlichen Dramen. Nachträge, Heidelberg, 1970, p. 15.

261


at mortem as in Admont and Eger, or continued to the end of the section traditional in the Passion tone setting:103

This also casts doubt on the deduction of Mehler on the basis of this chant, that the performance-verb dicere cantando in the St Gall Passion Play denotes complex melodic chant such as responsories.104 On the contrary, the term may more plausibly refer to recitative. Jesus goes off alone to pray to the Father to be relieved of the cup of suffering: 62, 64 [62] Iterum Iesus cantet Pater, si possibile est, transeat et dicat: Herre, vatter vnd Got, ist ez nit wider din gebot, so vberhebe mich dirre pin. 103

104

[i]: Matthew 26:38a, Passion tone; based on Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 89. [ii]: Matthew 26:38, Passion tone; cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 89. [iii]: Mark 14:34, Passion tone; cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 205. Cf. also the plays in note 95. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 194.

262

VII. The Passion (I) Yedoch irge der wille din. Des wil ich gehorsam sin. [ ] [64] Deinde vadat ad priorem locum orans: Et pater et cetera et dicat ut prius Herre, vatter et cetera.

(ll. 695a-700)

(ll. 708a-b)

This chant is sung twice, with different performance-verbs in each direction: cantare the first time, orare the second. The et before pater in the second direction (l. 708a) is presumably a scribal error.105 Bergmann does not deal with this item. Schuler s presentation of the plays which use a similar chant is particularly confused. In no. 298 he subsumes all his eleven instances under the Maundy Thursday responsory In monte Oliveti (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6916); but he lists certain plays again under no. 461 (Matthew 26:39) and/or no. 462 (Matthew 26:42).106 For the St Gall Passion Play, he records the two occurrences of what is clearly the same chant under both 298 and 462. A detailed critique of Schuler s listings is impossible here, but the facts can be summarized thus: Whilst In monte Oliveti is sung in several plays, it is the source of Jesus s plea to the Father only in three: Admont and the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, which have the responsory music; and Alsfeld, which like them has the distinctive responsory wording Pater, si fieri potest, transeat a me calix iste ,107 not found in the Vulgate. In all the other plays, whether or not 105

106

107

The direction perhaps originally read vadat ad priorem locum et orat Pater et cetera : cf. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 3227a; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 2227a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 563a. E.g. in Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2215a-d (Matthew 26:39) is listed under no. 298 ( In monte Oliveti ); ll. 2227a-b (Matthew 26:42) is listed under no. 461 (Matthew 26:39); ll. 2231a-c (Matthew 26:42, repeated) is listed under no. 462 (Matthew 26:42). Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 356a-60; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 186, 188; cf. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 150, 155; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3311a-c ( orat cantando ), 3327a-b ( cantat ), 3335a-b ( cantat ); cf. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p.

263


they use the responsory elsewhere, it is not the source of the prayer, which has the slightly different biblical wordings. In the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, for instance, a choral performance of In monte Oliveti covers the movement to the Mount of Olives;108 but Jesus s prayer begins Abba pater (Mark 14:36).109 Several plays use Matthew 26:42: Pater mi, si non potest hic calix transire nisi bibam illum, fiat voluntas tua ; one, the Tiroler Passionsspiel, explicitly prescribes the Passion tone.110 But the most common source is Matthew 26:39: Pater mi, si possibile est, transeat a me calix iste. Verumtamen non sicut ego volo, sed sicut tu. 111 There are minor differences in the amount of the verse sung in different plays; several change the biblical Pater mi, si to Mi pater, si or to Pater, si , the form used in St Gall.112 In all these cases, even though notation is lacking, Vulgate, not liturgical text, frequently combined with orare or dicere directions,

108

109 110

111

112

51; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 583, 587, 592 (performance-verbs as in Alsfelder Passionsspiel). Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 153. Janota s (implicit) interpretation (see Janota [ed.], Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, p. 44) of the marginal direction p(er)s(one) cantabu(n)t in monte as a local reference ( on the mountain ), rather than as the incipit of In monte Oliveti (accepted by Wolf, Kommentar, p. 171), is probably mistaken. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 157; Abba vater also in Haller Passion, l. 673. Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 845a-46; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2227a-b, 2231 a-c; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3774a-c; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 705a-d. Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 818a-21 (wording of Matthew 26:42 used for the repeat, ll. 845a-46); Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 563a-c, 575a-b, 585a; B, ll. 563a-c, 575a-b, 585a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 17v (addition); Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 2215a-d; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3760a-d; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 563a-c, 575a-b, 587a-b; Rabers Passion, ll. 110df; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 760a-c, 772a-b, 784a; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift (Maundy Thursday), ll. 1201a-c. Mi pater, si in: Bozner Abendmahlspiel, Heidelberger Passionsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A and B, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift. Pater, si in Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Line numbers as in note 111.

264


virtually guarantees the use of biblical recitative. The biblical wording in the St Gall Passion Play strongly suggests the same. Its cantet direction is thus unexpected; but this is surely a case where the clearly biblical wording found in no liturgical chant is stronger evidence than the individual performance verb. This is one of the very few instances in the play where a cantare direction demonstrably introduces biblical material.113,114

Pflanz is indecisive.115 He is correct in assuming that the chant is biblical (but he does not consider In monte Oliveti ). However, unaware that the incipits Pater, si and Mi pater, si are common variants of the biblical Pater mi, si in the dramatic repertoire, he seems to suggest as an alternative a Palm Sunday communio, which he cites from the modern Roman use, as a better match for the play s incipit Pater, si .116 This communio, however, follows the wording of Matthew 26:42 ( Pater, si non potest hic calix transire ), which is clearly not the verse intended in this play. From his list of changes to Hartl s reconstructions Pflanz appears finally to opt for Matthew 26:39 without the biblical mi , arriving by default at what is probably

113 114

115 116

See Chapter IV, note 37. Matthew 26:39, Passion tone, based on Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 90, and the setting of Matthew 26:42 in Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 705a-d. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 139-40. Ibid., p. 140. Cf. Liber usualis, p. 601. This communio seems to be used for the repeat of the prayer in (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 190; cf. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 150.

265


the right wording.117 He does not, of course, consider musical form at all. Returning to the disciples, who have fallen asleep, Jesus reproaches them: 63 Tunc veniat ad discipulos et inveniat eos dormientes. Cantet Una hora et dicat: Mohtent ir nit wachen eine stunt bit mir? Nu sprach doch vwer munt, ir wollent liden dorch mich not, ob ez wer der grimme dot. Nu slafent ir vil suze. So hat Iudas vnmuze, wie er mich gebe der Iudesheit. Nu slafent. Mir nahet min arbeit.

(ll. 700a-08)

This is sung between the two instances of the chant Mi pater (nos. 62 and 64). Whilst the direction specifies no kind of liturgical chant, the incipit Una hora corresponds, as Pflanz notes,118 to neither biblical version of Jesus s reproach: Sic non potuistis una hora vigilare mecum? (Matthew 26:40); Simon, dormis? Non potuisti una hora vigilare? (Mark 14:37), but to the Maundy Thursday responsory Una hora .119 In identifying the responsory, Pflanz agrees with Schuler and Mehler. Bergmann is probably wrong to see the item as biblical (Matthew 26:40).120

117

118 119 120

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 169. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 196, note 244, agrees. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 84-85. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7807. See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 619; Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 195; Bergmann, Studien, p. 92 and note 778.

266


That Schuler makes this responsory his Leittext is misleading: most of the plays he lists do not include the responsory incipit, and in fact use biblical text.121 The incipit Una hora is found in only two other plays: the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, with the responsory neumes, and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, with the distinctively liturgical wording.122 It is notable that both are relatively early; later plays, even in the Hessian tradition, do not use the responsory, but biblical wording.123 The use of Una hora in the St Gall Passion Play may be a feature which demonstrates the play s connections with the early Frankfurt tradition. The responsory is associated with two different verses: Dormite jam et requiescite. Ecce appropinqua[bi]t qui me traditurus est [in manus peccatorum]. Quid dormitis? Surgite et orate, ne intretis in tentationem.124

The first of these is that found in the Mainz, Worms and Speyer traditions.125 However, this long responsory may well have been performed

121

122

123

124

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 3319c (Mark 14:37); cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 585; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 11 (Matthew 26:46); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4215a-b (John 14:31); 4239a-d (Matthew 26:40-41); 4325a-d (Matthew 26:46); Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 2223c (Matthew 26:40). Cf. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3766a-f (Mark 14:37); Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 719a-d (melody, MS, fol. 15, not transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern. In fact, he describes this item as biblical recitative: see vol. I, p. 35, note 36). (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 191; cf. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 150, 155. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 158; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, pp. 18, 45, expands the manuscript s po to potestis , found in neither scriptural nor liturgical text. Wolf, Kommentar, p. 176 and note 359, considers the responsory, but does not see that the incipit guarantees that it is the chant intended; he does not comment on Janota s reading. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle; Egerer Passionsspiel, Frankfurter Passionsspiel; Heidelberger Passionsspiel; Tiroler Passionsspiel. Line numbers as in note 122. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7807 (vol. IV, p. 444). Variants of the second form include Qui dormitis, surgite and ut non intretis in tentationem .

267


in drama without its verse.126 Its melody is relatively stable, as is its mode (predominantly 7), as in Mainz and Speyer sources:

127

125

126

127

Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 152r-v; Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 229; Barth. 154, fol. 126; Barth. 160, fols. 366v-67; other Mainz sources in Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 85, note 1; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 262v; printed Worms breviary, 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515), sig. dd6vb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Ibid., no. 5465), sig. l 2r; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. cc8va (in all cases 6th responsory of matins, Maundy Thursday). (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 109, l. 191, sets only the refrain to the responsory neumes; additional wording is biblical (Matthew 26:46) under recitative neumes. Cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 161, 195; Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 149. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7807. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 152r-v. Mode 7 in Lucca Antiphonal (Paléographie musicale, vol. IX, fac-

268


Judas tells the armed guards with him that he will identify Jesus with a kiss: 65 Tunc Iudas ad choortem sibi traditam cantet Quem osculatus fuero et cetera et dicat: Nu horent mich, ir stolzen knaben, den [ich] kussen, den sullent ir haben. Vnd vurent in sicherliche, daz er vch it intwiche.

(ll. 708c-12)

In line 708c, choortem is the manuscript reading. Bergmann does not deal with this chant; Pflanz128 suggests that it is the second section of Traditor autem , the mode 1 Benedictus antiphon at Maundy Thursday lauds:129

128 129

simile pp. 192-93); Worcester Antiphonal (Paléographie musicale, vol. XII, facsimile p. 119); Liber usualis, p. 645; thirty-eight out of the forty-one CANTUS sources whose modality is known (two sources with unknown modality). Mode 1: Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 43. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 85-87. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5169. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 154. Also in Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 230; Barth. 160, fol. 368; cf. other Mainz sources cited in Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 86, note 1; Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 63v; Worms, Stadtbibliothek, Lu 3a, fol. 4; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 104vb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. l 2v; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. dd1vb; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fols. 44v-45. Usually Benedictus antiphon, Maundy Thursday.

269


This is also the chant which Schuler130 assumes for all the German plays; but his list is particularly error-ridden and unreliable.131 Closer inspection suggests the consistent use of Vulgate text for this chant. The relevant verses are Mark 14:44: Dederat autem traditor eius signum eis, dicens: Quemcumque osculatus fuero, ipse est, tenete eum et ducite caute , and the shorter version in Matthew 26:48: Qui autem tradidit eum dedit illis signum, dicens: Quemcumque osculatus fuero, ipse est; tenete eum. The latter is in fact identical in wording with the antiphon, with the sole exception of quemcumque rather than quem . In the dramatic repertoire, the chant regularly begins with the Vulgate Quemcumque , rather than the liturgical Quem . Insofar as incipits can show, the verse from Matthew is more frequent. Mark 14:44 is definitely found only in the Tiroler Passionsspiel;132 several plays have incipits too short to distinguish between Matthew 26:48 and Mark 14:44;133 some definitely or probably use the version from Matthew.134 The four with music use the Passion tone:135

130 131

132 133

134

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 499. Ibid., vol. I, pp. 280-81. E.g. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel wording wrongly transcribed; first word in Heidelberger Passionsspiel given as Quem , not Quemcumque ; several incipits not given at all. Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 779a-b, with notation. Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 901a-02; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil, MS, fol. 18v (but cf. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495: see note 134); Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2292a-b; Haller Passion, l. 744a; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3796b-d (incipit only to ipse est , but reconstructed by Gustav Milchsack (ed.), Heidelberger Passionsspiel, Tübingen, 1880 (Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins Stuttgart, 150) as Mark 14:44); Rabers Passion, ll. 102a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 1297a-b. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 403a-04; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 183; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 615a-d, see Traub, Kommentar, pp. 94-95; (cf. A, ll. 615a-b, without music); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 617a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 814b-c; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 779a-b.

270


However, it is noteworthy that the two exceptions to the general use of Vulgate text are in the Hessian group. Both Heidelberg and the Frankfurter Passionsspiel have biblical text; but Traditor autem is used in both the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle (sung by the chorus, not, as in the rest of the group, by Judas) and Alsfeld.136 Two details in the St Gall Passion Play seem to indicate liturgical origin: the cantet direction and the initial quem rather than quemcumque . Neither is absolutely conclusive. Cantet introduces a recitative setting not only in several late plays, but also in the early (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, and in several other items in 135

136

Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 615a-d; cf. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 403a-04; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 183; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 779a-b. Cf. similar, simpler setting in Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 91. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 156a; cf. Wolf, Kommentar, p. 173. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 37, ll. 3235a-b. The first word is represented by a nonstandard abbreviation, which does however seem to be an ornamented abbreviation of quem , not of quemcumque : cf. quem in Adriano Cappelli, Lexicon Abbreviaturarum: Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane [ ], Milano, 1929, p. 303, and Auguste Pelzer, Abréviations latines médiévales: Supplément au Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane de Adriano Cappelli, Bruxelles, 1966 [rpt. 1982], p. 67; and quemcumque in Cappelli, Lexicon, pp. 303, 306. Both Richard Froning (ed.), Das Drama des Mittelalters, 3 vols., Stuttgart, 1891-92 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1964] (Deutsche National-Litteratur, 14:1-3), vol. III, p. 685, and Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II, p. 479, read quem ; neither comments on the manuscript reading. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 566, which closely parallels the play here, definitely reads quem . Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 49, assumes the antiphon, but gives no rationale. The dicit direction applies to antiphons in Alsfeld: cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 208-09.

271


the St Gall Passion Play itself.137 The biblical verses and the antiphon are verbally nearly identical, and the St Gall copyist could easily have miscopied an abbreviated quemcumque in his original, or have been influenced by the memory of the antiphon, as may have been the case with a similar minor difference in chant, 57, Si non lavero tibi (see Chapter V). The opposite mistake the biblical quemcumque in the antiphon occurs in some liturgical manuscripts.138 Interestingly, the German dialogue (ll. 709-12) contains a fairly close translation not of the antiphon or of Matthew 26:48, but of Mark 14:44, Quemcumque osculatus fuero, ipse est, tenete eum et ducite caute : den [ich] kussen, den sullent ir haben. Vnd vurent in sicherliche

(ll. 710-11; emphasis supplied)

Pflanz ignores this, even though he usually uses the German dialogue as strong evidence for he preceding Latin chant. In this case, however, the Marcan wording in the German has little evidential value for the preceding Latin, for a German couplet translating the Marcan ducite caute is routinely found in plays, even those which demonstrably use a chant based on the verse in Matthew.139 To sum up: the German dramatic tradition, including the early (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, strongly favours biblical reci137

138

139

Haller Passion, l. 744a. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, Admonter Passionsspiel, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, Tiroler Passionsspiel, (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (line numbers as in note 136); St Gall Passion Play, 6, Quis es ; 62, Pater, si possibile est, transeat ; 79, Regem non habemus . See Chapter IV. E.g. fourteenth-century Cologne Dominican breviary, Cologne, Historisches Stadtarchiv, W.f. 104, fol. 121, and the fourteenth-century Trier breviary, Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Ms. 469/1904, fol. 139r, cited in Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 86, note 1. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 409-10; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 620-21; B, ll. 620-21; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 622-623; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 819-820.

272


tative (Matthew 26:48 or Mark 14:44), but the internal evidence in the St Gall Passion Play may well suggest the use of Traditor autem , and the antiphon was certainly used in Hessia. Melodically, this makes only a small difference, since the antiphon melody in many medieval German sources is less elaborate than the modern Roman form.140 Going up to Jesus, Judas greets him reverently: 66 Et Iudas veniat ad Christum Ave, ave, rabbi : Meister vnd herre, Got gruze dich. But mir dinen munt, vnd kusse mich.

(ll. 712a-14)

Bergmann does not deal with this item. Pflanz is probably right in assuming that the three words in the manuscript represent the whole text.141 Since he does not refer to any liturgical source, he presumably interprets this as part of Matthew 26:49 or Mark 14: 45, sung to a tone. This conclusion, shared by Schuler and Mehler is almost certainly correct.142 The direction has no performance verb; no liturgical chant includes the words. Nowhere does the dramatic tradition suggest any other treatment. Some plays notate or prescribe a tone.143 The direction for this chant varies considerably, with dicere , cantare ,

140

141 142

143

E.g. Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 154 and Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 104vb (similar in Schlager [ed.], Antiphonale Pataviense, fols. 44v-45r): the neumes of tenete eum (D-F-FE D-D) are even simpler than the modern form (Liber usualis, p. 652). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 140-41. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 36(a), and Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 194. Notation in: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 427a-28; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 199; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 627d-e; Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 4329b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 807c-d. Direction in: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3383a-c; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 611 (both dicit sub accentu ).

273


clamare and verbless forms all represented;144 but plays with notation always have a recitative setting, regardless of verb.145 Noteworthy is the St Gall Passion Play s twofold Ave , found elsewhere only in Heidelberg, and there in spoken dialogue, after the actual chant Aue, rabbj : Ave is repeated for metrical reasons: Aue, aue, rabbj! Gegrussett alzeytt mein meister sey!146

In a sung form, however, the double ave could have an unbalancing effect on the extremely simple melodic structures typically found. The doubling of ave in the St Gall Passion Play manuscript may indeed be a scribal error. A likely form for this chant is:147

144

145

146 147

Dicere : (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 199; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, l. 941c; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 165; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2350a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3838a-b; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 3263a-c; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 807c-d. Dicere sub accentu : Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3383a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 611. Cantare : Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 33v, ll. 427a-28; Haller Passion, ll. 750f-g; Rabers Passion, ll. 142a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 1325a-b. Clamare : (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 12; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 627d-e; B, ll. 627d-e; Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 4329b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 629c-d; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 826c-d. Verbless: Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 941a-b. Dicere : (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, Tiroler Passionsspiel. Cantare : Admonter Passionsspiel. Clamare : Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, Egerer Passionsspiel. Line numbers as in note 145. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3839-40. Matthew 26:49 / Mark 14:45, Passion tone. Based on Officium majoris hebdomadæ, pp. 92, 207, in the light of Admonter Passionsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, Egerer Passionsspiel, Tiroler Passionsspiel (line numbers as in note 145).

274


The disciples now run off, leaving Jesus to reproach the soldiers for arresting him like a criminal: 67 Tunc discipuli fugiunt Et Iesus cantet Tamquam ad latronem : Ir komment zu mir gewapent sere, rehte als ich ein morder wer. Doch brediget ich vch vffenbere in dem tempel mange lere.

(ll. 752a-56)

Though the direction does not explicitly designate this as liturgical, Pflanz148 assumes that it was the Good Friday responsory Tamquam ad latronem ;149 this agrees with Schuler;150 Bergmann does not deal with this chant. However, as with Tristis est anima mea (no. 61 above), the assumption is open to question. The wording of the responsory is based on Mark 14:48-49 (cf. Matthew 26:55), though it is not identical with either verse. In the modern Roman use, the refrain reads: Tamquam ad latronem existis cum gladiis et fustibus comprehendere me: Quotidie apud vos eram in templo docens, et non me tenuistis: et ecce flagellatum ducitis ad crucifigendam.151

However, in the medieval period, the chant is nearly always found in a shorter form, reading ... existis cum gladiis comprehendere me ... , without the et fustibus of Matthew 26:55. The difference is highly significant. The two forms are not simply common variants: the shorter one dominates everywhere,152 not only in the German-speaking area

148 149 150 151

152

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 25, pp. 87-89. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7748. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 597. Liber usualis, pp. 679-80 (4th responsory of matins, Good Friday). This is the only wording given in Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, p. 410. Shorter form cited as standard in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7748 (vol. IV, p. 429): longer form found in only one of Hesbert s twelve manuscripts: the

275


but throughout Europe, even in the distinctive English local uses of Sarum and York.153 Exceptions are found in the pre-Tridentine Roman use and occasionally in other dioceses.154 Given that the responsory set the last syllable of gladiis to a long melisma, which could have accommodated the addition of et fustibus , the conservatism of the tradition is remarkable. Only the post-Tridentine Romanization of the liturgy brought the longer wording into the European local uses; the shorter wording is consistently found in the medieval liturgy of Mainz, Worms and Speyer.155 Pflanz however fails to realize that the

153

154

155

twelfth-century monastic antiphonal of St-Maur-les-Fossés, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds lat., 12584. E.g. Gottschalk Antiphonal, Yale, Beinecke Library, MS 481.51, fol. 11; Lucca Antiphonal (Paléographie musicale, vol. IX, facsimile, p. 196); Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 47r-v; printed Coutances breviary, Rouen, 1499 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5327), sig. Ovra-b; printed Dominican breviary, Basel, 1492 (Ibid., no. 5224), sig. o iijva; Essômes: Breviarii [ ] prima pars [ ] ad vsum insignis ecclesie Sosmensis, Paris, 1548, sig. Uviiira; antiphonal, Mariengarten (near Göttingen): Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Cod. Guelf. 309 Novi, fol. 63; Reims: Breuiarium secundum ecclesie Remensis, pars hyemalis, Paris, 1543, sig. o viiivb; printed Utrecht breviary, Paris, 1498 (Ibid., no. 5491), sig. L6v; Sarum: Portiforium seu Breuiarium, ad insignis Sarisburiensis, ecclesie vsum, London, 1556, sig. Lviiiva; York: Breviarium ad usum insignis ecclesie Eboracensis (S.W. Lawley [ed.], Breviarium ad usum insignis ecclesie Eboracensis, 2 vols., Durham [etc.], 1880-83 (Publications of the Surtees Society, 71 & 75), vol. I, col. 391). E.g. Breviarium Romanum optime recognitum [ ], Venice, 1564, sig. Xviivb; printed Rouen breviary, 1480 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5437), sig. Gxiiva. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 156v-57; Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 231v; Barth. 154, fol. 128r-v; Barth. 160, fol. 369v; Barth. 161, fol. 356v; other Mainz sources cited by Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 89, note 1; printed Mainz breviary, 1474 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5392), sig. m iiiv; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 264v; printed Worms breviaries: 1475 (Ibid., no. 5513), fol. 289v; c. 1490 (Ibid., no. 5515), sig. ee1rb; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 105va; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Ibid., no. 5465), sig. l iiiv. Untypically, Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. dd3ra, has the longer form.

276


shorter form was standard in Mainz, and that the two Mainz books with the longer form are untypical of the medieval diocesan liturgy.156 A chant with this incipit is found in seven other plays, a not insignificantly small corpus; and with remarkable consistency they show the longer wording typical of the biblical, not the liturgical text.157 The directions also point away from the responsory. Cantare is found in late plays, which tend to use the term for recitative as well as for the melodically more complex chants; the dicere direction in several other late plays almost certainly denotes a tone, not something as elaborate as a responsory.158 The sole example of an early play with a cantat direction is the St Gall Passion Play itself; and as other examples have shown, cantare directions in this play need not invariably indicate liturgical melodies.159 Consistent with this is the evidence of the four plays with notation: three set the biblical words to a tone.160 The sole apparent exception is also the earliest play to contain the chant, the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel. It has the long, biblical wording; it has a dicat direction which in this play usually denotes accentus material or simple 156

157

158

159 160

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 89, note 1: fourteenth-century Carthusian breviary, Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. I 438, fol. 82; Breviarium Moguntinum, 1570, p. 350; cf. Reifenberg, Stundengebet, pp. 20-21, 225-52. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 597: (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 204a-05; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4373b-e; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 2403c-d; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 3870b-e. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 450a-52; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 952a-53 (ends at cum gladys ); Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 839a-e. Cantare : Admonter Passionsspiel; Egerer Passionsspiel; Tiroler Passionsspiel. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 209-10. Dicere : Heidelberger Passionsspiel, Frankfurter Passionsspiel (cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 198200, 203); Bozner Abendmahlspiel. All line numbers as in note 159. 6, Quis es ; 62, Pater, si possibile est, transeat ; 79, Regem non habemus . Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 450a-52 (modified biblical wording, with some verbal influence from the responsory), cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 116; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 4373b-e. dicit et canit = 4373b; Tiroler Passionsspiel, ll. 839a-e. Cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 93 (Matthew 26:55); p. 208 (Mark 14:48-49).

277


chants such as antiphons;161 and there is curious hybrid neumation, presenting the same problems as Tristis est anima mea in the same manuscript.162 From the start to gladiis there are the responsory neumes; but from et fustibus on, there are only virgas, a simple syllabic setting diverging completely from the responsory s lengthy melisma. The neumation here is even more schizoid than that of Tristis est ; the neumes over gladiis peter out in a melodically senseless way that defies performance. Again mistaken neumation seems very likely: the (possibly non-monastic) neumator misled by the incipit into assuming that the responsory was intended, perhaps realizing his error only at the precise point ( et fustibus ) when the words first diverged from the responsory text.163 The evidence for the use of the responsory in this play is by no means conclusive. Not only is there no unambiguous evidence of the responsory melody of Tamquam ad latronem in German religious drama; the data, as in the case of 61, Tristis est , in fact suggest a consistent tendency to use the biblical wording and recitative, or if using the responsory wording, to set it to a non-liturgical melody. In the light of this very definite general tendency, and of the evidence (see nos. 6, 62, and 79) that cantare in the St Gall Passion Play may not invariably have meant the more elaborate kinds of plainsong, the likelihood that it too used a tone is distinct. All the plays with this item use the version

161 162

163

Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 169, 175. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 205: Tamquam ad latronem existis cum gladiis et fustibus comprehendere me &c ; cf. no. 61 above. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 156, wrongly envisages the possibility of text derived directly from another play, with the music supplied from both the liturgy and Gospel . Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, vol. I:3, p. 171, note to l. 205; Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 150, 155-56; and Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 161, 169, disregarding the problematic neumation, conclude the chant was the responsory.

278


from Matthew, with the distinctive fustibus ; the corresponding word in Mark (14.48) is lignis .164,165

61, Tristis est anima mea and 67, Tamquam ad latronem illustrate an interesting tendency of German religious drama: the distinct preference, in the case of certain items, for a reciting-tone setting even though suitable liturgical chants existed. Plausible explanation is difficult. Might musical competence have been a consideration? Though a medieval stage Jesus would normally have been musically skilled and experienced, both Tristis est and Tamquam are of above-average length and complexity, especially for a solo performer. Responsories, which began as largely the province of solo cantors, had by the fourteenth century long been predominantly choral items.166 There may have been a consensus, perhaps the fruit of practical experience, that ones as difficult as these were slightly too challenging. Possibly there is another reason. By their very nature responsories are long, aesthetically developed chants which do not accompany any 164 165 166

Cf. note 159. Matthew 26:55, Passion tone. Cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 93. David Hiley, Western Plainchant: A Handbook, Oxford, 1993, p. 73; Helmut Hucke, Responsorium , in Friedrich Blume (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 16 vols., Kassel, 1949-79, vol. XI, cols. 313-25, esp. 316-18; David Hiley, Responsorium , in Ludwig Finscher (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Kassel-Stuttgart, 1994- [2nd rev. ed.], vol. VIII, cols. 176-200, esp. 179-81.

279


liturgical action but are designed primarily to be listened to.167 Possibly such lengthy, reflective items were felt to be less than ideal in a phase of the play which is arguably less sacramental in its emphasis than others, and mainly devoted to advancing the relatively tense action leading up to Jesus s arrest. Whilst this is a consideration not evident elsewhere in the St Gall Passion Play, or in German plays in general, it does seem to characterize the entire Agony in the Garden sequence. In this substantial section (ll. 688-758; chants 61-67), St Gall, usually so profligate of liturgical chants, seemingly uses only two. One, Quem osculatus fuero (65), is a short and simple section of an antiphon, not dissimilar to the Passion-tone setting used in other plays.168 The other, the responsory Una hora (63), is the only chant of any length or complexity; and even it is something of an exception in German drama, which invariably uses the corresponding Vulgate material both for Jesus s question here and throughout the Agony sequence. The remarkable consistency with which plays produced over several centuries almost everywhere in the German territories tend to avoid liturgical chant in the Agony sequence suggests that different ways of receiving, understanding and reacting to the different episodes, phases and sequences of religious drama may have been reflected in approaches to performance, including the choice of chants. This is a problem which cannot be addressed adequately here, or on our present knowledge of medieval religious drama; but it suggests directions which future scholarship might profitably take.

167

168

Bruno Stäblein, Psalm. B: Lateinischer Psalmengesang im Mittelalter , in Friedrich Blume (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 16 vols., Kassel, 1949-79, vol. X, cols. 1676-90, esp. 1685; cf. Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus, p. 54. See notes 136 and 141.

280

Chapter VIII

The Passion (2)

Jesus before Annas, Pilate and Herod (ll. 758a-1075) esus is arrested and brought before Annas (l. 758a). The interrogation is introduced by the silence-chant: 68, Iterum Sile[te] (l. 758b). See nr. 1 above. In the course of the interrogation, Rufus accuses Jesus of having said that, if the Temple were destroyed, he could restore it again in three days: 69 Respondet Rufus: Ich wil bezugen hie vorwar, daz er geredet hat vffenbar. Et cantet Solvite templum hoc et dicat: Ich wil bezugen hie vorwar, daz er geredet hat vffenbar, daz man den tempel breche nider. So wolt er in machen wider in drin dagen ganz als e. Noch danne sprach er rede me. Er sprach, er were Godes sun. Nu wartent, waz wollent ir herzu dun?

(ll. 807a-17)

Bergmann does not consider this chant.1 Pflanz assumes it is from the mode 5 Magnificat antiphon for the fourth week of Lent:2 1

2

Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, München, 1972 (Münstersche MittelalterSchriften, 14). Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205), pp. 26-27, 90-91.

The St Gall Passion Plays

Schuler cites the same antiphon.3 However, using this antiphon might well have been problematical. The gospels contain two references to these words of Jesus. In John 2:19 and 2:21 they are Jesus s direct speech, plus a narrative comment on it: Respondit Jesus, et dixit eis: Solvite templum hoc, et in tribus diebus excitabo illud [...] Ille autem dicebat de templo corporis sui.

In Matthew 26:60-61 the words are quoted by false witnesses to incriminate Jesus: Novissime autem venerunt duo falsi testes, et dixerunt: Hic dicit: Possum destruere templum Dei, et post triduum reaedificare illud.

The antiphon is based on the Johannine text, technically wrong for the St Gall Passion Play, which depicts the situation described by Matthew. More importantly, with the evangelist s comment and the inter3

René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12), no. 4982. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 130v. Also in Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 343v; Barth. 161, fol. 325; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 247r-v; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 95vb. Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940), no. 262. Schuler s Leittext, Hic dixit: Solvite templum hoc, et post triduum reedificabo illud! , fits the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, but possibly no other play.

282

VIII. The Passion (II)

polated dicit Dominus , the antiphon shows a sympathy and an explicitly Christian theological insight quite unsuited to the hostile Rufus. Pflanz correctly notes this,4 but his solution of ending the chant at illud would mean an unsatisfactory cadence on a: only at the very end does the melody resolve to its finalis F. This conflict of logical, theological and melodic constraints makes the antiphon in its usual musical shape unsuitable for this situation. These words are given to one of the hostile witnesses only in two of the Carmina Burana plays. By using Matthew 26:61 the (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel avoids the need for the witnesses to say dicit Dominus ; there are no musical indications.5 The treatment in the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel is very interesting. The wording, dicunt iudei Hic dixit. Soluite templum hoc et post triduum reedificabo illud 6 is basically that of the antiphon, but without either the dicit Dominus or the theological comment hoc autem dicebat de templo corporis sui , precisely the elements which present logical and theological problems. And the neumes, virgas and two puncta, are not those of the antiphon but of simple recitative. This might actually represent an attempt to circumvent the problems with using this antiphon identified above.7 Alsfeld and Heidelberg use the ambiguous dicens and sprichtt respectively, and include no music. The words are spoken directly by Jesus, not quoted by a hostile third party, so the use of the antiphon is

4 5

6 7

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 91. (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 14: Hic dixit. Possum destruere templum dei et post triduum reedificare illud . (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 210. Thomas Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, Sonderband zum 50. Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, Winterthur, 1982, pp. 150-51, 156, assumes this as the reason.

283


not a problem.8 The Alsfeld incipit is so short that it might represent the antiphon, or a biblical verse (John 2:19).9 In Heidelberg it is clearly John 2:19.10 The evidence for use of a liturgical chant is less than compelling. Vulgate text avoids the problems of perspective discussed above, and is suited to the capacity of a fairly minor actor; this is Rufus s only sung item, since his nr. 26, Magister , is almost certainly not sung (see Chapter VI). Recitative is a distinctly probable choice here:11

As Jesus is taken to Pilate (l. 851a), Judas confesses to Annas and Caiaphas that he has sinned in betraying Jesus: 70 Veniat ergo Iudas ad eos dicens Peccavi tradens sanguinem iustum : Ich han gesundet ane wan, 8

9

10

11

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 4361a-c: the accusatory verse, spoken by Sawel, is Hic dixit: Possum destruere templum Dei et post triduum reedificare illud ; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 829. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2665a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 426 ( dicit ); Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3 vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. II, p. 42. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 2716a-c: Soluite templum hoc, et in tribus diebus &c. (spoken by Jesus on arriving at the Temple). John 2:19, Passion tone, based on Officium majoris hebdomadæ et octavæ Paschæ [ ] cum cantu juxta ordinem Breviarii, Missalis et Pontificalis Romani. Editio typica Vaticana, Roma, 1922, p. 94 (Matthew 26:61), p. 209 (Mark 14:58).

284

VIII. The Passion (II) daz ich Iesum virraden han. Vnschuldig ist sin blut.

(ll. 851c-54)

This is yet another chant not dealt with by Bergmann. Since no liturgical chant contains these words of Judas (Matthew 27:4), this must be biblical text, as Schuler and Mehler conclude.12 Pflanz also correctly identifies a biblical verse, albeit on roundabout criteria including the dicens direction, which he thinks could indicate spoken delivery.13 The plays which notate the chant have a Passion tone setting.14,15

The long sequence of Jesus s interrogation by Pilate and Herod involves exchanges between the protagonists whose musical identity is problematic. For the sake of clarity, several separate chants are considered here together. Pilate takes Jesus into the Praetorium, to the accompaniment of a responsory. He asks him if he is king of the Jews: Jesus replies that he is:

12

13 14

15

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 464a, and Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), p. 189. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 141-42, esp. 142. Recitative notation in: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 647c-48; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 1347d-f; Rabers Passion, ll. 253a-b. Item also in: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3605a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 662; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 974c-75; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 1348c-d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 8; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 2633b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 4534bd; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 1355c-d; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/ 1503, ll. 1850c-d. Matthew 27:4; Passion tone setting based on Admonter Passionsspiel, in the light of Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B and Rabers Passion (line numbers as in note 15). The setting in Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 97, differs from those in German plays.

285

The St Gall Passion Plays 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 79 [71] Tunc Pylatus apprehendens eum ducat ad pretorium et duo angeli cantent responsorium Ingressus Pylatus usque [72] Tu es rex Iudeorum quod cantet Pylatus [73] Iterum cantet Iesus Tu dicis, quia rex sum Et dicat Pylatus: Bist du der Iuden kunig vorwar, des viriehe mir offenbar. Iesus: Io, du salt wuszen sicherlich, daz ich han ein kunigrich. Stunde daz nach der werlete reth, so hede ich mine kneth, daz du min hedes keine gewalt. Doch hat er sunden manigvalt, der mich hat gegeben dir, Pylate, des geleube mir.

(ll. 887a-97)

Pilate then has Jesus flogged; the soldiers crown him with thorns and mock him (ll. 897a-919; see nr. 74, below). Pilate brings Jesus out again. The Jews declare that they have no king but Caesar, and demand Jesus s crucifixion: [75] Tunc Pylatus ducat [eum] foras et cantent duo angeli Exivit ergo Iesus et cetera Tunc dicat Pilatus: Nu sehent vwern kunig an. Den vinden ich kein schult han. So ist er auch gar sere geslagen. Dar vmme mohtent ir wol gedagen. [76] Respondeant Iudei Regem non habemus Et dicat Rufus: Dem keiser biden wir ere. Keines kunges viriehen [wir] mere. Iterum Pylatus: Waz dun wir danne disme man, der nie keine sunde hat gedan? [77] Respondeant Iudei Crucifige, crucifige eum Et dicat Rufus:

286

VIII. The Passion (II) Du salt in cruzigen alzu hant. Wan er hat diz groze lant virirret von Galylea biz her. Sicherlich, daz arnet er.

(ll. 919-31)

Jesus is taken to Herod, who sends him back to Pilate (ll. 939a-79a). A dialogue between Pilate and the Jews is introduced by the silencechant: 78, Iterum Sil[ete] (l. 979c). See nr. 1 above. Once again the Jews deny that Jesus is their king: [79] Iudei cantent Regem non habemus

(l. 1050a)

Pflanz is unquestionably right in identifying the responsory mentioned in the first direction (l. 887a) as Ingressus Pilatus :16 Ingressus Pilatus cum Jesu in praetorium tunc ait illi: Tu es rex Judaeorum? Respondit: Tu dicis, quia rex sum. Exivit ergo Jesus de praetorio portans coronam et vestem purpuream. Et cum indutus fuisset exclamaverunt omnes: Crucifigatur, quia filium Dei se fecit. V. Tunc ait illis Pilatus: Regem vestrum crucifigam? Responderunt: Regem non habemus nisi Caesarem. Et cum indutus fuisset ... 17

This responsory, seemingly restricted to the area of present-day southern Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and northern Italy,18 is found in the Holy Week liturgy of the three relevant dioceses.19 However, the 16 17

18

19

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 27-29, 91-95. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6966. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 148r-v. Stephen K. Wright, The Ingressus Pilatus Chant in Medieval German Drama , Comparative Drama 28 (1994), pp. 348-66, esp. 350, citing CANTUS: A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant (http://publish.uwo.ca/~cantus); Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. I, pp. 166, 173 (nos. 71b, 73a), vol. II, p. 290 (no. 67c), vol. IV, p. 242, records responsory 6966 only in manuscripts from Bamberg, Ivrea, and Rheinau. It is not listed in John R. Bryden & David G. Hughes, An Index of Gregorian Chant, 2 vols., Cambridge, Mass., 1969, which is based on Roman, French, Italian, and English sources. Several melodic variants are recorded. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 148r-v; Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 364 (both responsory 3, Matins of Wednesday in Holy Week); Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 256; printed Worms bre-

287


details of the way the chant was used in the St Gall Passion Play are not self-evident; specifically, the question of whether the dialogues between Pilate and Christ, and between Pilate and the Jews, use the responsory wording or music. Schuler lists the various sung elements found here under different numbers: Ingressus Pilatus ... : 304; Tu es rex Iudaeorum? and Tu dicis, quia rex sum : 305; Exivit ergo Jesus ... : 306; Crucifigatur : 307; Regem vestrum crucifigam? : 308; Regem non habemus ... : 309. This atomized treatment, together with the complex and fragmentary evidence of the plays, makes it hard to gain an overview of how the various chants are used. Bergmann does not deal with the separate parts of the responsory and how they are used in drama.20 Ingressus Pilatus is found in both Easter and Passion plays.21 In addition, the exchanges between Pilate and Jesus ( Tu es rex Iudaeorum? Tu dicis quia rex sum ), and between Pilate and the Jews ( Crucifigatur, quia filium Dei se fecit Regem vestrum crucifigam? Regem non habemus nisi Caesarem ) are found in several

20 21

viary, 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 5515), sig. cc 8rb; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fols. 103v-04 (later marginal addition: probably Wednesday of Holy Week or Maundy Thursday); Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. cc 3rb, cc 7va (either Palm Sunday or Maundy Thursday); printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. k vir; Karlheinz Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Kassel [etc.], 1985 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88), fols. 39v-40 (all Palm Sunday). Frank Labhardt, Das Cantionale des Kartäusers Thomas Kreß. Ein Denkmal der spätmittelalterlichen Musikgeschichte Basels, Bern-Stuttgart, 1978 (Publikationen der Schweizerischen Musikforschenden Gesellschaft, Ser. 2, 20), p. 99, fol. 55 (Wednesday of Holy Week). This variation in days of use noted in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. IV, p. 242. Bergmann, Studien, p. 28. Easter plays: Benediktbeurer Osterspiel, Erlau V, Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, Innsbrucker thüringisches Osterspiel, Klosterneuburger Osterspiel. Passion plays: Admonter Passionsspiel, Alsfelder Passionsspiel, (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, Egerer Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion. Line-numbers in subsequent footnotes.

288


other plays, though, as will be seen, they are not always taken from the responsory. The use of the responsory in drama has recently been examined by Stephen Wright.22 Because the Easter plays by definition begin after the Crucifixion, and hence after the Pilate-Christ confrontation which Ingressus Pilatus records, the question-and-answer dialogues which Pilate conducts both with Jesus and the Jews do not take place.23 Indeed, scholars have repeatedly suggested that Ingressus Pilatus is so irrelevant to the content of the Easter plays that they used a different chant derived from the Gospel of Nicodemus.24 Wright, however, con22

23

24

Wright, The Ingressus Pilatus Chant , is unaware of the use of the chant in the Göttweiger Dirigierrolle and Rabers Passion. Benediktbeurer Osterspiel, ll. 0a-1; Erlau V, ll. 0d-g; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, fol. 1, ll. 2-3; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, l. 40a; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 1-4. Post haec ingressus Pilatus templum Iudaeorum congregavit omnes principes sacerdotum et grammaticos et scribas et legis doctores, et ingressus est cum eis in sacrarium templi , in Descensus Christi ad inferos, A, cap. XIII, in Evangelia Apocrypha (edited by L.F.C. von Tischendorf [ed.], Evangelia apocrypha, adhibitis plurimis codicibus Graecis et Latinis maximam partem nunc primum consultis atque ineditorum copia insignibus, Leipzig, 1876 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1966], p. 388). Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 304; Edélestand Du Méril, Origines latines du théâtre moderne, Paris, 1849, pp. 126-27, note 11; Gustav Milchsack, Die Osterund Passionsspiele: Literarhistorische Untersuchungen über den Ursprung derselben bis zum 17. Jahrhundert, vornehmlich in Deutschland, Wolfenbüttel, 1880, p. 105; Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church, 2 vols., Oxford, 1933, vol. I, p. 421, n. 2 (on Klosterneuburger Osterspiel). Incipit reconstructed thus in Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, (edited by Eduard Hartl [ed.], Das Drama des Mittelalters, 3 vols., Leipzig, 1937-42 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1964-69], vol. II, p. 137, ll. 40a-46 (cf. note on p. 302) and Klosterneuburger Osterspiel (edited by Ibid [ed.], vol. II, p. 32, ll. 0a-6 (cf. note on pp. 294-95). Most recently Bergmann, Studien, p. 28, questioning propriety of Ingressus Pilatus in (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (edited by Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, p. 518); Walther Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, 9 vols., BerlinNew York, 1975-90 (Ausgaben deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama, 5), vol. IX, p. 1104, same objection in Klosterneuburger Osterspiel. Cf. Wright, The Ingressus Pilatus Chant , passim and Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edi-

289


vincingly rebuts this; the responsory is indeed used in the Easter plays, on account not of its narrative appropriateness , but of its aesthetic appropriateness to the non-mimetic moment of the opening parodos (the ritual procession of principal characters into the arena) that precedes the play. This use is not expository but ceremonial , pointing up the closeness of the Easter plays to a liturgical aesthetic.25 The use of the responsory Collegerunt pontifices (48, above) as an entrance-chant for Annas, Caiaphas and the Jews in several Passion plays is analogous. The Passion plays make a more complex use of the responsory. Like St Gall several use all or part as a processional chant to cover Pilate s entry into the acting area.26 But the question of whether the dialogic exchanges between Pilate and Christ, and Pilate and the Jews, come from the responsory is less easy to answer. 71, Ingressus Pylatus Pflanz s suggestion that the narrative sections tunc ait illi and respondit will have been left out in performance is unconvincing.27 Tunc ait illi is an important narrative, syntactic and melodic bridge. The St Gall Passion Play direction (ll. 887c-d) does not explicitly prescribe that the angels sing the single word respondit , but this does not absolutely exclude the possibility: in Eger, where the performance

25

26

27

tion der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, p. 67. Wright, The Ingressus Pilatus Chant , pp. 357-58 (cf. pp. 355-57). Dronke s comment on Ingressus Pilatus in the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel implies that he is reading the chant as a narrative premonition of the confrontation of Christ and Pilate (See Peter Dronke [transl. and ed.], Nine Medieval Latin Plays, Cambridge, 1994 (Cambridge Medieval Classics, 1), pp. 185-237, esp. 186). Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 709a-12; Alsfelder Passionspiel, ll. 3717a-c, 3783 a-c; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 680, 696; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 1; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5117a-e; Rabers Passion, ll. 0c-d, 1877c-d (both wrongly written as Jncipit Pilatus : see Traub, Kommentar, p. 67). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 94.

290


of the responsory looks in some respects similar to that in St Gall, the chorus sings both these brief narrative items.28 72, Tu es rex Iudeorum , and 73, Tu dicis, quia rex sum Pflanz assumes that the dialogues between Pilate and Jesus, and between Pilate and the Jews, come from the responsory. He does not, of course, make the important distinction between the text and the music of the chant. Yet the exchange between Pilate and Jesus was taken entirely and directly from the responsory only in Eger.29 Nearly all the other plays lack music, but their wording diverges from that of the responsory ( Tu es Rex Iudaeorum? Tu dicis quia rex sum ).30 The only two which have the liturgical wording do not use the responsory melody but a simple recitative setting.31 This could have been done to accommodate the actor playing Pilate, who might not have been musically particularly expert. The evidence as to whether the St Gall Passion Play envisaged a musically competent Pilate capable of singing this section from the relatively difficult responsory melody is extremely ambiguous. Tu es rex Iudeorum is his only chant; yet several of the play s characters such as John the Baptist and Joseph of Arimathea sing only once, but perform complex material (see Chapter IV above). On the other hand, 28

29

30

31

Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5117a-e, 5139b, 5141b-c; transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 179. Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 82v, ll. 5139a-b, 5141a-c; transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 179. Milchsack s error in giving Jesus s reply as Tu dicis, quia rex sum ego is noted by Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 156. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 3997a-b, 3999a-b: Ergo rex es tu? Tu dixisti, quia rex ego sum ; identical in Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 753, 754; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 181: Tu dixisti, quia filius dei ego sum ; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 4606b-c: Tu es rex Iudeorum? (John 18:33); ll. 4612a-c: A temetipso hoc dicis [ ]? (John 18:34). Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 712a-13 (Passion tone); (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 219-20 (simple cadential settings).

291


Pilate is not given the chant Regem vestrum crucifigam? , a fairly standard item, found in a dozen plays,32 let alone any other common Pilate chants (e.g. Ecce homo 33). This implies a wish to shorten and simplify his part, and strongly suggests a Passion-tone setting for his question. Perhaps the precise circumstances of particular performances decided: if a good singer was available, he could have sung the responsory neumes; otherwise, he could have used recitative. Would Jesus have answered with the responsory melody even if Pilate had questioned him in recitative? There is no absolute reason why he should not have done, and several reasons why he might well have: the actor playing Jesus was musically competent, and this section of the responsory is not challenging; there is no verbally identical biblical text.34 75, Exivit ergo Iesus There is little doubt that this was sung to the responsory melody, and performance by the duo of angels, clearly trained singers, effectively guarantees this. Exactly how long this section was is uncertain. Vestem purpuream and se fecit both give a satisfactory cadence, and though singing the whole verse to Regem non habemus nisi Caesarem cannot be excluded, it does seem unlikely. There are no clear parallels in German drama which might help to decide. 76, 79, Regem non habemus The evidence for the last exchange between Pilate and the Jews is more mixed. In most plays Pilate puts the question Regem vestrum 32

33 34

To the nine plays listed in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 308, add Admonter Passionsspiel, Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, Rabers Passion. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 171. John 18:33, the reply to Pilate s Tu es rex Judaeorum? is A temetipso hoc dicis, an alii dixerunt tibi de me? John 18:37, Tu dicis, quia rex sum ego [...] , replies to Pilate s later Ergo rex es tu?

292


crucifigam? The St Gall Passion Play probably omits this to simplify the musical task of the actor playing Pilate, as suggested above. The same consideration may account for the recitative settings of the question in a good many plays, probably including the Hessian group, which have dicere directions.35 The responsory melody is found only in three late south German plays.36 The Jews reply Regem non habemus nisi Caesarem also shows a wide range of evidence, and Pflanz s assumption that it came from the responsory cannot be made automatically. Plays consistently use the responsory wording, Regem non habemus rather than the Vulgate Non habemus regem (John 19:15). In Bozen, and the Sterzing plays which resemble it, the Jews do not sing their riposte at all.37 The words are set to the responsory melody in Admont, Eger and Rabers Passion, and also in the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, though not as part of the Regem vestrum crucifigam? dialogue.38 But they are probably recitative in the (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel and, significantly, in the Hessian plays where dicere or a

35

36

37

38

(Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 239; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 1555a-b (cf. A, ll. 1558a); Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 11v. Cf. Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 1565a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, l. 1791a: no music, but identical dialogue to Bozen. (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 24: respondet direction, probably recitative. Hessia: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 4375a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 832; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 3529a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 4930a-b. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 909a-10; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5585a-b, transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 180; Rabers Passion, ll. 794a-b, 800a-b. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 1560-63 (cf. A, ll. 1562a-66); Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 11v; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 1569a-73; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 1795a-99. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 912a-13; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5591a-b ( Cayphas cantat ); transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 180; Rabers Passion, ll. 800a-b; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 246, cf. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , pp. 151, 156.

293


similar verb is found.39 Indeed, the extreme simplicity of the Jews only other chant in the St Gall Passion Play, 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum , suggests they were not a group of expert singers (see Chapter IV above), and the likelihood is rather that they sang the Passion tone setting here. 77, Crucifige, crucifige eum Though Schuler lists the Jews demand for Christ s execution along with the other sections of Ingressus Pilatus ,40 it never in fact comes from the responsory. This is seen from the few plays with music, where a reciting-tone is found,41 or much more frequently from the wording, which is nearly always the biblical Crucifige, crucifige eum (Luke 23:21, John 19:6, cf. Mark 15: 13), not the Crucifigatur, quia filium Dei se fecit of the responsory.42 Only once, in the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, is the wording of the responsory found but not its melody, merely a simple cadential tone.43 The three 39

40 41

42

43

(Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 25; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 4411a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 838; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 3531a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 4936a-b. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 307. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 849, 857; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 225, 230, 239. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 1450a-b, B, ll. 1449a-b; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5177a-b, 5203a-b, 5453a-b, transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 179. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 848a-49, 856a-57, 880a-81; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 4187a-b, 4225a-b, 4229a-b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 787, 796, 799; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 230; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 21; Bozner Abendmahlspiel, ll. 1050a-51; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 1450a-b, B, ll. 1449a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 10; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5177a-b, 5203a-b, 5453a-b; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 3525b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 4928a-b, 5086a-b; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 3433a, 3643a; Luzerner Passionsspiel, l. 8438a (in German); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 1457a; Rabers Passion, ll. 720a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/ 1503, l. 1683a. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 307a. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 239; cf. Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fols. 39v-40r.

294


other plays with notation also use settings similar to the Passion tone.44 No other play specifies any music, though others in the Sterzing group probably used the Bozen melody. Again the simple melodies probably accommodate the limited musical ability of the actors playing the Iudaei . The frequency of clamare or rufen directions for this item45 does not absolutely exclude a simple musical setting (cf. 46, Lazare, veni foras ). Admont and the Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, both with this direction, have a melody. A likely model for the music of the sections above, then, is given on the next page.46 In the middle of Pilate s interrogation, the soldiers flog Jesus, mockingly addressing him as king of the Jews: 74 Tunc exuant eum milites et ligant eum ad statuam et flagellant Postea vestient eum purpura et imponent ei coronam spineam et flexis genibus clament Ave, rex Iudeorum 44

45

46

Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 848a-49, 856a-57, 880a-81; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 1449a-b, cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 38; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5177 a-b; transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 179. E.g. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 848a, 856a: Schreyen , l. 880a: Schreit ; Alsfelder Passionsspiel: clamant ; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: clamando ... dicant ; Bozner Abendmahlspiel: clamant ; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B clamant ; Egerer Passionsspiel, clamant ; Frankfurter Passionsspiel: clamat ; Heidelberger Passionsspiel: rueffenn ; Luzerner Passionsspiel: schryend ; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel: clamant ; Rabers Passion: clamant ; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503: clamant . Line numbers as in note 43. Responsory sections (71, 73, 75): Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 148r-v. 72: Matthew 27:11, Mark 15:2, Luke 23:3 or John 18:33, Passion tone; Admonter Passionsspiel, l. 713; cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 99 (Matthew), p. 212 (Mark), p. 262 (Luke), p. 404 (John). 76: responsory wording (cf. John 19:15), Passion tone; cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 404. 77, 79: Luke 23:21 or John 19:6 (cf. Mark 15:14), Passion tone: cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 265 (Luke), p. 407 (John), p. 214 (Mark), transposed to the a-c interval typical of medieval plays.

295

VIII. The Passion (II) Et percucient caput eius arundine et dicant: Der Iuden kunig gegruzet si. Dem wanet swache ere bi.

(ll. 917a-19)

Bergmann does not consider this item; but as Pflanz47 recognizes, no liturgical chant contains these biblical words from Matthew 27: 29, Mark 15:18 or John 19:3.48 Of the plays where the words occur, the three with music (Benediktbeuern, Bozen 1495, Eger) have a reciting tone, despite a consistent canere direction in Bozen and the whole Sterzing group;49 the setting in other Sterzing plays will presumably have been similar.50 The other plays have a dicere direction,51 also suggesting a tone; so such a setting seems probable for the St Gall Passion Play. On the evidence of the few plays which notate it, it may have differed from the modern Roman setting:52

47 48 49

50

51

52

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 142-43. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 37. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 227; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 1641c-d; cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 29; cf. A, ll. 1644c; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5385a-b, 6423a-b, transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 19. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 1644c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 13; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 1651c; Rabers Passion, ll. 704b-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, l. 1877c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift, ll. 1651a-b; cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 29. Brixener Passionsspiel, l. 1883a ( spricht ); Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 3513c ( dicit ); Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 4954b-c ( sprichtt ). Matthew 27:29, Mark 15:18 or John 19:3, Passion tone setting based on Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 5385a-b and Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 1641c-d. The Eger and Bozen settings, based on a falling c-a interval, differ from the modern Roman setting, based on a rising d-f: Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 102 (Matthew), p. 215 (Mark), p. 406 (John).

297


The Crucifixion (ll. 1075a-1183) The soldiers load the Cross onto Jesus and march him and the two thieves to the place of execution (ll. 1083a-b), a movement unaccompanied by music. The process of crucifixion is not described in dialogue or directions, but must be complete before the soldiers begin to dice for Jesus s robe (ll. 1090a-1107). One of the two crucified thieves mocks Jesus (ll. 1122a-24), but the other recognizes him as guiltless and begs him to remember him: 80 Deinde idem cantet Memento mei, Domine et dicat: Herre, irbarme dich vber mich, so du kummest in dines vatter rich.

(ll. 1130a-32)

Pflanz is probably right to opt for liturgical text here,53 since the corresponding biblical verse (Luke 23:42) reads Domine, memento mei cum veneris in regnum tuum . The wording of the incipit, Memento mei, Domine ... is that found in three liturgical chants for Good Friday based on this verse: (i) Part of the refrain of the responsory Velum templi , from matins: Velum templi scissum est, et omnis terra tremuit; latro de cruce clamabat, dicens: Memento mei, Domine, dum veneris in regnum tuum.

54

53 54

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 29-30, 95-96. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7821. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 155v-56. Also in: Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 231; Barth. 160, fol. 369; Barth. 161, fol. 355v; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 264r-v; printed Worms breviary, c. 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515), sig. dd 8vb; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbi-

298


(ii) Part of Ait latro , usually the third antiphon at lauds:55 Ait latro ad latronem: Nos quidem digna factis recipimus, hic autem quod fecit? Memento mei, Domine, dum veneris in regnum tuum.

(iii) Memento mei, Domine Deus , usually the fifth lauds antiphon:56

Pflanz cites these chants confusedly from many liturgical sources. He seems to assume he is dealing with two, rather than three, chants, and fails to grasp that the wording Memento mei, Domine, dum veneris is common to Velum templi and Ait latro , and that the form

55

56

bliothek, A.D.3, fol. 105rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. l3. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1316. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 159. Also in: Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 232v; Barth. 160, fol. 371; Barth. 161, fol. 358v; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 265v; printed Worms breviaries: 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fol. 291v; c. 1490 (ibid., no. 5515), sig. ee2va; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 106rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), fol. l 4 (2nd antiphon). Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3736. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 159. Also in: Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 232v; Barth. 160, fol. 371; Barth. 161, fol. 358v; Worms breviary, British Library, add. 19415, fol. 266; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 106rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. l 4v.

299


Memento mei, Domine Deus, dum veneris is not a variant, but the distinctive wording of the antiphon Memento mei .57 His argument that Herre, irbarme dich vber mich (l. 1131) translates a Latin original reading Domine , not Domine Deus , is pedantic, given how loosely irbarme dich vber mich translates memento mei .58 Of the three possible chants the least likely seems Velum templi , an elaborately melismatic responsory, probably beyond a minor actor s capacity; significantly, it is used only in Alsfeld as a choral item.59 Either of the two antiphons, however, would be suitable. The limited evidence of the five other German plays containing a comparable item is reasonably consistent, though this fact is obscured by Schuler s perfunctory treatment.60 Apart from Heidelberg (biblical verse), all use liturgical wording.61 The three with notation all set the Good Thief s plea to the second part of Ait latro ,62 and not to Memento mei or Velum templi ,63 the only two chants which Schuler suggests. Indeed, Schuler s Leittext, Memento mei, Domine Deus 64 is precisely the form not used in any play. All plays which take the thief s words from Ait latro also use the beginning of the antiphon, sung either by the chorus or by the thief himself. The Frank57

58

59

60 61 62

63 64

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 95, note 1. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, vol. III, pp. 36, 332, records no variation between Domine and Domine Deus in the wording of his 1316 or 3736. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 96. Closer translations in Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 4118: A, herre, gedenck auch an mich ; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, l. 5491: O here, wollest auch gedencken mein ; Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 6534: So gedenck, herr, an mich . Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6656d-f; cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 628; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1150. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 344. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 5490a-c. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1052a-1061; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 6523a-c, 6531ac, transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 203 (no. 344). Rabers Passion, ll. 1152a-b, 1164a-b. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, nos. 3736 and 7821. Ibid., no. 3736.

300


furter Passionsspiel has no music, and does not use the beginning of Ait latro , but the wording ( Memento mei, domine, dum veneris in regnum tuum ) matches only Ait latro and Velum templi .65 Assuming that Velum templi is probably too complicated, it is likely that Frankfurt also used Ait latro .66 This small corpus shows a clear consensus for Ait latro as the source of the thief s prayer. For the St Gall Passion Play, Memento mei cannot be definitely excluded, but the play would have been unique in using it. The Words of Jesus from the Cross (ll. 1164a-83) Jesus sings four of the Last Words recorded in the Gospels in quick succession. They are: Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34), Sitio (John 19:28), Consummatum est (John 19:30) and In manus tuas, Domine, commendo spiritum meum (cf. Luke 23: 46). 81 Tunc cantet Iesus Hely, Hely et cetera Et tunc dicat Rufus Iudeus: Warta, wie er wafet vnd Helya rufet. Nu nement allesamt war, ob er zu ime komme dar.

(ll. 1164a-68)

Schuler67 incorrectly classes this item, which he records in twenty plays, as part of the Good Friday responsory Tenebrae factae sunt ,68

65 66

67 68

Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 4117b. Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002, p. 826 and note 890, only mentions Ait latro , as well as Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3736, as a possible chant in the Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 604. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 7760.

301


a chant used only in the Bordesholmer Marienklage.69 Bergmann and Pflanz correctly identify biblical text (Matthew 27:46 or Mark 15: 34).70 However, since Pflanz considers neither musical form nor the evidence of other plays, he effectively goes no further, stating no explicit conclusions and not recording his reconstruction in his list of emendations to Hartl s edition.71 Presumably he believes that the chant took the form of the whole of one of the verses, but that it is impossible to know which. The dramatic tradition, however, is clear: in the examples cited by Schuler, all manuscripts with notation have the same melismatic setting, not from a liturgical chant but from the German Passion tone.72 This affecting melismatischer Höhepunkt aller Passionstöne 73 is used in numerous plays over a wide historical and geographical range, with only slight variants in notes and wording.74 The Alsfeld version is the 69

70

71 72

73

74

Bordesholmer Marienklage, nos. XVIII and XIX, and Anhang, p. 9; transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 330-31. Bergmann, Studien, p. 226 and note 1848, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 144-45. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 162-73. Robert Haas, Handbuch der Musikwissenschaft, vol. III: Aufführungspraxis der Musik, Wildpark-Potsdam, 1932, p. 66, with example from the Missale Pataviense, 1512. The modern Roman setting is simpler: Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 105 (Matthew 27:46) and 217 (Mark 15:34). Karl Konrad Polheim, Das Admonter Passionsspiel, vol. III: Untersuchungen zur Passionshandlung, Aufführung und Eigenart. Nebst Studien zu Hans Sachs und einer kritischen Ausgabe seines Passionsspieles, München-Paderborn-Wien, 1980, p. 146, note 220. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. I, pp. 94-96, citing further literature on pp. 121-23, and Beilage 34 (vol. III, p. 49); cf. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 194. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6159a-c, 6196b-e; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 277; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 27; Bordesholmer Marienklage, IX, ll. 512a-c and Anhang, p. 9, transcribed by Schuler, vol. II, pp. 331-33; cited by Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. I, p. 95; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2095a-d; cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 161; Brixener Passionsspiel, ll. 2748a-b; Docens Marienklage, ll. 19a-c; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 6541a-c; Erlau VI, addition after l. 115; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 233; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 4123a-24; Freiburger

302


example closest geographically to the St Gall Passion Play region. In the manuscript it is written in the G mode, but here it is transposed down into F, the mode in which it almost always appears:

75

75

Fronleichnamsspiel, A, ll. 1434a-b; B, ll. 1745a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 5522a-b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2065 a-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1495/ 1503, ll. 2337a-c; Trierer Marienklage, ll. 203a-05, 227a, 261a; Wolfenbütteler Marienklage, ll. 116a, 134a (l. 134a: heli wrongly given by Otto Schönemann [ed.], Der Sündenfall und Marienklage. Zwei niederdeutsche Schauspiele aus den Handschriften der Wolfenbütteler Bibliothek, Hanover, 1855, as hoh! ). Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1072b-73; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1043, 1053; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2097a-d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 23; Rabers Passion, ll. 1084a-c; Villinger Passionsspiel, ll. 4954-55. Five melodies transcribed by Schuler, vol. II, pp. 331-33. Despite inclusion by Schuler, Luzerner Passionsspiel 1616, 2. Teil, ll. 9179-80, is part of a German couplet, not the Latin chant. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 66, ll. 6159b-e (written out again twice, fol. 66v); transcription by myself. A bis in the manuscript indicates that Deus meus is repeated; there is a second, clearly erroneous, me before dereliquisti . The transcriptions in Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. III, Beilage 34, p. 49, and Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II, ll. 6159b-e, both give the Deus meus repeat; that in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 331-33, omits it. All keep the superfluous me , though Dreimüller editorially brackets it. Andreas Traub, Der Debs-Codex als musikalische Quelle , in Elrich Mehler & Anton H. Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel: Festschrift für Hansjürgen Linke zum

303


In fifteen out of twenty-one plays, notation, or a cantare direction, or both, mark the Heli-Ruf as sung.76 Five categorize it as spoken ( sprechen ) or shouted ( clamare or dicere clamando ).77 Interestingly, no play with a sprechen or clamare direction contains music, and with one verbless exception no play with music has anything other than cantare , canere or singen .78 Might this suggest that the plays with a clamare direction did not use the Passion-tone setting? Almost certainly not. The cantare plays are, apart from Docens Marienklage, uniformly late texts which apply the verb to a wide range of sung items;79 earlier plays, which tend to reserve cantare for complex concentus material, are in the group of those with a clamare direction.80 In addition, the clamare plays are almost all in manuscripts which contain no music at all.81 This throws light on the manu-

76

77

78 79 80

81

65. Geburtstag, Amsterdam-Atlanta, 1994 (Amsterdamer Beitrage zur älteren Germanistik, 38-39), p. 341, notes that chants written in the F and G modes (modes 5 and 6, 7 and 8) were often performed identically. Notation in: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Bordesholmer Marienklage, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil (empty staves); Egerer Passionsspiel, Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel A and B, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion, Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503. Performance verb cantare or similar: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Bordesholmer Marienklage, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, Brixener Passionsspiel, Docens Marienklage, Egerer Passionsspiel, Erlau VI, St Gall Passion Play, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion, Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, Trierer Marienklage, Wolfenbütteler Marienklage. Line numbers as in note 75. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: dicit clamando ; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: alta voce clamat ; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle: clamabit ; Frankfurter Passionsspiel: clamabat ; Heidelberger Passionsspiel: sprichtt . Line numbers as in note 75. Exception: Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, A, ll. 1434a-b; B, ll. 1745a-b. See note 75. See note 78. Clamare in two late plays is explicable: the Frankfurter Passionsspiel probably follows earlier Frankfurt tradition (Dirigierrolle); the Heidelberger Passionsspiel s use of chant in general is anomalous. Of the clamare plays listed in note 78, only the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel is consistently neumed; the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle has only a very few neumed items. The remaining three have no music whatever.

304


script of the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel. The direction is dicit clamando . Ely, ely is spaced out on the page, with red lines added, suggesting that the neumator was meant to write in the melisma; but no neumes have been added.82 Did the clamando direction in fact signal the intention not to use the melisma, and were the words set out for neumation by mistake?83 The evidence above strongly suggests that the melisma was intended, and that this is simply one of the several pieces of inexplicably missing neumation in this manuscript (cf. 61, Tristis est , and 67, Tamquam ad latronem , above). In the St Gall Passion Play, the cantet direction both illustrates the relatively wide scope of cantare in this play, and probably also reflects the melodic elaboration of the Passion-tone setting of this passage. The most significant variant in this chant is in the melismata after hoc est : these are sometimes set to the words Deus meus, Deus meus (exactly as in Matthew 27:46)84 and sometimes to Deus, Deus meus .85 Occasionally, even, there is only a single Deus meus , 82

83

84

85

(Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 111, l. 277. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , vol. I, p. 148, note 178, dismisses misinterpretations by Hartl and Knudsen of the red lines as representing the dying Christ s laboured breathing. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 152, does not address this question. Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 152-54, considers Bischoff s suggestion that this part of the manuscript was written by a non-monastic scribe unfamiliar with the melodies. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Admonter Passionsspiel; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B; Egerer Passionsspiel; Villinger Passionsspiel (no music). Line numbers as in note 75. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 111; Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 152, misinterprets the first deus as omitted through carelessness . Otto Schumann & Bernhard Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana: Mit Benutzung der Vorarbeiten Wilhelm Meyers kritisch herausgegeben von Alfons Hilka und Otto Schumann, vol. I.3: Die Trink- und Spielerlieder. Die geistlichen Dramen. Nachträge, Heidelberg, 1970, l. 277, has Deus meus, Deus meus without editorial explanation. Correct transcription in (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel (Eduard Hartl [ed.], Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Halle an der Saale, 1952 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41), pp. 12-44, l. 465; Dronke [transl. and ed.], Nine Medieval Latin Plays, l. 298. (Kleines)

305


though this surely would have produced a less balanced melody, and may even be a mistake.86 Variation within the Sterzing group suggests that the chant was not absolutely standardized, even in local tradition.87 Pflanz asserts that the explanatory hoc est ... or quod est interpretatum ... would be omitted.88 Also, he argues, an explicit interpretation of Eloi or Eli in the chant would make nonsense of Rufus s confusion of Eli with Elias . For once he relativizes these objections in the light of the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, where the chant, which includes the hoc est clause, is followed by one of the Jews remarking: Elyam vocat iste .89 However, he draws no further conclusions about the general applicability of this aesthetic argument, which he uses so frequently in his study. The evidence of the Heli chants in the play-manuscripts, however, is unequivocal: not a single one which gives the full wording omits hoc est .90

86

87

88 89

90

Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, pl. 7: Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, l. 27, editorially add meus to the first Deus . Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/ 1503. Line numbers as in note 75. Brixener Passionsspiel, Docens Marienklage, Rabers Passion, Trierer Osterspiel. Line numbers as in note 75. Deus, Deus meus : Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2097a-d, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 23; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2065a-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1495/1503, ll. 2337a-c. Deus meus, Deus meus : Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2095a-d. Deus meus : Rabers Passion, ll. 1084a-c; it is possible that melisma was to be sung twice, but that this was not indicated in the manuscript (as Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 66r-v, ll. 6159b-e, does). Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 145. (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 282. Binkley, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana , p. 152, assumes the inclusion of hoc est is a mistake. Text and notation of Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel A and B end at lama sabathami [sic]. Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, p. 170, note on the (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 277, misinterprets hoc est as a rubric; Hansjürgen Linke, Ist das Tiroler Schauspiel des Mittelalters Volksschauspiel? , in Egon Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel: Beiträge zur Theatergeschichte des Alpenraumes, Schriftenreihe des Südtiroler Kulturinstitutes, 3, Bozen,

306

VIII. The Passion (II) 82 Tunc Iesus Sicio et dicat Ach hude vnd vmer mere, wie durstet mich so sere.

(ll. 1168a-70)

Bergmann simply identifies this as biblical wording (John 19:28). Pflanz correctly notes that it is not from any liturgical chant.91 It too is widespread, being found in thirteen German plays apart from the St Gall Passion Play, most of which specify it as a sung item.92 Those with neumes or notation use simple settings related to the Passion tone, nearly all showing the form:

or a slight variant (or misrepresentation).93 Slightly divergent versions are found in two Sterzing plays.94 If the item was sung in the St Gall

91

92

93

1976, p. 100, and Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 147-48, comment on how often such interpretative comment is sung in the dramatic repertoire. See Bergmann, Studien, p. 226 and note 1849, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 146-47. See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 582a. In Schuler,: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6253a-b; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 273; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495*, B, ll. 2139a-b; Brixener Passionsspiel*, l. 2766a; Egerer Passionsspiel*, ll. 6551 a-b; Erlau VI*, l. 123, marginal addition; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 234; Frankfurter Passionsspiel; ll. 4132a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 5527a-b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel*, ll. 2105a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503*, ll. 2377a-b; Trierer Marienklage*, ll. 379a-80. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel*, ll. 1077a-78; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1066; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495*, A, ll. 2144a-b; Rabers Passion*, ll. 1174a-b. Asterisked plays have a canit or cantat direction; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: dicat direction, but the word is neumed. This is the suggested reading by Traub, Kommentar, p. 169, of Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2139a-b; it corresponds to, or gives a plausible reading of, the settings in: Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 84; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 67 (unheighted neumes; differently reconstructed by Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. III, Beilage 43, p. 58, and in Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, II, ll. 6253a-b); (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 111; Egerer Pas-

307


Passion Play, as it was in the vast bulk of the plays which used it, then it was probably to a similar setting. 83, 84 [83] Quod cum Iesus gustasset dicat Consumatum est [84] et cantet In manus tuas et cetera et dicat: Vatter, ez si dir irkant, mine sele geben ich in din hant. Tunc inclinato capite emittet spiritum

(ll. 1174a-76a)

83, Consumatum est Bergmann merely identifies the wording as biblical (John 19: 30).95 Pflanz misinterprets the dicat direction as indicating a spoken item.96 The fact that he finds the words Consummatum est in the Good Friday antiphon Cum accepisset acetum 97 is in his own terms effectively irrelevant, since the two words are identical in the antiphon and the Bible. But when considering the item melodically, it is important. Consummatum est is found in almost the same corpus of plays as Sicio , again designated as a sung item in the vast majority.98 None

94

95 96 97 98

sionsspiel; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/ 1503 (line numbers as in note 93; transcribed Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 322); Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 412. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2144a-b (see Traub, Kommentar, p. 169); Rabers Passion, ll. 1174a-b. Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 25, has an empty stave. Bergmann, Studien, p. 226 and note 1850. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 96-97. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 1970. See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 582b. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel*, ll. 6267c-d; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 274; (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 31; Bordesholmer Marienklage*, no. XIII, ll. 592a-b and Anhang, p. 10, transcribed by Schuler, vol. II, p. 322; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495*, B, ll. 2149a-b; Brixener Passionsspiel*, l. 2796a; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 6571a-b, transcribed by Schuler, vol. II, p. 322; Erlau VI*, l. 123, marginal addition; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 235; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 4146a-b; Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 5543a-b; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel*, ll. 2115a-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503*, ll. 2387a-b; Trierer Marienklage, l. 385;

308


has the antiphon melody, but a Passion-tone setting:99

This will almost certainly have been the St Gall Passion Play setting, as Mehler recognizes.100 84 (l. 1174a): Short responsory In manus tuas, Domine This chant is dealt with in Chapter V. 85: Tunc Centurio Vere After Jesus dies, the centurion recognizes him as the Son of God: 85 Tunc Centurio Vere : Ich han groz wunder hude gesehen. Bi dem wunder kan ich speh[en], daz er vorwar was Godes sun. Do die sunne ist vndergangen, Wolfenbütteler Marienklage*, l. 161a. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel*, ll. 1084a-1085; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1070; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495*, A, ll. 2154a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514*, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 25; Rabers Passion*, ll. 1196a-b. Directions in asterisked plays are canit , cantat , or (Admont, Brixen) singt ; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: no direction but the word is neumed. 99 This is the suggested reading by Traub, Kommentar, p. 162, of Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll 2154a-b (cf. B, ll. 2149a-b; Traub, Kommentar, p. 169). It corresponds to, or gives a plausible reading of, the settings in: Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 84v; Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 67 (unheighted neumes as interpreted in Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, II, ll. 6267 c-d; differently reconstructed by Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. III, p. 58, Beilage 44); (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 111; Bordesholmer Marienklage, MS, fol. 16v; Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 107r-v; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; Rabers Passion; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503 (line numbers as in note 99; transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 322); Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 412. 100 Mehler, Dicere und cantare , pp. 189-90.

309

The St Gall Passion Plays so kummet der doden manger, die lange sint gelegen dot vnd Iesum hant dar vor, er were Got.

(ll. 1176b-83)

Bergmann does not deal with this item. Schuler does not include St Gall amongst the plays which contain it because Mone and, uncharacteristically, Wolter both wrongly transcribe it as Tunc centurio venit .101 Without considering the evidence of other plays, Pflanz is at a loss to know whether the incipit corresponds to Matthew 27:54, Vere filius Dei erat iste , Mark 15:39, Vere hic homo filius Dei erat , or Luke 23:47, Vere hic homo justus erat .102 He correctly notes that the centurion s speech does not correspond closely to the Latin: it refers to the earthquake and resurrection of the dead which Matthew says inspired the centurion and his companions to faith in Christ (Matthew 27:51-53). There is no indication that these events were staged in St Gall, as they were in some plays.103 Rather the remark is the centurion s direct response of faith in the crucified Christ, as in the majority of plays.104 101

102 103

104

See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 644. Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, 2 vols., Karlsruhe, 1846-48, vol. I, pp. 49-128, l. 1169b; Emil Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977] (Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41), l. 1176b. See Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 146. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 146-47. E.g. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 6463b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1108; Augsburger Passionsspiel, ll. 1788a-b; Heidelberger Passionspiel, ll. 5575a-c; Villinger Passionsspiel, ll. 4997a-c. See Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 644. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6463b-c; (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, l. 278; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2270a-c; Brixener Passionsspiel, l. 2834a ( spricht ); Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 6689c; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 237; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 4158c; Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, A, ll. 1502c-d; B, ll. 1819c-e; Heidelberger Passionspiel, ll. 5575c-d; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2133a-b, 2227a-b; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503, ll. 2405a-b, 2509 a-b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1095a-96; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1108; Bozner Grab-

310


The German in the St Gall Passion Play is useless as an indication of the form the Latin may have taken, but German plays consistently have the wording of Matthew 27:54, Vere filius Dei erat iste ; sometimes with a second vere .105 In five plays, music is lacking and directions either have no performance-verb or use dicere or clamare .106 But ten include a cantat direction and notation, invariably a simple Passion-tone-like melody, slightly different from the modern Roman setting, and varying a little from play to play, but always well within the musical competence of a minor actor.107 Neither the number of vere s nor the precise melody seems to have been absolutely standardized, even within local traditions. Four Sterzing manuscripts, for instance, record the same basic melody, but each with a different cadence on the final erat iste .108 The Bozner Passionsspiel 1514 and Rabers Passion have a repeated vere , the others a single one. As with the other Words from the Cross (see

105

106

107

108

legungsspiel II, ll. 324a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2275a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 25v; Rabers Passion, ll. 1410i-j; Welser Passionsspielfragment, ll. 101a-02. Vere, vere : Admonter Passionsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil (empty stave), Egerer Passionsspiel, Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, A and B, Rabers Passion, Welser Passionsspielfragment. Line numbers as in note 105. Brixener Passionsspiel: spricht ; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle: clamabit ; Frankfurter Passionsspiel: dicens ; Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, A: no verb; B; spricht ; Heidelberger Passionsspiel: no verb. Line numbers as in note 105. Admonter Passionsspiel, Alsfelder Passionsspiel, (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, Bozner Grablegungsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495 A and B, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil (empty stave), Egerer Passionsspiel, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion, Welser Passionsspielfragment. Line numbers as in note 105. Melodies of Bozner Passionsspiel 1495 A and Egerer Passionsspiel transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 349. Cf. Officium majoris hebdomadæ, p. 106. Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2133a-b, 2227a-b; Rabers Passion, ll. 1410i-j; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2275b-c; B, ll. 2270b-c (cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 169).

311


above), there was clearly a certain room for variation. The double vere does however seem to feature only in later plays.109 The wording of the item in the St Gall Passion Play, therefore, is beyond serious doubt; and the lack of performance-verb by no means excludes sung delivery, broadly attested in the dramatic corpus. In the light of the arguments of Mehler and others that the spoken passages of German dialogue in the plays were probably delivered in a kind of recitative, it is all the more likely that a chant of some kind would have been used:110

The Lament of Mary (l. 1183a) A lapidary direction introduces the most problematical chant of the entire play: 86 Sequatur lamentacio Marie

(l. 1183a)

We simply can have no certainty as to what this Marienklage might have been. There was a wide range of such laments,111 and German plays often wrote them out in full; without even so much as a textual incipit the text remains here a mystery. The words, though not the mu109 110

111

See note 106. Matthew 27:54, Passion tone setting based on plays in note 108, particularly the unheighted neumes of Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6463b-c; cf. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2275a-c. Rolf Bergmann, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele und Marienklagen des Mittelalters, München, 1986, passim; Ulrich Mehler, Marienklagen im spätmittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Deutschland: Textversikel und Melodietypen, Amsterdam-Atlanta, 1997 (Amsterdamer Publikationen zur Sprache und Literatur, 128-129), passim. Reference to over thirty entries in Kurt Ruh et al., Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, Berlin-New York, 1978- [2nd ed.], vol. VI, col. 10.

312


sic, of the Frankfurt lament Uwe mir armen, vwe mir, we! are known,112 but as has already been seen, St Gall s relation to Frankfurt, especially as regards its music, is unclear: the play s brief and understated crucifixion scene bears no resemblance whatever to Frankfurt models.113 There may have been a particular Marienklage associated with the play, and it may have been preserved in another manuscript, not obtained by Kemli and now lost. Another possibility is that the play used one of the two well-known Marienklage sequences, Flete, fideles animae or Planctus ante nescia . Hartl imports Flete, fideles animae into his St Gall Passion Play edition (ll. 1373a-1402), and for this he is criticized by Steinbach;114 but it is the lack of editorial comment and rationale that is the problem: the item itself is a likely choice, as is the other widely known sequence, the longer Planctus ante nescia . The St Gall Passion Play direction might have been brief precisely because it referred to such well-known standard material:115

112

113

114

115

Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 4229a-88; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 242; cf. Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 5653a-79. Synopsis in Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, I, pp. 408-410. St Gall Passion Play, ll. 1083-1183; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 223-41; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, ll. 3616a-3886. Rolf Steinbach, Die deutschen Oster- und Passionsspiele des Mittelalters: Versuch einer Darstellung und Wesensbestimmung nebst einer Bibliographie zum deutschen geistlichen Spiel des Mittelalters, Köln, 1970 (Kölner Germanistische Studien, 4), p. 138, note 44. Anonymous, probably French. Version in (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, ll. 265/1a-5a; melody in Michael Korth (ed.), Carmina Burana. Lateinischdeutsch. Gesamtausgabe der mittelalterlichen Melodien mit den dazugehörigen Texten. Übertragen, kommentiert und erprobt von René Clemencic. Textkommentar von Ulrich Müller. Übersetzung von René Clemencic und Michael Korth, München, 1979, pp. 154-56. Further verses in Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, pp. 114-15 [CB 4*] and Clemens Blume & Guido M. Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica medii aevi, 55 vols., Leipzig, 1886-1922 [rpt. Frankfurt, 1961], vol. XX, pp. 155-56. Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 496, 49899, 507-13, 535 and pl. XII; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, pp. 25-26, 19798, 240-41; Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, pp. 115-16.

313


314


315


116

The Burial of Jesus (ll. 1183b-1230c) Joseph of Arimathea asks Pilate for Jesus s body and takes the Lord down from the Cross (ll. 1198a-1210a). After the Virgin and Mary Magdalene grieve over Jesus, Joseph buries him: 87 Tunc Io[seph] sepeliat Iesum cant[a]ns responsorium Ecce quomodo mor[i]tur iustus Tunc recedant omnes

(ll. 1230a-c)

The direction is particularly full of scribal error. For cantans (l. 1230a), the manuscript reads cantens ; for moritur (l. 1230b), moretur . The character who buries Jesus is given as John ( Iohannis ) rather than Joseph [of Arimathea], who invariably performs this task, as in the Gospel account, usually together with Nicodemus.117 116

117

Written by Godefroy of St. Victor (1125 or 1130 c. 1194). Version in Fragmenta Burana, IV, edited by Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, pp. 129-31 [CB 14*]; melody in Korth, Carmina Burana, pp. 160-63. Further verses in Blume & Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica, vol. XX, pp. 156-58; cf. Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, pp. 129-31. Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 496-98, 503, 506, 514-17, 535, 538, 699-701; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. I, pp. 25, 271 (no. 473); Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, pp. 131-33. Joseph and Nicodemus: e.g. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1212d-15; Augsburger Passionsspiel, ll. 1996a-b; Bozner Grablegungsspiel II, ll. 470a-76b; Frankfurter Passionsspiel, l. 4408a; Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, A, ll. 1764-73; Heidel-

316


118

118

berger Passionsspiel, ll. 5919a-25c; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2396a-c. Bergmann, Studien, pp. 27, 231 and note 1905, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 98-99.

317


This chant, given on the previous page, is clearly specified;119 both Bergmann and Pflanz correctly identify it as the mode 4 responsory (usually the sixth) of Holy Saturday matins in nearly all European dioceses. Numerous German plays include Ecce quomodo , usually to cover the burial of Jesus, and in two cases that of John the Baptist.120 Three use it at a point before the burial.121 The responsory was also a standard item in the Good Friday Depositio ceremony.122 However, in the Mainz-Worms-Speyer area, the ceremonies in which it appears are mostly late, the earliest from the early fifteenth century, many from 119

120

121

122

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6605. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 161r-v. Also in: Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 372; Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 267; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 107ra; Agenda Spirensis, 1512, fols. XCIv-XCIIr (= sig. m iiiv-ivr); cf. Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936, p. 728. On the history of this chant see L. Brou, OSB, Le répons Ecce quomodo moritur dans les traditions romaine et espagnole , Revue Bénédictine 51 (1939), pp. 144-68. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 174. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6792a-e; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2458a-c; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 3698-99 (verse In pace factus est only; music transcribed p. 254); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 6933a-e; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 76a (John the Baptist), 246a (Jesus); Heidelberger Passionsspiel, ll. 914a-e (John); ll. 5925a-b (Jesus; one of the few Heidelberg items explicitly marked as sung); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2396a-c; Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/ 1503, ll. 2701a-c. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1213-15 (sung by angels); Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1167; Bozner Himmelfahrtsspiel, ll. 257a-g; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2463a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 31; Bozner Marienklage (I), ll. 337a-c; Bozner Marienklage (II), ll. 312a-c; Rabers Passion, ll. 1492a-c; Saganer Grablegungsspiel, ll. 50 e-f; Welser Passionsspielfragment, ll. 51a-c. See Hansjürgen Linke, Beobachtungen zu den geistlichen Spielen im Codex Buranus , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 128 (1999), pp. 185-93, esp. 191-93. Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 6933a-e: while Jesus is still hanging on the cross; Rabers Passion, ll. 1492a-c; Welser Passionsspielfragment, ll. 51a-c. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. IX, p. 889, index, lists over fifty ceremonies from Germany, Poland and Bohemia.

318


the sixteenth century or after,123 and it is interesting that the St Gall Passion Play and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle are the only prefifteenth-century plays to include it, another of their many similarities. Liturgical influence of the Depositio is seen in plays where Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus and helpers wear alb and stole, or bring the embalming spices in a thurible, reflecting the incensation of cross or host common in the ceremony.124 The verse of this responsory in most medieval uses is not Tamquam agnus ad occisionem as in the modern Roman rite, but In pace factus est as given above and by Schuler.125 Not all modern editors have realized this.126 123

124

125

Mainz: Ibid., nos. 251: Mainz2, fifteenth century; 254: Mainz5, c. 1400; 257: Mainz8, before 1500; 258: Mainz9, c. 1500; 260: Mainz11, c. 1547; 261: Mainz12/ Würzburg, 1671; 262: Mainz13/Liebfrauen, 1762; 263: Mainz14, Cathedral (in fact probably Mariengraden). Not in Lipphardt: Kassel, 2o Ms. theol. 131, Mainz missal, early fifteenth century, probably from the Heilig-Geist-Hospital, Fritzlar, fols. 93vb-94ra. Cf. Hermann Reifenberg, Sakramente, Sakramentalien und Ritualien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Spätmittelalter, 2 vols., Münster, 1971-72, (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 53-54), vol. I, pp. 711-17 and nos. 4062, 4077. Worms: Lipphardt, no. 369: Worms6, c. 1500. Not in Lipphardt: printed Worms missal, 1488, fol. LXIXva; Missale Ecclesie wormatiensis, 1522, fol. XCIIIva (= sig. m vva). Speyer: Lipphardt, nos. 340: Speyer2, 1512; 340a: Speyer3, c. 1500 (during procession to sepulchre). Alb and stole: Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 264a. Thurible: Rabers Passion, ll. 1492 d-e. Incensation in most Lipphardt ceremonies: thirteen examples from the fourteenth century or earlier include: Lipphardt, nrs 212a: Fulda3, 274: Münster1, 349: Trier3, 372: Würzburg2, 500: Aschaffenburg1, 536: Breslau3, 595: Klosterneuburg4, 743b: Seckau7. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 174. Tamquam agnus : Liber usualis, p. 728; Antiphonale Romanum secundum liturgiam horarum [ ] dispositum, vol. I: Liber hymnarius cum invitatoriis & aliquibus responsoriis, Paris-Tournai, 1983, p. 499. In pace : eleven out of twelve Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium manuscripts (vol. IV, p. 155); twenty-nine out of thirty-seven CANTUS manuscripts, including all Dutch/German/Austrian/Swiss sources; all Mainz, Worms and Speyer sources in note 120, as well as: processional, Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 100, fol. 29; Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. cviiiva; Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense, fols. 81v-82r; Theodor Heinrich Klein, Die Prozessionsgesänge

319


The amount of the responsory performed would probably have been determined mainly by the time taken to carry out the burial, and this could be considerable, even when, as in the St Gall Passion Play, Jesus s body had already been taken down from the cross.127 Despite the direction (l. 1230a) Joseph could not have managed the whole complicated process entirely alone (many plays specify a group of characters who help him).128 But liturgical considerations the way the chant was performed in the Depositio ceremony may also have played a part. In practice there may have been little conflict between these two different constraints, for a complete liturgical performance, including the verse, might well have been needed to cover the necessarily lengthy action. Thus the verse, which Pflanz does not include in his transcription of the responsory,129 might have been performed. Refrain, verse and repetenda would have lasted about two and a half to three minutes; repeating the refrain would give four minutes or more.

126

127 128

129

der Mainzer Kirche aus dem 14. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Speyer, 1962 (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 7), pp. 98-100, 114. Cf. Linke, Beobachtungen , p. 192. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, p. 84, wrongly reconstructs the melody of Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6792a-e, with Tamquam agnus . Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 78v, ll. 3698-99, In pace , melody p. 254 (with notation of the verse from Ecce quomodo ), is unclearly identified by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 300. Wolf, Kommentar, p. 227 and note 499, cites Ecce quomodo with verse Tamquam . Direction, l. 1210a: Et cum [Joseph] deponit eum [ ] . E.g. Joseph and Nicodemus: see note 117. Joseph, Nicodemus and helpers: Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 246a. Joseph, Nicodemus, Centurion and Longinus: Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 3691a-d. Joseph, Nicodemus, John, James the Less, Angels: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6792a-e. Joseph, Nicodemus, die weiber, Joannes und die zwei Heiden : Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, B, ll. 1989a-c. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 98-99.

320

Chapter IX

The Resurrection and the Harrowing of Hell

The Resurrection (ll. 1230d-62d) aiaphas asks Pilate to have Jesus s tomb well guarded, to prevent the theft of the body and the fraudulent allegation of a resurrection (ll. 1230d-42). Pilate orders his soldiers accordingly, and the men march off in high spirits: 88 Tunc milites vadant ad sepulcrum cantantes aliquid.

(l. 1263a)

The manuscript gives no clue to the choice of song; but a very likely choice must be the German Wächterlied preserved in sixteen German plays1 with more or less identical wording: Mer woln zu dem grabe gan, | Ihesus der wel vff stan. Ist das wore, ist das wore, | So sint gulden unszer hore.2

1

2

Cf. Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940), no. 345. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 6912a-e; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1185. The song is also found in the following plays: In Schuler: Augsburger Passionsspiel, ll. 2100a2104; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2700a-04; B, ll. 2693a-97; Brixener Passionsspiel, ll. 3454a-b (J. E. Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, Graz, 1897 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Litteratur und Sprache Österreichs und seiner Kronländer, 1), p. 420); Erlau V, ll. 351a-59 (on the second visit; the first time, ll. 277-87, they sing a different song); Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 185a-89; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 190a-94; Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 166a-71. Not in Schuler: Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, ll. 260a-64; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 0a-4a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 45v; Friedberger Dirigierrolle, p. 197; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 1v, l. 1; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 142a-j (cf. Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Ster-


This song has been studied by Barbara Thoran and Hans Blosen.3 The Frankfurter Dirigierrolle is the first German source in which the movement of the Wächter to the grave is accompanied by choral chant, the responsory Sepulto Domino ; the St Gall Passion Play is the first play in which the Wächter themselves sing; the Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel is the first to contain a full verse of the Wächterlied .4 The same song is used in plays from a wide geographical spread, showing great textual consistency: it is clearly a Wandertext .5 The song s familiarity is probably reflected in the fact that it is notated only in the Wiener Osterspiel and Alsfelder Passionsspiel; yet the two melodies are different, and the Alsfeld melody probably did not originally go with these words.6,7

3

4

5 6

zinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, p. 129); Villinger Passionsspiel, ll. 5753-56. Das Lied der Wächter auf dem Weg zum Grab Jesu in österlichen Spielen des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts , in Dorothee Lindemann, Berndt Volkmann & Klaus-Peter Wegera (eds.), bickelwort und wildiu maere: Festschrift für Eberhard Nellmann zum 65. Geburtstag, Göppingen, 1995 (Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik, 618), pp. 398-407; Hans Blosen, Zum Lied der Wächter im Wiener Osterspiel . Zugleich Bemerkungen zum Refrain in mittelhochdeutscher Lyrik , Orbis Litterarum 29 (1974), pp. 183-215. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 250a; cf. Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [first volume of additions to Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002], p. 228; St Gall Passion Play, l. 1263a; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 185a-89; cf. Thoran, Das Lied der Wächter , pp. 401-02. See plays in note 2; Thoran, Das Lied der Wächter , p. 399. Wiener Osterspiel, MS, fol. 188, transcribed by Hans Blosen (ed.), Das Wiener Osterspiel: Abdruck der Handschrift und Leseausgabe, Berlin, 1979 (Texte des Mittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit, 33), p. 127. The manuscript notates the last line too high: correct transcription in Blosen s edition, in idem, Zum Lied der Wächter , p. 206, and Karl Dreimüller, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) (Doctoral thesis), 3

322

IX. The Resurrection and the Harrowing of Hell

7

vols., Universität Wien, 1935, vol. I: Abhandlungen, p. 167; incorrect in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 203-04. The play s notation is mensural; cf. Helmuth Osthoff, Deutsche Liedweisen und Wechselgesänge im mittelalterlichen Drama , Archiv für Musikforschung 7 (1942), pp. 65-81, esp. 67. Osthoff s transcription is given in Blosen (ed.), Wiener Osterspiel, pp. 126-27. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 74, mensural interpretation based on the suggestion of Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. III, p. 69, Beilage 53b; cf. I, pp. 163-169. Plain transcription of Alsfeld MS in Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. III, Beilage 53a, p. 69, Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 203-04 and Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, II, ll. 6912a-e. Blosen, Zum Lied der Wächter , p. 208: nicht ursprünglich zu diesem Text gehörige und nicht nach der Textstruktur konzipierte Melodie .

323


Blosen s study of analogous songs from all over western Europe concludes that the Wächterlied is a typical carole or dancing song. This is supported by the Wiener Osterspiel direction Dy ritter tanczin czum grabe , and in three other plays by the interesting variant Wir wellen umb das grab gan .8 Blosen envisages performance in carole style, with the verse (ll. 1-2) sung by a single Vorsänger and the rest of the soldiers joining in with the refrain (ll. 3-4).9 The aliquid in the St Gall Passion Play direction implies a choice of songs, and the existence of alternatives. Since this is the first play to include a watchmen s song, and since it predates by as much as half a century the first appearance of the Wächterlied in the Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel of 1391, it is even possible that the Wächterlied did not yet exist. But no other possible songs have survived, and the ubiquity of the Wächterlied must make it a likely choice. In the last line, wird or werden is found in south German plays, but sind in those from central Germany, and thus presumably in the St Gall Passion Play.10 The soldiers, however, are immediately attacked by angels brandishing swords: 89 Tunc duo angeli gladiis percucient eos cantantes Terra tremuit et quievit

(ll. 1262b-c)

As Schuler and Bergmann note,11 this incipit matches two liturgical chants. One is a mode 8 Maundy Thursday office antiphon:12 8

9 10 11

Wiener Osterspiel, l. 166a; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, l. 261; Bozner Osterspiel III, l. 1; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, fol. 1v, l. 1: Wir schullen vmb etc. . Blosen, Zum Lied der Wächter , passim; Thoran, Das Lied der Wächter , pp. 404-06. Blosen, Zum Lied der Wächter , passim, esp. pp. 205-08. Thoran, Das Lied der Wächter , pp. 403-405. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 605, and Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts,

324


The antiphon wording varies slightly: cum exsurgeret dum exsurgeret are occasionally found.13 Dum resurgeret is clearly standard in Mainz, Worms and Speyer.14 The second is a mode 4 offertorium for Easter Day:15

12

13

14

15

München, 1972 (Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 14), p. 27 and nos. 146 and 147. René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12), no. 5139. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 152v. Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, München, 1972 (Münstersche MittelalterSchriften, 14), p. 27 and nos. 146 and 147, wrongly gives dum resurgeret as the consistent wording of the offertorium and dum exsurgeret of the antiphon. Dum resurgeret in iudicio in: Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 152v; Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 367 (references to other Mainz sources in Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205), p. 100, note 1); Worms breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 215; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 104rb; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 5465), sig. l 2; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. dd 1ra; cf. Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936, p. 641. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fols. 74v-75. Also in: Mainz missal, Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 131v; Mainz missal and ritual, Frankfurt, Barth. 107, fol. 62v; printed Worms missal, 1488, fol. LXXIIIrb (sig. kirb); Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. cxixvb; Darmstadt, Hs. 889, fol. 93rb; printed Speyer missal, 1501, fol. LXXIIIra (= sig. kira) ( dum resurgeret in iudicio ); cf. Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, neumis Laudunensibus (Cod. 239) et Sangallensibus (Codicum Sangallensis 359 et Einsidlensis 121) nunc auctum, Solesmes

325


Pflanz identifies the St Gall Passion Play chant as the antiphon, Bergmann as the offertorium.16 Neither offers detailed argument; neither considers Psalm 75(76):8-9 on which both chants are based. Either chant would seem suitable. The antiphon is simpler, but St Gall angels would assuredly have been competent to perform the offertorium, which, more melismatic and with its additional Alleluia , might seem even more suitable to accompany this theologically significant and dramatically effective episode, performed in some plays by an angel with a fiery sword.17 The dramatic tradition, though inconclusive, is suggestive. Fourteen other plays have a chant with this wording. None uses the psalmverse; the five which notate it use the office antiphon.18 Because the

16

17

18

[etc.], 1979, p. 199; Liber usualis, p. 781. See Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 99-100, and Bergmann, Studien, p. 197 and note 1593. Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2817b-c; B, ll. 2809c; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7397a-c; Erlau VI, l. 299a; Rabers Passion, l. 2766a; Tiroler Osterspiel, l. 182b. Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 97, ll. 1527g-28; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 107, ll. 3591b-e; Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 121v, ll. 7397d-e; Rabers Pas-

326


wording of the offertory differs only in its final Alleluia from that of the antiphon, the short incipits in the other plays do not distinguish the chant used.19 Not even the Alleluia is an infallible guide: in the only play in which it is found (Brixen), it is added to the antiphon melody.20 Only the antiphon, then, is positively attested in the dramatic tradition; yet this is only in late south German sources (Admont, Eger, the Tyrol). There is no way of identifying the chant in plays chronologically or geographically closer to the St Gall Passion Play; indeed, with the exception of the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, such an item, whatever its liturgical form, seems foreign to the Hessian tradition.21 The chant is not part of the Osterfeier repertoire.22 The antiphon can be cautiously suggested as the St Gall chant. The triumphant moment of resurrection arrives. The soldiers watch, terrified, as Christ rises from the tomb: 90 Quibus territis cantans dominus surgat Resurrexi et cetera

(l. 1262d)

Even the one-word incipit is enough to identify the mode 4 Easter

19

20 21

22

sion, ll. 2766a-c, 2785a-b; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 182b-c ( dum resurgeret in novissimo deus ). Bozner Marienklage I, ll. 109a-b; Bozner Marienklage II, ll. 106a-b; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, ll. 390a-c; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 94a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2817b-d; B, ll. 2809c-e; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, II, MS, fol. 47; Erlau VI, ll. 299a-c; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 255a; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 1v, l. 28. Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 107, ll. 3591b-e. Bergmann, Studien, p. 198 and note 1599, asserts without evidence that the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 255a, uses the offertorium. The chant (possibly, but not definitely, Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5139) is found only in Walther Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, 9 vols., Berlin-New York, 1975-90 (Ausgaben deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama, no. 5767: Zurich1, a thirteenth-century Elevatio.

327


morning introit:23

The introit is correctly identified by Bergmann and Pflanz.24 More difficult to decide is exactly how much of this long chant Jesus would have sung; beyond the et cetera the direction gives no indication. The dramatic tradition attests various modes of performance. In liturgical drama in Germany, Resurrexi is almost always the liturgical introit to the Easter morning mass after the Elevatio or Visitatio Sepulchri, and so will have been performed in full, though not strictly as part of the ceremony or play itself.25 In the case of the Passion plays, 23

24 25

Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 74. Also in: Mainz missals: Frankfurt, Barth. 31, fol. 130; printed Worms missal, 1488, fol. LXXIIvb (sig. i8vb); Speyer missals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. cxviiiva; Darmstadt, Hs. 889, fol. 91va; cf. Graduale triplex, p. 196; Liber usualis, p. 778. Bergmann, Studien, p. 198, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 129-30. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, nos. 549: Diessen3 (fifteenth century); 686: Regensburg5 (fifteenth century); 728: St Lambrecht1 (thirteenth century); 744: Seckau8 (late thirteenth century). An exception in Meißen: Resurrexi opens the Elevatio as a processional antiphon: Lipphardt, nos. 612: Meißen1 (fifteenth century); 614: Meißen3 (1520).

328


Mone perceptively notes a connection with the liturgy: in singing Resurrexi , Christ himself is as it were celebrating the Easter Mass of the Resurrection.26 The St Gall Passion Play makes this kind of connection between the play and the liturgy elsewhere: for instance when Augustinus speaks of Jesus singing his first mass at the Last Supper.27 This does not guarantee, however, that the plays simply replicated liturgical usage, an assumption implied in Schottmann s reconstruction of the single-word incipit in the Redentiner Osterspiel using the complete introit.28 The Passion and Easter plays show a variety of modes of performance which Schuler attempts to differentiate.29 Most elaborate are the late, large-scale plays such as Alsfeld, where, in a spectacular Resurrection sequence, all three sections of the introit are performed, alternating with extensive blocks of German dialogue, by Jesus and two angels; two Eastertide office antiphons complete the sequence; Eger is only slightly less grandiose.30 Other plays probably had simpler arrangements, but manuscripts often offer too little evidence to show how much was performed. Seven have only the single word Resur-

26

27

28 29 30

Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, 2 vols., Karlsruhe, 1846-48, vol. II, p. 10; cf. Brigitta Schottmann (ed.), Das Redentiner Osterspiel: Mittelniederdeutsch und neuhochdeutsch, Stuttgart, 1975, p. 184, note to line 250b. Cf. Andreas Traub, Zwischen Aufgezeichnetem und Nichtaufgezeichnetem: Probleme bei der Edition der Melodien der Sterzinger Spiele , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Text und Musik, Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 211-18, esp. 214. St Gall Passion Play, ll. 611-12: Des selben dages er sang | sin erste messe. Dez habe er dang. Schottmann (ed.), Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 250b-e. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 536. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7026a-76; there follow the antiphons Et ecce terre motus (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2699) and Data est mihi omnis potestas (Ibid., no. 2099): Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, pp. 8788; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1206-19; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7411a-39.

329


rexi ; slightly longer incipits in a further seven are almost as unhelpful.31 One possible limiting factor is musical. Cadences on the mode 4 finalis E occur only on the first and third alleluia s of the refrain, so, without melodic alterations, Jesus must either have sung the entire refrain, or else stopped at tecum sum, alleluia . Steinbach s suggestion of continuing to manum tuam is thus not absolutely compelling;32 Pflanz s proposed end at tecum sum is more feasible.33 There is some manuscript evidence for the latter practice. In several plays where one or more angels also sing parts of this introit, Jesus sings only the first section, the angel(s) the second, and the third, if it is performed.34 Though there is no analogous evidence in plays without an31

32

33 34

Resurrexi in: Augsburger Passionsspiel, l. 2144a; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, ll. 424a-b; Innsbrucker thüringisches Osterspiel, ll. 213a-14a; Redentiner Osterspiel, l. 250b; Tiroler Himmelfahrtsspiel aus Cafless (Cavalese), l. 124a; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 204a-b; Wiener Osterspiel, l. 175a. Longer incipits in: Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 30a-c: Resurrexi et ad huc tecum sum etc. ; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 121a-c: Resurrexi et adhuc sum alleluia ( ) ; ll. 570a-b ditto (manuscript: suum ); Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 3281a: Resurrexi et aduc [sic] sum tecum , B, ll. 3277a-b ( tecum sum ) (both sung after the Christ/Mary Magdalene encounter); Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 59r: Resurrexi et adhuc tecum sum ; Osnabrücker Passionsspielfragmente, ll. 135b: resurre ; l. 135c: posuisti ; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 3170a: Resurrexit [sic] et aduc [sic] ; Rabers Passion, ll. 2809a-b: Resurrexi et adhuc tecum etc. . Rolf Steinbach, Die deutschen Oster- und Passionsspiele des Mittelalters: Versuch einer Darstellung und Wesensbestimmung nebst einer Bibliographie zum deutschen geistlichen Spiel des Mittelalters, Köln, 1970 (Kölner Germanistische Studien, 4), p. 138, note 44, citing Alsfelder Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 75v-76, ll. 7060a-b, which however explicitly uses the entire introit; and Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 122v, ll. 7435a-b, which may end at manum tuam, alleluia with altered melody on alleluia ; cf. transcription in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 306. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 129-30. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7042a-60b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1210-14; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7411a-39; Erlau V, ll. 380a-d. Probably also Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 2, l. 2, reading as amended by Dieter Trauden, in Hansjürgen Linke et al., Kollation zu Rolf Bergmann: Die Göttweiger Dirigierrolle eines Osterspiels (unpublished typescript, University of Cologne, Institut für Deutsche

330


gel performers, this may indicate that the first phrase of the introit was regarded as Jesus s particular part. Why this should have been the case is unclear. Nothing in the Christological exegesis of Psalm 138, the source of the introit, suggests such a division of voices;35 nor does it directly imitate liturgical performance, where a cantor intoned Resurrexi , the choir joining in for the rest of the chant. The precise details of the performance of Resurrexi in the St Gall Passion Play and many other plays may never be known with certainty, but the hints in the dramatic tradition that the introit may not always have been sung in full should be taken seriously. The Harrowing of Hell (ll. 1262e-89b) Jesus, carrying the Cross, now proceeds to Hell to free the imprisoned Good Souls. 91, 92, 93 [91] Deinde vadat ad infernum portans crucem cantans Tollite portas et dicat: Ir hellen vursten, dunt of die dur. Vnd gebent mir mine knethe hervor. [92] Respondet Lucifer Quis est iste rex glorie : Wer ist der, der do bozet vnd an die dore stozet? Ich bin gewesen v[un]f dusent iar in dirre helle vurste vorwar, daz ich gehorte keinen stoz an dise dore so rehte groz. [93] Respondet angelus qui precedet Iesum Dominus virtutum ipse est rex glorie :

35

Sprache und Literatur, [s.d.]), p. 3: cantans: Resurrexi; angelus: posuisti super me etc. . Biblia Sacra cum glossa ordinaria, 6 vols., Douai-Antwerpen, 1617, vol. III, cols. 1505-16; cf. Augustinus, Enarratio in Psalmum CXXXVIII, in J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus [ ] Series Latina, 221 vols., Paris, 1844-90, vol. XXXVI-XXXVII, cols. 1784-1803, esp. cols 1788, 1796.

331

The St Gall Passion Play Dunt vf, der herre ist kommen, von dem vch wirt benommen vwer manigveltige gewalt der ist gewesen alzu alt. [ ] Tunc Christus pede trudat ianuam et apperiatur

(ll. 1262e-74, 1279a)

Bergmann identifies these as chants from the Elevatio ceremony, though he does not discuss the precise form which they may have taken.36 Pflanz s separate treatment of the several closely related items in different sections of his study is unhelpful. On pages 34-35 he identifies several (inapplicable) chants with the incipit Tollite portas .37 On pages 100-101, however, he cites only an unidentified versus : it is in fact from an Advent responsory, and is cited in the standard abbreviated form, which Pflanz misinterprets.38 On pages 147-148 he turns to Quis est iste rex gloriae? and Dominus virtutum ... , saying only that they are drawn from Psalm 23(24):8 and 10. His whole discussion resolves almost nothing about the text or liturgical provenance of any of these chants; and as always he ignores the melodic aspect. Nowhere does he consider the use of these chants in liturgical drama or the Easter plays; though as will be seen these traditions offer clues to the way the St Gall Passion Play may have used them. This dialogue uses verses from Psalm 23(24):7-10, from the liturgy of the dedication of a church, a ceremony which included a symbolic attempt to enter the church in the name of Christ against diabolical re36 37

38

Bergmann, Studien, p. 196 and nos. 1580, 1582. Gradual, Ember Wednesday in Advent (Liber usualis, pp. 1269-70); offertorium, Christmas vigil (Liber usualis, p. 362); verse of the responsory Ave Maria , first Sunday in Advent (Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 6157). Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 105: verse of the responsory Ave Maria (Ibid., no. 6157). The verse is written as: Tollite portas principes vestras [ ] et introibit. Filius. , the convention indicating that the repetenda, beginning at Filius Dei , follows straight after et introibit . Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 101, mistakenly reading Filius as the repeat of an earlier chant, assumes that rex gloriae might have been added after introibit .

332


sistance.39 The inspiration was the Descensus Christi ad Inferos in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, where this dialogue presents the confrontation of Christ and the Devil at the Harrowing of Hell.40 Both the Tollite portas dialogue and the chant Cum rex gloriae (see 94, Advenisti desiderabilis , below) were staples of the Elevatio ceremony, when the celebrant knocked at the doors of the church, or entered the sanctuary.41 They were also used in the the Harrowing of Hell sequences in the Passion plays, staged in the later and longer examples with considerable spectacle. Exhaustive consideration of the wide range of possibilities of arranging the chants and dialogue of this episode would go far beyond the scope of this study, as would a discussion of the complex and by no means certain interrelationships of Depositio and Elevatio, the Gospel of Nicodemus and the liturgy for the dedication of a church; or of the development of the Elevatio ceremonies and the religious drama.42 Twenty-three known Elevatio ceremonies, from twelve centres, contain this dialogue in some form; the vast majority (twenty ceremo39

40

41

42

Earliest known example of the rite in this form in Metz, ninth century: Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church, 2 vols., Oxford, 1933, vol. I, p. 103; idem, The Harrowing of Hell in Liturgical Drama , Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters 16 (1909), II, pp. 889-947, esp. 894. Gospel of Nicodemus, in J.K. Elliott (ed. and trans.), The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation, Oxford, 1993, pp. 185-205; Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 14950. Description in ibid., vol. I, pp. 103-04. Cum rex gloriae and Tollite portas are used together in Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, nos. 212d: Fulda6, 231: Gerresheim1, 238b: Köln15, 251: Mainz2, 262: Mainz13, 340a: Speyer3, 357a: Trier12, 369: Worms6, 376: Würzburg6, 377: Würzburg7, 522: Augsburg22; 526: Augsburg26, 530: Bamberg10, 683a: Rasdorf2, 788: Hersfeld. Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 149-77, esp. 151. See the discussion in Luis Schuldes, Die Teufelsszenen im deutschen geistlichen Drama des Mittelalters: Versuch einer literarhistorischen Betrachtung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der geistesgeschichtlichen Gesichtspunkte, Göppingen, 1974, (Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik, 116), pp. 48-79.

333


nies, from eleven centres) are from the German territories.43 In these dialogic ceremonies, the command Tollite portas, principes, vestras, et elevamini, portae aeternales (which is sometimes extended to include et introibit rex gloriae ) is followed at the very least by the question Quis est iste rex gloriae? (Psalm 23(24):8a) in nine centres; and slightly less often, in six centres, by an answer, either Dominus fortis et potens, Dominus potens in praelio (Psalm 23(24):8b), in five centres, or Dominus virtutum, iste est rex gloriae (Psalm 23(24): 10b) in two centres). In all these ceremonies, except those from Würzburg, this sequence of command, question and (where applicable) answer is performed three times. Only the Augsburg tradition, however, appears consistently to follow the sequence of the psalm (cf. Psalm 23(24):7-10), answering the question Quis est iste rex gloriae? the first and second times with Dominus fortis et potens ... and the last time with Dominus virtutum ... .44 Otherwise the ceremonies use Dominus fortis et potens ... all three times,45 or leave the question unanswered the first two times, answering it the third time either with Dominus fortis et potens ... or with Dominus virtutum ... .46 This 43

44

45 46

German ceremonies: Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, nos. 212d: Fulda6 (1615); 213: Gerresheim1 (fifteenth century); 223c: Innichen3 (1617); 224: Kleve (fifteenth century); 262: Mainz13, Liebfrauen (1762); 340a: Speyer3 (1438-70); 357a: Trier12 (1576); 357c: Trier14 (1767); 369: Worms6 (1500); 376: Würzburg6 (1482); 377: Würzburg7 (1564); 522: Augsburg22 (1487); 523: Augsburg23 (1499); 524: Augsburg24 (1547); 526: Augsburg26 (1580); 527: Augsburg27 (1612); 528: Augsburg28 (1656); 529: Augsburg29 (1764); 530: Bamberg10 (1587). Elevatio from St Quintin, Mainz (1585), Mainz, Stadtarchiv, Hs. HBA I 50, pp. 7879 (not in Lipphardt). Non-German ceremonies: Lipphardt, 397: Dublin1, 772: Dublin2, 772a: Dublin3 (all fourteenth century). Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, nos. 522-24; 526-29 (Augsburg22-24, 26-29); Mainz, St Quintin (1585), Mainz, Stadtarchiv, Hs. HBA I 50, p. 78 (not in Lipphardt), uses Dominus fortis et potens the first time, and Dominus virtutum the third time. Lipphardt, nos. 262: Mainz13; 530: Bamberg10. Lipphardt, nos. 224: Kleve ( Dominus fortis et potens ... ); 357c: Trier12 ( Dominus virtutum ... ).

334


may reflect the slightly different sequences in three versions of the Gospel of Nicodemus.47 The Elevatio tradition, however, is uninformative on the melodies for this dialogue. No dialogic German Elevatio before the early fifteenth century is preserved; none before 1487 has any notation.48 Fifteenth-century texts contain too little information to identify the melody used for Tollite portas .49 The musical traditions of only three centres can thus be seen: Augsburg, Bamberg and Trier; and only the Augsburg sources can be followed through, as Bamberg and Trier are each represented by only one noted source.50 In eight of the twenty German Elevatio ceremonies which contain this dialogue the music to which it was performed is not certain.51 Four predominantly late ceremonies use psalm or lection tones.52 In 47 48

49 50

51

52

Elliott (ed.), Apocryphal New Testament, pp. 187-88, 193, 202. Surviving pre-fifteenth-century German Elevatio ceremonies are all non-dialogic : Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, nos. 190a: Bamberg5 (late twelfth century), 266: Metz1 (eleventh century), 274: Münster1 (thirteenth century), 505: Augsburg3 (twelfth century), 694: Salzburg1 (c. 1160) and 728: St. Lambrecht1 (c. 1200). The earliest notated German Elevatio is Lipphardt no. 522, in Obsequiale Augustense, Augsburg: E. Ratdolt, 1487, fols. XXXV-XXXVIII. Lipphardt, nos. 213: Gerresheim1; 224: Kleve; 340a: Speyer3; 376: Würzburg6. Augsburg: Lipphardt, nos. 522: Obsequiale Augustense (1487), fols. XXXVXXXVIII; 523: Augsburg23, Obsequiale secundum Ecclesiam Augustensem (1499), fols. XXXI-XXXIIv; 524: Agenda Diocesis Augustensis (1547), fols. 44-47v; 526: Ritus ecclesiastici Augustensis episcopatus (1580), pp. 582-93; 527: Liber Ritualis (1612), pp. 110-21; 528: Rituale Augustanum (1656), pp. 418-28; 529: Rituale Augustanum (1764), pp. 441-53. Bamberg: Lipphardt, no. 530: Bamberg10, Agenda Bambergensis (1587), pp. 585-97. Trier: Lipphardt, no. 357c: Trier14, Rituale Trevirense (1767), pp. cxxxi-cxxxiij. Lipphardt, nos. 212d: Fulda6 (1615); 213: Gerresheim1 (fifteenth century); 224: Kleve (fifteenth century); 340a: Speyer3 (1438-70); 357a: Trier12; 369: Worms6 (c. 1500); 376: Würzburg6 (1482); 377: Würzburg7 (1564). Elevatio from Mainz, St Quintin, 1585, Mainz, Stadtarchiv, Hs. HBA I 50, pp. 7879, esp. 78 (not in Lipphardt) (psalm-tone); Lipphardt, nos. 262: Mainz13 (1762) (psalm-tone); 223b: Innichen3 (lection tone for Tollite portas ; but rest of dialogue is non-standard); 357c: Trier14, Rituale Trevirense (1767), vol. II, p. cxxxiij

335


only eight do rubrics or notation clearly identify Tollite portas as the mode 3 antiphon over Psalm 23(24) at matins of the dedication of a church:53

These are all from two centres, Augsburg and Bamberg; the seven from Augsburg are predominantly late, though the earliest records fifteenth-century practice, and hence probably that of earlier times. Thus only two German centres clearly witness to a tradition of using the antiphon as part of the Tollite portas dialogue. By contrast, it figures in four non-dialogic ceremonies from as many different German centres.54 In the few German ceremonies where this antiphon begins the dialogue, the other verses (8b and 10b) are sung to the matching third psalm-tone:55

53

54

55

(melody like psalm-tone, but not authentic). Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5159. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, no. 522: fol. XXXVI. Also in Lipphardt, nos. 523: fol. XXXIr-v; 524: fols. 44v-46; 526: p. 587; 527: p. 116; 528: p. 423; 529: p. 445; 530: p. 593. Lipphardt, nos. 238b: Cologne15 (1664); 251: Mainz2 (fifteenth century); 683a: Rasdorf/Rhön1 (1587); 788: Hersfeld (fifteenth century; = Hersfelder Osterspiel, l. 23). Used also in one non-German ceremony: Lipphardt, no. 770: Barking (136376). Lipphardt, no. 522: fol. XXXVIv: Dominus virtutum is not notated, but directed to be sung sub priori melodia . Also in: Lipphardt, no. 523: fol. XXXIr-v; 526: pp. 587-88; 527: pp. 116-17; 528: pp. 423-25; 529: pp. 445-46; 530: p. 593. Sources as in note 50.

336


The antiphon Tollite portas sets only part of Psalm 23(24):7, and makes no reference to any King of Glory. To follow it with the question Quis est iste rex gloriae? thus offends against verismo, but this was clearly not a priority in the Elevatio ceremonies. Only four centres unambiguously show the antiphon melody being extended to include et introibit rex gloriae , and this predominantly in very late examples; the earliest, from Augsburg, are of the late fifteenth century.56 Augsburg and Bamberg set this clause to the same third psalm-tone as was used for the psalm-verses:57

There are, equally, ceremonies where Quis est iste rex gloriae? follows on even though there is no positive indication of the Tollite portas chant having been extended.58

56

57

58

Augsburg: Lipphardt, nos. 522, 523, 524, 526, 527, 528, 529. Bamberg: Lipphardt, no. 530 (1587). Fulda: Lipphardt, no. 212d (1615; not notated). Trier: Lipphardt, nos. 357a (1576), 357c (1767; psalm-tone-like melody: see note 52). Sources as in note 50. Augsburg: Lipphardt, no. 522: fol. XXXVIv. Also in: Lipphardt, no. 523: fol. XXXI; 524: fol. 45; 526: p. 587; 527: p. 116; 528: p. 423; 529: p. 445. Bamberg: Lipphardt, no. 530: pp. 593-94. Sources as in note 50. Lipphardt, nos. 213: Gerresheim1; 224: Kleve; 262: Mainz13; 340a: Speyer3; 376: Würzburg6; 377: Würzburg7. Elevatio, Mainz, St Quintin, 1585, Mainz, Stadtarchiv, Hs. HBA I 50, pp. 78-79, esp. 78.

337


In the Easter and Passion plays, directly influenced by the Gospel of Nicodemus, this dialogue, predictably enough, is routinely found. Not all the relevant plays are listed by Schuler.59 The evidence of the relatively few which notate this episode is very consistent: with the exception of the Osnabrücker Osterspiel, which sets the entire dialogue to unique melodies,60 Tollite portas is always Hesbert s antiphon 5159.61 Evidence of Passion and Easter plays extending the melody of this antiphon to include the phrase et introibit rex gloriae is very limited 59

60

61

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 610. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7122a-60; Augsburger Passionsspiel, ll. 2402a-16a; Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 134a-236; *Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2830d-2992d; *Brixener Passionsspiel, 108-12v, Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, pp. 201-09; *Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 3908-10; *Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7439g-85c; Erlau V, ll. 395d-409; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 251a-55; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 268a-302a; *Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 188200; *Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2792c-2952d; Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 512a-80a. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1275a-93a; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1230-56; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, ll. 434b-54a; *Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2837c-2999d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fols. 47v50; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 2, ll. 5-10; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 3731a-45e; Luzerner Osterspiel 1545, ll. 9837a-53 (in German); *Münchener Osterspiel, ll. 34a-260a; *Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 64a-86; Osnabrücker Passionsspielfragmente, l. 147a (incipit tollite only); *Rabers Passion, ll. 2819d-53c; Villinger Passionsspiel, ll. 6083-6188; Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 209a-50a (uncertain if Latin chants used). Asterisked plays contain notation. Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 64a-76b. The melodies (not transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern) seem to be mode 3, some transposed. Hans-Hermann Breuer (ed.), Das mittelniederdeutsche Osnabrücker Osterspiel: Der Ursprung des Osterspiels und die Prozession Untersuchungen, Einleitung und Ausgabe, Osnabrück, 1939 (Beiträge zur Geschichte und Kulturgeschichte des Bistums Osnabrück, 1), p. 87, nos. 4-8, does not discuss the music. Admonter Passionsspiel, l. 1276; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 2837d; B, l. 2830d; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 108 (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 201; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 3908-09; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7439g-h; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 193-94; Münchener Osterspiel, ll. 34a-36, 242a-44 (German wording); Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 2792d; Rabers Passion, l. 2819f.

338


indeed. Only two late plays, Donaueschingen and Admont, unambiguously do so.62 In the rest of the corpus, two plays whose notation seems to be complete (Brixen and Eger) use the antiphon melody unextended.63 The rest contain too little music or text to show how much was sung. The longest (Künzelsau) stops at portae aeternales ; most are considerably shorter.64 Some write or notate as far as Tollite portas, principes, vestras ;65 almost as many have even shorter incipits.66 Significantly, not a single one of these manuscripts includes even the words et introibit rex gloriae , let alone any music for them. Klosterneuburg is problematical: the text is written out, seemingly for neumation, as far as r[ex] gl[ori]e , but neumes are written only over the initial Tollite , and these seem to be those of about half the entire antiphon.67 As it stands, this manuscript does not guarantee that 62

63

64 65

66

67

Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 82v, ll. 3908-10; melody transcribed by Anthonius H. Touber (ed.), Das Donaueschinger Passionsspiel: Nach der Handschrift mit Einleitung und Kommentar neu herausgegeben, Stuttgart, 1985, p. 255, and Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 335; the melody of Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5159, is continued to cover et introibit rex gloriae , though in the manuscript text and notation break off at introibit . Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 99v-100 (l. 1276): the melody of Atollite [sic] portas is repeated for et Eleuamini portae aeternales , leaving the proper melody of the second clause for et introibit rex gloriae . Traub, Kommentar, pp. 120-21. Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 108 (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 201, note to ll. 328a-d); Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 122v-23, ll. 7439g-h. Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 3731a-d. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, l. 7122b; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1230; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, l. 434e; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 2837d; B, ll. 2830c-d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 47v; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 268a, 280a, 284a; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 2792d; Rabers Passion, l. 2819f. For instance: t : Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 2, l. 6 (reading of Linke et al., Kollation zu Rolf Bergmann: Die Göttweiger Dirigierrolle eines Osterspiels , p. 4); Toll : Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 2, l. 9; Tollite : Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 526b, 532b; Tollite etc. : Augsburger Passionsspiel, l. 2402a; Tollite portas, principes : Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 251a; Tollite portas, principes, etc. : Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, l. 134a. Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, MS, fol. 143v, ll. 193-94. The neumes could possibly

339


et introibit rex gloriae was intended to be sung; this could be one of the frequent occasions where a scribe has mistakenly set out for the neumator text which was never intended to be neumed. The Münchener Osterspiel interestingly corroborates the general impression of reluctance to extend the antiphon melody. In this late text, the chants have all been translated into German. The German wording Jr fursten Thund ewre thor abkeren || so mag ein geen der kunig der Eern does indeed verbally cover the Latin et introibit rex gloriae ; but it is fitted into the unextended antiphon melody.68 References to the King of Glory in the German dialogue of plays are by no means evidence of the antiphon having been extended: they are frequent in plays where the chant was definitely, or probably, not lengthened.69 The allusion to rex gloriae is in effect supposed as present in the audience s awareness or memory without being expressed in performance. In the light of this evidence, then, editors should show caution in their approach to the Tollite portas incipits in plays, especially earlier ones: the reconstructions in the Innsbrucker Osterspiel by Meier, and in the Redentiner Osterspiel by Schottmann, to include et introibit rex gloriae are not necessarily right.70 Music for the rest of the dialogue is given in only four plays, all late. The Osnabrücker Osterspiel is melodically unusual; Brixen sets

68 69

70

be those of Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5159, as far as et ele- . Münchener Osterspiel, ll. 34a-36, 242a-44. E.g. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7123-24, 7133-34; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2838-39; B, ll. 2831-32; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 49v; Brixener Passionsspiel (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 201); Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 7444; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 275-76; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 3732-35; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2793-94; Rabers Passion, ll. 2819d-23; Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 513-14. Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 269-71, 281-83, 285-87; Schottmann (ed.), Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 512d-e, 526b-c, 532b-c. Neither edition offers an explicit rationale for this reconstruction.

340


Dominus fortis et potens in prelio to the melody of Jesum Nazarenum crucifixum querimus from the Quem quaeritis dialogue.71 Admont and Eger have a psalm-tone setting.72 Here the Passion play tradition shows its relation to the liturgical drama; in several Sterzing plays, the liturgical practice of singing the Tollite portas higher each time is found.73 Consistently absent from the Passion play manuscripts, however, is music for the devils question Quis est iste rex gloriae? This reflects the general association of music with heaven, and the devils corresponding aversion to it. It also reflects the description of the devils crying out this question in the Gospel of Nicodemus.74 Even in the German Elevatio tradition this convention can be observed. In three ceremonies it is unclear exactly how the dialogue was performed and whether the diabolical question was sung or not.75 Only in five is it definitely sung; and these are predominantly late sources, representing only three different centres.76 By contrast, those where the question is definitely or probably said are both more numerous (ten), more wide71

72

73

74

75

76

Osnabrücker Osterspiel, MS, fol. 132v, ll. 66a-76b; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 109v, Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 203; cf. manuscript, fol. 118v. Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 100v, ll. 1281a-82 (similar to tone 3); Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 123v, ll. 7467a-c (tone 3). Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2982a, 2999a; B, ll. 2974a, 2992a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 50; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2792c-52d. Richard Rastall, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I, p. 208. Gospel of Nicodemus, Latin B version: Elliott (ed.), Apocryphal New Testament, p. 202. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, nos. 357a: Trier12 (1576), 369: Worms6 (1500), 376: Würzburg6 (1482). Lipphardt, nos. 213: Gerresheim (fifteenth century); 357c: Trier14 (1767); 527: Augsburg27 (1612); 528: Augsburg28 (1656); 529: Augsburg29 (1764). The question Quis est iste rex gloriae? was sung in the Regensburg Cathedral Elevatio (Lipphardt, nos. 684a: Regensburg3 [1491], and 689: Regensburg8 [1570]), but not as part of a mimetic Tollite portas dialogue; it was set to the Psalm-tone, referred to as Versus in Lipphardt, no. 689 (vol. IV, p. 1249, ll. 33-36).

341


spread (seven centres), and on average somewhat earlier.77 The necessarily tentative conclusion that the shouting of the question tends to be the earlier practice in liturgical drama is supported by the Augsburg evidence. Here it is the later sources (1612, 1656, 1764) where the diabolical question is sung,78 whereas in the two earliest, from 1487 and 1580, it is shouted coarsely.79 In Klosterneuburg, the only Latin Osterspiel with this dialogue, the text has been set out for neumation, but not neumed, inconclusive evidence which might mean that it was not in fact intended to be sung.80 In the vernacular Passion and Easter plays the devils are clearly directed to yell, not sing, their question.81 The melodically unique Osnabrücker Osterspiel seems to be the sole exception.82 Whilst none of this proves exactly how the St Gall Passion Play may have treated these chants, it does at least suggest likely approaches:

77

78

79

80 81

82

Lipphardt, nos. 212d: Fulda6 (1615); 224: Kleve (fifteenth century); 262: Mainz13 (1762); 340a: Speyer3 (1438-70); 357a: Trier12 (1576); 522: Augsburg22 (1487); 523: Augsburg23 (1499), 524: Augsburg24 (1547); 526: Augsburg26 (1580); 530: Bamberg10 (1587). Lipphardt, nos. 527: Augsburg27 (1612); 528: Augsburg28 (1656); 529: Augsburg29 (1764). Lipphardt, no. 522: Augsburg22 (1487), ll. 32-33: Levita Junior vel Alius in Figura Diaboli grossa voce querat ; the same in Lipphardt, no. 523: Augsburg23, fol. XXXIr-v; 526: Augsburg26 (1580), ll. 46-47: Aliquis [ ] Diaboli responsum simulans, intus crasse ita respondet . Similarly Lipphardt, no. 530: Bamberg10, p. 594. Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, MS, fol. 143v, ll. 195-96. Schreien : Admonter Passionsspiel, l. 1278a; Augsburger Passionsspiel, l. 2408a; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 109v (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 203. Clamare : Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 112 (Ibid., p. 208); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7459d-e, 7483a-b; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 254; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, l. 271a; Rabers Passion, ll. 2823a. Dicere alta voce : Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 2938a. Respondere cum strepitu : Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7124a-b; cf. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1232-33. Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 66a-b.

342


91 Tollite portas ... The play gives no indication of how long this chant continues, and as Pflanz recognizes, the German Ir hellen vursten, dunt of die dur. || Vnd gebent mir mine knethe hervor , which does not directly correspond to the Latin wording, is of no help in this respect.83 The evidence of the German Passion plays suggests that extending Hesbert s antiphon 5159 is rare, and more typical of later plays. 92 Quis est iste rex gloriae? Though the Devil does sing in the temptation of Jesus in the St Gall Passion Play,84 in the case of this dialogue the consistent practice in Passion plays, and the almost uniform practice in the Easter plays and ceremonies, particularly in the earlier period, is cacophonous shouting. 93 Dominus virtutum, iste est rex gloriae The angel s response, by contrast, will almost certainly have been sung, most probably to the third Psalm-tone or a simple melody related to it. An unextended antiphon for 91, a question shouted by the Devil for 92 and a chanted angelic response for 93 corresponds to the arrangement in both Eger and Brixen.85 This dialogue, then, is one of the sung parts of the St Gall Passion Play about which final certainty is impossible. From the directions, however, it would seem that this is one of the simpler performances of these chants in the dramatic repertoire, as befits a relatively early play

83 84

85

Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 34-35. 15, Si es filius Dei (see Chapter V above), and 17, Angelis suis mandavit (see Chapter VI above). Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7439g-85c; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 108-112v (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, pp. 201-09).

343


whose manuscript seems to imply less elaborate staging than in the latest and largest-scale examples. The likely format is:86

After the Tollite portas dialogue, Christ breaks down the door of Hell, and is greeted by Adam and the patriarchs, who sing of their delight in his coming after so many millennia: 94 Tunc Christus pede trudat ianuam et apperiatur Et Adam cum ceteris cantent Advenisti et dicat: Herre, du bist kommen her. Wir din gebeident han bit ger in dirre vinstere mange stunt. Nu ist vns dine helfe worden kunt, des wir binne wol vunfdusent iar vil gemerlichen waren.

(ll. 1279a-85)

Bergmann and Pflanz correctly identify this item, though Pflanz s description of it is scanty.87 Advenisti, desiderabilis is part of the anti-

86

87

Tollite portas : Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5159, from Psalterium Spirense (1515), sig. c viir. Dominus virtutum : Psalm-tone 3, based on sources in note 55; cf. Psalterium Spirense (1515), sig. c viir; Liber usualis, p. 114. Bergmann, Studien, p. 196, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 148-49.

344


phon Cum rex gloriae , also known as the Canticum triumphale .88 It is verbally similar to the Justorum ad Christum obsecratio in PseudoAugustine s Sermo 160 for Easter.89 As a processional antiphon for Easter Sunday it is found in numerous liturgical sources, showing minor melodic variants.90 Its text and melody were frequently adapted by post-Reformation hymn-writers.91 Cum rex gloriae is a staple of Visitatio Sepulchri and Elevatio ceremonies; one hundred and thirty, from about fifty centres, are recorded in Lipphardt s Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, of which nearly all are from the German territories, Bohemia, Moravia and central Poland.92 88

89

90

91 92

Not in Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium. Carl Marbach, Carmina scripturarum, Strasbourg, 1907 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1963], pp. 540-41; Hermann Adalbert Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus sive hymnorum canticorum sequentiarum collectio amplissima, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1855-56, vol. II, p. 315; Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 151-52; Frieder Schulz, Singen wir heut mit einem Mund , Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie 32 (1989), pp. 29-71, esp. 41-43. Also known as Sermo 137 de tempore: Migne (ed.), Patrologia Latina, vol. XXXIX, cols. 2059-61, esp. 2061. The possibility that Cum rex gloriae is the source of Pseudo-Augustine, rather than the other way round, as usually supposed, is discussed by Emil Lengeling, cited in Schulz, Singen wir heut , p. 42, note 61. Conspectus of sources in Tadeusz Miazga, Die Gesänge zur Osterprozession in den handschriftlichen Überlieferungen vom 10. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, Graz, 1979, pp. 250-57; cf. Schulz, Singen wir heut , pp. 41-45; Christian Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Kassel [etc.], 1982 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87), fol. 81r-v. Schulz, Singen wir heut , passim. Listed by geographical centre, with Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele nos.: (i) present-day German-speaking countries: Admont (485a, 485b); Augsburg (522, 526-529); Bamberg (190a, 190b, 195, 195a, 530); Berlin (532, 533); Diessen (549); Eichstätt (550, 550a, 551-555, 557-560); Essen (564); Fulda (212a, 212d); Gandersheim (785); Gernrode (786); Gerresheim (213-215); Halle (585); Innichen (223a, 591); Kleve (224); Köln (238b, 238c); Magdeburg (608); Mainz (251-254, 256, 257, 260, 262, 263); Meißen (612, 614); Münster (274, 293, 296); Neuenherse (624); Neuß (625a); Paderborn (308); Prüfening (311); Rasdorf (683a); Regensburg (325, 326, 686); Reichersberg (692); St Gallen (330, 331); St Lambrecht (728, 730); Seckau (744, 745); Seligenstadt (335);

345


Cum rex gloriae is attested copiously in Mainz: here it frequently figures after the Elevatio and as the antiphon for the Easter Sunday procession, often explicitly linked with a preceding Visitatio Sepulchri.93 The antiphon was also used at the aspersion on the Sunday after Easter.94 Speyer sources are much less plentiful, but do record the antiphon in the Elevatio ceremony.95 The dearth of Worms books, especially the complete absence of graduals and processionals, means that it cannot be adequately documented there; but its use in the Elevatio in the Worms ritual printed about 1500 shows it was known in that diocese also.96 Cum rex gloriae Christus infernum debellaturus intraret, et chorus angelicus ante faciem ejus portas principum tolli praeciperet, sanctorum populus, qui 97 tenebatur in morte captivus voce lachrimabili clamaverat:

93

94

95

96

97

Speyer (339, 340a); Strasbourg (341); Trier (355, 357a); Wöltingerrode (766); Worms (369); Würzburg (372, 373, 376, 377); Zurich (767); (ii) Bohemia, Moravia, Poland: Glatz (K odzko) (383); Gnesen (Gniezno) (576, 576f, h, i); Krakau (Cracow) (431, 431b-e); Olmütz (Olomouc) (385a, 386); P ock (432c); Prague (388, 389, 661-65, 668-73, 675, 676, 678, 678a, 679, 680); Warschau (Warsaw) (432d); Breslau (Wroc aw) (536e, h, n, q, r, x, x1, x2). This list, whilst fuller and more accurate than the seriously inadequate list in Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. IX, p. 905, may not be exhaustive. After Elevatio: Lipphardt, nos. 251: Mainz2, 256: Mainz7, 260: Mainz11, 262: Mainz13, 263: Mainz14; Mainz Cathedral processionals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 4, fols. 78v-80v; Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 5, fols. 65v-68. Easter Sunday, connected with Visitatio: Lipphardt, nos. 252: Mainz3, 253: Mainz4, 254: Mainz5; Mainz Cathedral processionals: Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 4, fol. 80v; Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 5, fol. 68 (mentioning the collegiate churches procession to Liebfrauen). Theodor Heinrich Klein, Die Prozessionsgesänge der Mainzer Kirche aus dem 14. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Speyer, 1962 (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 7), pp. 50-51. Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Vindob. 1882, fol. 41v (= Lipphardt, no. 339); Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv, 67/452, fol. 26 (= Lipphardt, no. 340a); both at the Elevatio, before Matins and Visitatio Sepulchri. Lipphardt, no. 369: Worms6, in Agenda ecclesie wormaciensis, 1500-10, fol. 70 (sig. i vir). Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 74.

346


347


The antiphon is found in numerous plays, not all listed by Schuler.98 The great majority also perform the first section of the antiphon, beginning at Cum rex gloriae . The St Gall Passion Play is one of a mere six to contain only Advenisti ; it may be significant that three of this small group are Hessian.99 The almost invariable lack of notation for this chant in these plays, even in those whose manuscripts contain much music, is a sign of familiar and easily accessible liturgical material.100 Whilst Pflanz does not address the question of how much of this long chant would have been sung in St Gall, he does not expressly 98

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 72, 73, 74, 75. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7076a-7160d; Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 268a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 2830a-c, 3006a; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 108, 113-16 (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, pp. 201, 210, 214; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 3941-48; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7439a-f, 7501a-c; Erlau V, ll. 395a-c, 421a-b; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 255; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 250a-65; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 188-89, 200-01; Luzerner Osterspiel 1545, marginal addition after l. 9865; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2792a-b, 2966a-c; Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 506a-i, 604a-e; Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 199a-b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1272a-75, 1293a-94; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, ll. 1220-56; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, ll. 434 b-c, 454a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 2837a-b, 3013a; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 47v; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 2, l. 6; Hersfelder Osterspiel, ll. 19-22; Münchener Osterspiel, ll. 294b-97; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 58a-e, 88a-c; Rabers Passion, ll. 2819b-c, 2855a-b; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 204a-c. 99 St Gall Passion Play, Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, Frankfurter Dirigierrolle; also Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, Luzerner Osterspiel 1545, Münchener Osterspiel, line numbers as in note 98. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 72, lists St. Gallen VI (= Lipphardt, Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, no. 330), St. Gallen VII (= Lipphardt, no. 331), Tiroler Osterspiel and Wiener Osterspiel as having Cum rex gloriae without Advenisti . Lipphardt, no. 331, does, however, include Advenisti . 100 Melodies given only in Admonter Passionsspiel, Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, Egerer Passionsspiel, Klosterneuburger Osterspiel and Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel (line numbers as in note 98). Klosterneuburg, MS, fol. 143v (l. 201), neumates only the words Cum rex gloriae Christus .

348


disagree with Hartl s edition, which prints the entire text, though without the final Alleluia . The evidence of other surviving texts is far from helpful. The Elevatio ceremonies offer only an indirect parallel to the Passion and Easter plays: they almost invariably use the antiphon to accompany the procession of the cross or the Blessed Sacrament raised from the Easter Sepulchre, which often involves circling the church or churchyard three times, so that the whole chant is needed as an accompaniment.101 The Passion and Easter plays contain nothing analogous to the Elevatio procession, and few give enough information to show how much of the antiphon is to be performed. Exceptions tend to be the later, longer and more spectacular examples such as Alsfeld, where Christ, the angels, and the good souls sing the entire chant in a complicated se-quence, alternating with the Tollite portas dialogue (no. 67, above), an arrangement similar to Admont and with interesting parallels in some German Elevatio ceremonies.102 Yet the few which do show where the chant ended display a consistency. Five specify finishing at de claustris ; Admont stops even earlier, at in tenebris .103 101

102

103

Of the eighty-four German ceremonies listed in note 92, thirty-five definitely and thirty probably use the whole antiphon. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7076a-7160d; cf. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, pp. 88-92; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, ll. 1220-56. Cf. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1273-94. Cum rex gloriae as a processional antiphon is interrupted by the Tollite portas dialogue in ceremonies from Augsburg (Lipphardt, Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, no. 522: Augsburg22; 526: Augsburg26), Bamberg (Lipphardt, no. 530: Bamberg10), and possibly Gerresheim (Lipphardt, no. 231: Gerresheim1); also in Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 58a-88c. Cum rex gloriae is followed by Tollite portas (though without such interruption) in Hersfelder Osterspiel, ll. 18-23, and in Lipphardt, nos. 212d: Fulda6, 238b: Köln15, 251: Mainz2, 262: Mainz13, 340a: Speyer3, 357a: Trier12, 369: Worms6, 376: Würzburg6, 377: Würzburg7, 683a: Rasdorf2. Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 108; Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 210 (Wackernell misreads usque ad hunc v[er]su[m] Te nostra as usque ad hunc Jesu spe nostra ); Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 83v, ll. 3941-48; Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 124, ll. 7501a-c; Frankfurter

349


There is evidence in some plays for the singing of the rest of the antiphon, from Te nostra vocabant suspiria , as the Altväter proceed to Heaven.104 The evidence of these few, but spatially and chronologically diverse plays, suggesting that de claustris was felt to mark a significant division in the chant, is supported by the music: from Te nostra vocabant suspiria the melody becomes more melismatic and its tessitura is on average higher. De claustris seems a likely point for the chant to end. Jesus takes Adam s hand, and sings his invitation to the Blessed Souls to come to his kingdom: 95 Tunc Iesus apprehende[n]s Adam manu cantet Venite, benedicti : Wol vf, ir sollent ane swere vorbaz leben vmer mere bi mir vnd bi dem vatter min. Do sollent ir bit vreuden sin. Tunc deducat eos ad paradysum

(ll. 1285a-89a)

Disagreeing with Hartl, who reconstructed this item as Matthew 25:34 ( Venite, benedicti patris mei, possidete paratum vobis regnum a con-

104

Dirigierrolle, l. 255 ( usque extra given without comment by Johannes Janota [ed.], Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, vol. I: Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments und des Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragments , Tübingen, 1996, and Richard Froning [ed.], Das Drama des Mittelalters, 3 vols., Stuttgart, 1891-92 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1964] (Deutsche National-Litteratur, 14:1-3), vol. II, p. 364) and dubiously interpreted by Wolf, Kommentar, p. 233, as meaning bis nach erfolgtem Auszug ). Münchener Osterspiel, ll. 294b-97; Admonter Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 101r-v, ll. 1293a-94. E.g. Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 116, Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 214; Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 682a-b ( Magna consolatio ).

350


stitutione mundi ), Bergmann and Pflanz,105 propose a Magnificat antiphon for Monday of the first week of Lent:

106

Pflanz and Bergmann however overlook another liturgical possibility: the introit for Wednesday of Easter Week: 107

105

106

107

Bergmann, Studien, p. 196 and note 1582, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 35-36, 101-02. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5350. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fol. 109v. Also in: Mainz breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 160, fol. 318v (see other Mainz breviaries in Pflanz, p. 102, note 1); Worms breviary, British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 229v (also as Benedictus antiphon, Tuesday, Week 1 of Lent); printed Worms breviary, 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515), sig. z 4vb; Speyer psalter and breviary, Speyer, Gymnasialbibliothek, A.D.3, fol. 87ra; printed Speyer breviary, 1491 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465), sig. h2r; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. 4vb; cf. Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934, p. 346; Karlheinz Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Kassel [etc.], 1985 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88), fol. 32v. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 77. Also in: Mainz missal, Frankfurt, Barth. 118, fol. 6; printed Worms missal, 1488, fol. LXXIVv (= sig. kiiv); Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fol. cxxiiva (introit, Wednesday of Easter Week); printed Speyer missal, 1501, fol. LXXIIIIvb (= sig. k iivb); Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense, fol. 85v; Graduale triplex, pp. 205-06; Liber usualis, pp. 792-93.

351


The dramatic tradition does not greatly help to decide which chant the St Gall Passion Play may have used. A similar item is found in sixteen other plays, not all listed in Schuler; seven manuscripts include music.108 The antiphon was definitely used in five plays, and probably in the Bozner Passionsspiel 1514.109 The introit, however, 108

109

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 637. In Schuler: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7248a-b; Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 262a-c; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 3002a-b; see Traub, Kommentar, p. 170; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 113, Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 210; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 3931-34; *Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7553a-c; Erlau V, ll. 445a-c; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, l. 337; *Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 2962a-b; Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 586n-p. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1300a-01; Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 1270; Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil, ll. 492d-e; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3009a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 50; Göttweiger Dirigierrolle, MS, fol. 2, l. 24; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, l. 3750, marginal addition; Rabers Passion, ll. 2897c-d. Those asterisked contain notation. Admonter Passionsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, B (cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 170), Egerer Passionsspiel, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion; linenumbers as in note 108; some melodies transcribed by Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 343. Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 50: Saluator canit: Venite benedicti , short empty stave.

352


appeared in Erlau V, and possibly in the Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel.110 Two late plays are unusual: Brixen has the untypical wording Venite Benedicti patris mei et possidetis regnum coelorum below an empty stave; in Donaueschingen neither the words nor the melismatic melody come from either antiphon or introit.111 In the rest, brief incipits or imprecise directions leave the identity of the chant uncertain.112 Missing completely, however, is any positive evidence of the use of the biblical wording Venite, benedicti patris mei, possidete paratum vobis regnum a constitutione mundi (Matthew 25:34) of Schuler s Leittext.113 Schottmann s reconstruction of the Redentin incipit using this wording is thus probably incorrect; Dreimüller s completion of the unnotated Alsfeld incipit using the antiphon wording and the Eger melody is more plausible.114 The dramatic tradition thus gives no clear indication of the melody used in plays close in time or space to the St Gall Passion Play. Both 110

111

112

113 114

Erlau V, 445a-c: ut patet in introitu . In Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 262a-c, the incipit Venite, benedicti patris mei, Alleluia might be a shortened (or inaccurate) version of the introit, but could perhaps indicate the antiphon with an added Alleluia as in Eger. Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 113v, Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 210; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 83, ll. 3931-34: Venite, benedicti patris mei in regnum celorum quod paratum est vobis ; music transcribed by Touber (ed.), Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, p. 255, and in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, p. 343; cf. Anthonius H. Touber, Das Osterspiel im Donaueschinger Passionsspiel: Text und Musik , in Max Siller (ed.), Osterspiele: Text und Musik, Innsbruck, 1994 (Schlern-Schriften, 293), pp. 203-09, esp. 206. Incipits: Venite, benedicti : Bozner Osterspiel I, Teil 1, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, Redentiner Osterspiel; Venite, benedicti patris : Göttweiger Dirigierrolle; Venite, benedicti patris mei : Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel; Kom[t] ir ausirweltin : Wiener Osterspiel, l. 262a. linenumbers as in note 108. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 673. Schottmann (ed.), Redentiner Osterspiel, ll. 586n-p; Schottmann s note (p. 211) offers no rationale for this reconstruction. Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7248b-c; cf. Dreimüller, Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , vol. II, pp. 93, 165.

353


antiphon and introit would have been possible choices. The general tendency in St Gall, as in many German plays, to use office chants, may make the former the more likely choice. Jesus leads the Blessed Souls to Heaven: 96 Tunc deducat eos ad paradysum Quo cum pervenerint cantent Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus

(ll. 1289a-b)

This chant is discussed under no. 20 in Chapter VI above. Taken literally, the direction to sing the item after arriving in Heaven ( Quo cum pervenerint , l. 1289b) suggests that the procession itself has no musical accompaniment. Whilst there are some unaccompanied movements in the St Gall Passion Play,115 a large-scale, theologically important movement of this kind in silence seems both theatrically and liturgically weak, and using the second part of Advenisti, desiderabilis to cover the procession, as in Brixen and Redentin, certainly suggests itself.116 All the more interesting, then, that a silent procession to Heaven is in fact comparatively common in German plays. In some, spoken dialogue covers the movement;117 but a good many do indeed seem to envisage a silent procession.118 This seems a South German tendency, however; the two relevant Hessian plays do accompany the 115

116 117

118

E.g. l. 687a: Tunc Iesus vadat ad Montem Oliveti ; l. 939a: Tunc veniunt ad Herodem ; l. 979a: Tunc induatur alba et ducatur ad Pylatum ; ll. 1083a-b: Tunc milites [ ] ducent [Christum] ad locum ubi debet crucifigi . See note 104. E.g. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 406a-22; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7557 a-91a; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 337-506; Wiener Osterspiel, ll. 262a-314. E.g. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1300-03; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3073 a-b; B, ll. 3066a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 51; Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, ll. 4034a-d; Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, ll. 3749ac; Luzerner Passionsspiel, l. 10013a; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 3026a; Rabers Passion, l. 2903a; (Ibid., ll. 2903b-c: Salve, festa dies is sung after arrival in heaven).

354


procession with chant.119 Nonetheless, the lack of musical accompaniment in the St Gall Passion Play may not be a simple gap or error, but may reflect general tendencies in the staging of German religious drama.

119

Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7274a-c: Jesu, nostra redemptio ; ll. 7290a-b: Gloria tibi, Domine ; Frankfurter Dirigierrrolle, 255a: Et cantantes sequentur eum .

355

Chapter X

The Empty Tomb

he final part of the play is the most intensively melodic, with twelve musical incipits in under sixty lines of dialogue. Here, even more so than elsewhere, music is no mere Einlage but the primary vehicle of the play s meaning. The action is close to its liturgical roots in the Visitatio ceremony. The Visitatio Sepulchri (ll. 1289c-1331) The Visitatio sequence begins with the processional movement of the three Maries to the tomb: 97 Tunc procedant cantantes Media vita

(l. 1309a)

This incipit is highly distinctive, and Schuler, Bergmann and Pflanz1 unproblematically identify the mode 1 antiphon Media vita in morte sumus , legendarily ascribed to Notker Balbulus but in fact probably written in the mid-eleventh century, a product of the Gorze monastic re-form.2 Media vita was strongly characteristic of the German terri1

2

Ernst August Schuler, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 (vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940), no. 343), Rolf Bergmann, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, München, 1972 (Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 14), p. 197 and note 1585, Hermann Manfred Pflanz, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205), p. 37, pp. 102-03. René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12), no. 3732. Clemens Blume & Guido M. Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica medii aevi, 55 vols., Leipzig, 1886-1922 [rpt. Frankfurt, 1961]; Register, ed. by M. Lütolf, 2 vols. in 3 parts, Bern-München, 1978, vol. XLIX, pp. 386-89 (nos. 784-86); Ulysse Chevalier, Repertorium Hymnologicum: Catalogue des chants, hymnes, proses, séquences,


tories.3 By the mid-thirteenth century it had gained immense popularity there as a song of lament and supplication; hymn versions were produced till the beginning of the seventeenth century.4 The antiphon, credited with apotropaic powers, was frequently associated with the Crucifixion.

3

4

tropes en usage dans l église latine depuis les origines jusqu à nos jours, 6 vols., Louvain-Bruxelles, 1892-1921 (Subsidia hagiographica, 4), no. 11419; Hermann Adalbert Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus sive hymnorum canticorum sequentiarum collectio amplissima, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1855-56, vol. II, pp. 329-31; Processionale monasticum ad usum Congregationis Gallicae Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, Solesmes, 1893 [rpt. Paris-Tournai, 1983], pp. 45-46; John Julian (ed.), A Dictionary of Hymnology Setting Forth the Origin and History of Christian Hymns of All Ages and Nations, London, 1908 [rev. ed.], pp. 720-21; Josef Höfer & Karl Rahner (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, 11 vols., Freiburg, 1957-67 [2nd ed.], vol. VII, col. 230; Walther Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind : Zur Geschichte des Liedes und seiner Weise , Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie 8 (1963), pp. 99-118, esp. 100-06 (p. 103); idem, Media vita in morte sumus , in Kurt Ruh et al., Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, BerlinNew York, 1978- [2nd ed.], vol. VI, cols 271-75, citing further literature; Johannes Janota, Studien zu Funktion und Typus des deutschen geistlichen Liedes im Mittelalter, München, 1968 (Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 23), pp. 232-33. On Gorze see William J. McDonald et al., New Catholic Encyclopedia, New York [etc.], 1967-, vol. VI, pp. 634-35; Walter Kasper et al. (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, Freiburg, 1993- [3rd ed.], vol. IV, cols 1061-62. Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , p. 102. The antiphon is found in only two of the twelve Corpus antiphonalium manuscripts, but in twenty-six CANTUS sources, seventeen from Germany, Austria, Slovenia, Belgium and the Netherlands. Julian (ed.), Dictionary of Hymnology, pp. 720-21; Adolph Franz, Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Liturgie und des religiösen Volkslebens, Freiburg, 1902 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1963], pp. 99, 208; Wilhelm Bäumker, Das katholische deutsche Kirchenlied in seinen Singweisen von den frühesten Zeiten bis gegen Ende des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts, 4 vols., Freiburg, 1886-1911 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1962], vol. I, pp. 583-84, 592-93; Karl Eduard Philipp Wackernagel (ed.), Das deutsche Kirchenlied von der ältesten Zeit bis zu Anfang des XVII. Jahrhunderts, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1864-77 [repr. Hildesheim, 1964], vol. II, nos. 99199 and III, no. 12 (ten versions from the fifteenth century to 1605). Cf. Lipphardt Media vita in morte sumus , cols 273-74.

358

X. The Empty Tomb

5,6

The chant, the Nunc dimittis antiphon at compline during Lent, seems in the thirteenth century to have shifted generally to mid-Lent.7 In sources from the fourteenth century and later, it is found in Mainz 5

6

7

Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus, vol. II, p. 331; e.g. the German version under a woodcut of the Crucifixion in Postille maiores [...] in Epistolas et Euangelia [...], Basel: A. Petri, 1514, verso of titlepage, printed in Wackernagel (ed.), Das deutsche Kirchenlied, vol. II, no. 992. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 102v-03. Here, as in all German sources, the melismata on sancte rise to c, higher than in Roman books (e.g. Processionale monasticum, pp. 45-46); see Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , p. 103; cf. examples in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 315-18 (Braunschweiger Osterspiel, Brixener Passionsspiel, Egerer Passionsspiel, Engelberger Osterspiel II, Erlau III, Nottulner Osterspiel I, Trierer Osterspiel, Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel), plus: Admonter Passionsspiel; Feldkircher Osterspiel; Füssener Osterspiel; Münchener Hortulanusszene; Osnabrücker Osterspiel; Tiroler Osterspiel; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, II, III. Line numbers: see note 11 below. Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , p. 102.

359


on the first Sunday and on Saturdays, in Worms and Speyer predominantly in mid-Lent.8 The haunting melismata of Sancte Deus, sancte fortis, sancte et misericors Salvator seem not originally to have been part of the antiphon, but to have been taken over, by about the twelfth century, from the Tris[h]agion, a Good Friday chant of Byzantine origin, with the refrain Sancte Deus, sancte fortis, sancte et immortalis, miserere nobis .9 Pflanz s claim to find a short form of Media vita without the Sancte Deus section in late-medieval Mainz sources is mistaken.10 8

9

10

Mainz: Hermann Reifenberg, Stundengebet und Breviere im Bistum Mainz seit der romanischen Epoche, Münster, 1964 (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 40), p. 137, note 861: Saturdays in Lent; Franz Falk (ed.), Die pfarramtlichen Aufzeichnungen (Liber consuetudinum) des Florentius Diel zu St. Christoph in Mainz, 1491-1518, Freiburg, 1904 (Erläuterungen und Ergänzungen zu Janssens Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, Band 4, Heft 3), p. 8: also Ash Wednesday. Mainz antiphonal, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 102v-103; Mainz breviaries: Frankfurt, Barth. 150, fol. 185v; Barth. 160, fol. 314v (both first Sunday in Lent). MidLent placing in: Worms: Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 244v; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 519, fol. 188; printed Worms breviary, 1490 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 5515), sig. bb 4ra; Speyer: printed Speyer breviaries: 1478 (Ibid., no. 5464), sig. K5ra; 1491 (Ibid., no. 5465), sig. i4v; Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), sig. aa5rb-va; Cf. Karlheinz Schlager (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Kassel [etc.], 1985 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88), fol. 35r-v (Saturday of week two of Lent). Kenneth J. Levy, Trisagion , in Stanley Sadie (ed.), The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., London, 2001 [2nd ed.], vol. XXV, pp. 745-46; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 556, 557, 558a (melodies transcribed in vol. II, pp. 315-18) and vol. I, p. 15; Dietrich Schmidtke, Ursula Hennig & Walther Lipphardt, Füssener Osterspiel und Füssener Marienklage , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen), 98 (1976), pp. 231-88, 395-423, esp. 408-10; cf. Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , pp. 104-06. Previously, Heinrich Sievers, Die lateinischen liturgischen Osterspiele der Stiftskirche St. Blasien zu Braunschweig, Wolfenbüttel, 1936 (Veröffentlichungen der niedersächsischen Musikgesellschaft, 2), p. 44, assumed that the Trisagion was developed from Media vita . Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 37, pp. 102-03, and p. 103, nos. 1 and 2, misinterprets sources such as the mid-fifteenth-century breviary, Frankfurt, Barth. 154, fol. 95, and the printed Mainz breviary, 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegen-

360

X. The Empty Tomb

The Trisagion was long established as the standard chant in the Visitatio.11 Indeed, the melody of the Trisagion Sancte Deus taken over by Media vita is not that of the Good Friday liturgical chant but one developed in the Easter plays and ceremonies.12 This is probably why the otherwise ubiquitous Media vita is unknown in drama apart from the St Gall Passion Play.13 But the popularity of Media vita no doubt explains why its wording of Sancte Deus occasionally influenced or replaced that of the Trisagion in plays.14 In various German uses, including Mainz, Media vita was associated with Rogationtide and All Souls processions, which might have suggested its use as a processional chant in the St Gall Passion Play.15

11

12

13

14

15

drucke, no. 5394), p. 126b, which set out the sections Sancte Deus , Sancte fortis and Sancte et misericors Deus separately after each verse. To the examples in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 556, 557, 558a (melodies transcribed in vol. II, pp. 315-18) add: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1353-68; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 401a-42; Bozner Osterspiel II, ll. 192a-231; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 473a-500; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 58r-v; Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, ll. 565a-80; Chiemseer Osterspiel, ll. 87-90; Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 193-95; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 131a-34; Hersfelder Osterspiel, ll. 60-70; Münchener Hortulanusszene, l. 23; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 19; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 230-42; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3140 a-f (has notation); Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 426a-b; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 71, 76, 81; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 243, 256, 269; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 145, 156, 167. Walther Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, 9 vols., Berlin-New York, 1975-90 (Ausgaben deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama, 5), nos. 779a, Augsburg30; 792, Medingen. Cf. Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , p. 106. Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , pp. 104-106; idem, Media vita in morte sumus , col. 272. Apart from the St Gall Passion Play it is found only in two ceremonies, in neither case integral to the dialogue: Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 308, Paderborn3, 1480 (before Mass of the Presanctified, Good Friday); no. 673, Prague18, late fourteenth century (recessional antiphon after compline in Lent). Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 8052b: sancte et misericors salvator, miserere mei . Media vita wording in Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 193-195; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 132-34; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 779a, Augsburg30. Lipphardt, Mitten wir im Leben sind , pp. 101, 102-03, citing e.g. a Mainz

361


The antiphon is sometimes associated with verses,16 but on its own would almost certainly have covered any processional movement necessary in this play. As they approach the tomb, the Maries worry about how they will lift off the stone covering it (ll. 1309a-17). But to their surprise, it has already been removed: an angel asks them who they are looking for: 98, 99, 100 [98] Tunc cantet angelus O tremule mulieres : Ir drurigen vrauwen, sagent mir In disme grabe, wen suchent ir? [99] Tunc respondentes Iesum nazarenum crucifixum Et dicat Maria Magdalena: Wir suchen hie in dirre vrist Iesum, der do gecruziget ist. [100] Respondet angelus Non est hic, quem queritis [et] dicat: Den ir suchen, der ist hie nit, als vwer augen selbe sehint. Gent, vnd sagent den iungern sin, daz sie gen hin zu Galylea alzu stunt. Do wirt er in allen kunt.

(ll. 1321a-31)

This is undoubtedly the Quem quaeritis dialogue, the basis of the whole Visitatio tradition. The words o tremule mulieres unambiguously indicate the second, later, German form of the dialogue, Quem quaeritis II :17

16

17

processional, c. 1400 (Munich, St Anna, Zentralbibliothek der bayrischen Franziskanerprovinz, MS. 12o Cmm 82, fol. 38). Frankfurt, lat. qu. 48, fols. 102v-03, has verses: 1. Ne proicias nos in tempore senectutis dum defecerit virtus nostra: ne derelinquas nos, Domine. 2. Diu cognoscis omnia occulta cordis; parce peccatis nostris. 3. Noli claudere aurem tuam ad preces nostras. These differ from those in modern Roman books, e.g. Processionale monasticum, pp. 45-46. Kassel, 2o theol. 129, antiphonal, St Peter, Fritzlar, 1344-48, fol. 111. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, vol. IX, p. 952, Vis., IIb, IIc, IId; cf. Ibid., vol. VII,

362

X. The Empty Tomb

Quem quaeritis II originated in the eleventh to twelfth century amongst the Augustinian Canons in south-western Germany, probably pp. 388-90, 468; Helmut de Boor, Die Textgeschichte der lateinischen Osterfeiern, Tübingen, 1967 (Hermaea, Germanistische Forschungen, n.s., 22), pp. 38, 50-51, 132-58; William L. Smoldon, The Music of the Medieval Church Dramas, (ed.) Cynthia Bourgeault, London [etc.], 1980, p. 79, plate VI and chart 3. The variant in hoc tumulo gementes is geographically restricted to parts of Austria; the more widespread plorantes is possibly the original form: see De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 138-41. The Visitatio ceremonies from the St Gall Passion Play s area which use Quem quaeritis II have plorantes : see Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 207, Frankfurt; 209, Fritzlar2.

363


in Augsburg; and was spread through Germany, Central Europe and northern Italy by one of the reform movements of the twelfth century.18 This seminal Visitatio chant is found in nearly four hundred plays and ceremonies; a complete list is unnecessary here.19 A slight complication is that the manuscript omits the first two words of the angels question. Bergmann does not discuss this, but Pflanz deduces from the incipit and the German of lines 1322-23 that the play inverted the usual word order to O tremulae mulieres, quem quaeritis in hoc tumulo plorantes? 20 This is almost certainly wrong. Textually and melodically, Quem quaeritis II is very stable. None of the hundreds of plays and ceremonies inverts the text of Quem quaeritis plorantes ; that the St Gall Passion Play might be the sole surviving exception is utterly improbable. And a textual change would also demand melodic inversion. The first phrase, Quem quaeritis , 18

19

20

Michael Norton, The Type II Visitatio Sepulchri: A Repertorial Study , Diss. Ohio State University, 1983, David Hiley, Western Plainchant: A Handbook, Oxford, 1993, pp. 261-63. Earliest extant source: Einsiedeln, Stiftsbibliothek, Ms. 366, p. 55 (Lipphardt [ed.], Lateinische Osterfeiern, vol. VII, pp. 394-95, no. 563, Einsiedeln1); Cf. De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 18-19, 133; Timothy J. McGee, The Liturgical Origins and Early History of the Quem quaeritis Dialogue , Diss., University of Pittsburgh, 1974, passim. To Schuler s nearly fifty examples (Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 502), add: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1309a-21; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 43a-59; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 210a-25; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3172a-80b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 56; Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 112a-34; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 284-88; Frankfurter Osterspielfragment, p. 603, ll. 1-3; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 42a-58; Münchener Osterspiel, ll. 676-708 (in German); Nottulner Osterspiel II, nos. 6-8; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 162a-76; Rabers Passion, ll. 3380a-94; Regensburger Osterspiel, ll. 141-55; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 398a-414; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 30a-36; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 93a-104; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 56a-70 (including German version). Note that Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3102a-14 has notation. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, index (Ibid., vol. IX, pp. 953-54), records approximately 330 instances; cf. Smoldon, Music of the Medieval Church Dramas, pp. 120-21 and comparative melody chart, pp. 432-33. Cf. Bergmann, Studien, p. 197, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 14950.

364

X. The Empty Tomb

hovers round the finalis (usually E); the second, o tremulae mulieres , rises, centring a minor third higher, then redescends to the finalis; the last, in hoc tumulo gementes [plorantes] centres on the finalis. To invert this simple but primal musical structure of home tone, departure from it, and return, would be unthinkable. Pflanz s argument is further undermined by the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, which also uses Quem quaeritis II 21 with dialogue strikingly similar to St Gall: dicant angeli: Quem queritis? Ir vrouwin alle, sagit mir.22

Rhyme and sense guarantee that the next line must be in diseme grabe wen suchent ir? or something very similar: chant and dialogue almost identical to that in St Gall. There seems no reason to assume that the St Gall Passion Play used the Quem quaeritis dialogue in anything other than its standard form. The incipit o tremule mulieres is probably a scribal slip, deriving from a concern to record the crucial words o tremule mulieres , which differentiate Quem quaeritis II from the other, older form of the dialogue: Quem quaeritis in sepulchro, [o] Christicolae? Jesum Nazarenum crucifixum, o caelicolae

21

22

Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 284-88. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 500, wrongly lists this as Quem quaeritis I , and Klaus Wolf, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [first volume of additions to Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe: Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002], p. 250, includes Quem quaeritis I as a possibility. But Quem quaeritis II is seen in the angels Non est hic quem queritis (l. 288), and confirmed by the fragmentary dialogue in the closely related Frankfurter Osterspielfragment, p. 603, ll. 1-3, which notates et Petro quia surrexit Ihesus , from the end of Quem quaeritis II . Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 285. The similarity with the St Gall Passion Play here is noted by Wolf, Kommentar, p. 250.

365

The St Gall Passion Play Non est hic , resurrexit sicut praedixerat. Ite, nuntiate quia surrexit de sepulchro. 23

For the textual incipits of both versions (italicized) are identical. The St Gall MS 919 scribe, or a predecessor, seems to have been so intent on including the verbal differentia as to omit the opening words of the chant. This slip may be less bizarre than it appears. The Visitatio ceremonies of the Mainz, Worms and Speyer dioceses consistently use Quem quaeritis I ,24 and the St Gall Passion Play scribe may have been taking particular care to make it clear that his play like several others produced in this area25 was using Quem quaeritis II even though the local liturgical tradition favoured the older first form. The Hortulanus Encounter (ll. 1331a-47e) Two of the Maries leave, but Mary Magdalene stays, and encounters the risen Christ in the appearance of a gardener: 101, 102, 103 Tunc aliis euntibus remaneat Maria Magdalena plorans [101] Tunc Iesus in specie ortulani dicat ad eam Mulier, quid ploras et dicat: Sage mir, vrauwe, mere, waz weines du so sere? Wen suches du zu dirre stunt? Daz salt du mir machen kunt. [102] Respondet Maria Quia tulerunt dominum meum 23

24

25

Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, vol. IX, p. 945, Vis. Ib, Ic, Id; Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 8455; De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 28-80. Mainz: Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 76, 252-56, 261, probably no. 260; Worms: nos. 365-66, 370, probably no. 367; Speyer: no. 339. Some mixture of forms in nos. 207, Frankfurt, 1483; 209, Fritzlar2, fourteenth century ( Quem quaeritis II but also the typically Mainz chant Ad sepulchrum Domini venimus gementes ). See vol. IX, pp. 946-47 and 953-54 on the geographical distribution of Quem quaeritis I and II. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1028a-36d; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 284-88; Frankfurter Osterspielfragment, p. 603, ll. 1-3.

366

X. The Empty Tomb [103] et dicat Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi et dicat: Ich inweiz, war min herre ist kommen vnd wo er lit in disen stunden. Daz salt du mir nu sagen, so wil ich in dannen dragen.

(ll. 1331a-39)

The chants of the play s Hortulanusszene , the encounter between the risen Christ and Mary Magdalene, cannot be identified with complete certainty. Partly this is because the overall repertoire of Hortulanus chants is still poorly researched: no systematic, large-scale study of the melodies, as opposed to the texts, yet exists. Only a few melodies are transcribed by Schuler; Lipphardt does not identify the chants used in individual ceremonies, and Susan Rankin s study of eighteen sources is restricted to Latin ceremonies and deals with only ten German examples.26 John s gospel records a dialogue of Mary with angels at the empty tomb (John 20:11-13): Dicunt ei illi: Mulier, quid ploras? Dicit eis: Quia tulerunt Dominum meum, et nescio ubi posuerunt eum. (John 20:13)

and another shortly after (verses 14-17) with the risen Lord in the guise of a gardener: Dicit ei Jesus: Mulier, quid ploras? Quem quaeris? Illa [ ] autem dicit ei: Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi ubi posuisti eum, et ego eum tollam. (John 20:15)

26

Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 108-15, 189-91, 215-16, 337-39; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, vol. IX, pp. 958, 1023; Susan K. Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene in the Visitatio Sepulchri Ceremonies , Early Music History 1 (1981), pp. 227-55, examines only the following German texts: Braunschweiger Osterspiel, Chiemseer Osterspiel, Einsiedler Osterspiel, Engelberger Osterspiel II, Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, Maastrichter Osterspiel, Nottulner Osterspiel I, Rheinauer Osterspiel, Zwickauer Osterspiel I, Ia, II, III, MS B (wrongly ascribed to Joachimsthal), and Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 786, Gernrode1.

367


These two distinct, but similar, exchanges each generate office chants, used both for Easter Sunday and Easter Week, and for the feast of St. Mary Magdalene.27 Pflanz treats the episode without reference to other plays, looking only for verbally suitable liturgical chants;28 he does not consider the possibility that the play s chants could be adapted or specially composed. For Mulier, quem quaeris he suggests antiphon 2300.29 In the search for a single chant to cover both Quia tulerunt and Domine, si tu he cites, without clearly distinguishing individual chants, Corpus antiphonalium nos. 2300, 6323 and 7797,30 and even no. 5232, though this antiphon was not used in Mainz.31 Since, however, no chant contains the quia or the Domine specified in the directions (ll. 1331ab), he concludes that Mary s reply was Vulgate text, perhaps spoken rather than sung.32 More light is shed on these three St Gall Passion Play chants by the other German plays and Visitatio ceremonies containing some or all of them. There are over forty, fewer than half listed by Schuler.33 27

28 29 30 31

32 33

John 20:13, antiphons: Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2210, Dicunt ei illi: Mulier, quid ploras? ; no. 3824, Mulier, quid ploras? ; nos. 5230-32, (all Tulerunt Dominum meum ); responsories: nos. 7796-97 (both Tulerunt Dominum meum ); no. 7885, Vidit Maria duos angelos ; versicle: no. 8228, Tulerunt Dominum meum . John 20:15, antiphons: no. 2198, Dicit ei Jesus: Mulier, quid ploras? ; no. 2300, Dixit Jesus: Mulier, quid ploras? ; responsory: no. 7722, Super lapidem monumenti . John 20:13 and 15: responsory no. 6323, Congratulamini mihi , with verse Tulerunt Dominum meum . Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 37-38, 105-08. Ibid., p. 105. Ibid., p. 107. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5232, Tulerunt Dominum meum ; Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p. 108 and note 1, cites as Mainz books two Carthusian breviaries and one of uncertain use (Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, Hss. I 365, I 438, I 433). Ibid., pp. 106-07 (misinterpreting the dicat direction, l. 1331b), 108. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 374, 618, 157 (melodies in vol. II, pp. 21516, 337-39, 108-15): Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1126a-28; Bozner Pas-

368

X. The Empty Tomb

They show a distinct tendency to conflate Mary s two encounters with the angels and Jesus, and this affects the number, order and attribution of chants. The great majority omit the angels question Mulier, quid ploras? , include only the longer question Mulier, quid ploras? Quem quaeris? asked by Jesus, and have Mary answer [Domine,] si tu sustulisti eum, dicito mihi . The reply [Quia] tulerunt Dominum meum is much rarer.34 There are, however, exceptions, and rather

34

sionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 3200a-05b; Braunschweiger Osterspiel, ll. 75-80; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 121v (J.E. Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, Graz, 1897 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Litteratur und Sprache Österreichs und seiner Kronländer, 1), pp. 223-24; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7978a-8004c; Einsiedler Osterspiel, ll. 60-66; Engelberger Osterspiel II, p. 22; Erlau III, ll. 1076a-82d; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 296-98; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1138a-43; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 168-77; Münchener Hortulanusszene, ll. 13-19; Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 29-35; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3118j-k, 3122a-c, 3132c; Rheinauer Osterspiel, ll. 75-82; Trierer Osterspiel, ll. 82a-89; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, ll. 158a-60b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1340a-44; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 106a-07, 121 a-b; Bozner Osterspiel II, ll. 162a-63, 167a-68 (cf. Andreas Traub, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996, p. 142); Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 277a-78, 298a-99; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3202a-08 (Ibid., p. 165), Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 57; Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, ll. 550a-51; Breslauer Osterspielfragment, ll. 152a-57; Chiemseer Osterspiel, ll. 60-67; Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 170-79; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 113a-18; Havelberger Osterspiel, ll. 41-44; Hersfelder Osterspiel, ll. 52-53; Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 44-52; Nottulner Osterspiel II, nos. 12, 13; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 202a-06b, 216a-20c; Rabers Passion, ll. 3452a-58c; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 422a-b, 426a-b; Tiroler Osterspiel, separate Visitatio, ll. 98a102c; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 60a-64; Zwickauer Osterspiel Ia, l. 1; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 212a-20; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 123a-32 (incl. German version); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 779a, Augsburg30; 786, Gernrode1; 786a, Gernrode2; 790, Klagenfurt; 792, Medingen; 796, Regensburg10; 807, Erlau2 (Eger). Also Egmonter Osterspiel, ll. 82-91; Maastrichter Osterspiel, ll. 4554; but Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , pp. 235, 240-41, shows that Maastricht follows French melodic models and cannot in effect be regarded as a German play. Egmont, which Rankin does not deal with, is almost identical to Maastricht. Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , p. 235.

369


more in the vernacular Passion and Easter plays than Schuler records, or than Rankin s study of Latin ceremonies might suggest. The question is indeed hardly ever given to the angels.35 But the reply [Quia] tulerunt Dominum meum is found in thirteen cases, a by no means insignificant proportion.36 The initial quia is characteristic of France and Italy,37 and German plays tend to omit it; but it is not entirely unknown.38 However, though the individual elements of the St Gall Passion Play scene are found in the German tradition, the play s precise combination of them is very unusual. To find Mulier, quid ploras ? , [Quia] tulerunt Dominum meum and Domine, si tu sustulisti eum together is rare in itself (nine texts, with only Eger and the Osnabrücker Osterspiel amongst the vernacular plays).39 But St Gall s precise disposition of chants is effectively unique. In several plays, [Quia] tulerunt and Domine, si tu both occur because the 35

36

37

38

39

Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 202a-b; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 779a, Augsburg30, from Saints Ulrich and Afra: cf. Ibid., commentary, vol. VIII, p. 712: the angel dialogue is evidence of the great age of the ceremony. Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, ll. 550a-51; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7990 a-c; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 298; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 117-18; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 170-72; Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 44-46; Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 31-35; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 13; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 206a-b; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 779a, Augsburg30 (1431); 786 and 786a, Gernrode1-2 (both c. 1500); 790, Klagenfurt (thirteenth century). Cf. Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , pp. 235, 248. Rankin s selection includes only three German ceremonies with this chant. Ibid., pp. 238-39. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 771, Coutances; 773-74, Mont-St.-Michel1,2; 775-78, Rouen2-5; 779, St Lhomer1/Blois; 781, Cividale2; 824, Tours3; 825, Origny4; 811, Palermo2; also no. 770, Barking. Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 117-18; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, l. 171; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 779a, Augsburg30, l. 70; no. 790, Klagenfurt, l. 17. Egerer Passionsspiel; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel; Marienberger Osterspiel; Nottulner Osterspiel I, II; Osnabrücker Osterspiel; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 779a, Augsburg30; 786, Gernrode1; 786a, Gernrode2. Line numbers as in note 33.

370

X. The Empty Tomb

question Mulier, quid ploras ? is asked more than once,40 or because Tulerunt precedes the question.41 Only the Nottuln and Gernrode plays combine [Quia] tulerunt and [Domine], si tu sustulisti eum as the answer to a single question, as St Gall does.42 But they come from distant regions (Westphalia, the Harz), or have unusual melodies,43 and probably represent a different strand of tradition. The closest match of St Gall is not a German source at all, but a fourteenth-century Visitatio from Cividale, in a region of northern Italy which was part of the German church.44 The incipit Mulier, quid ploras (l. 1331c) could represent either the whole of the angels question (John 20:13) or Jesus s longer Mulier, quid ploras, quem quaeris? (John 20:15). The longer question is used in the vast majority of German sources, as is seen from the texts, and in most cases the melodies too.45 Unfortunately, the very few which do not clearly indicate the form used include the two plays geographically closest to the St Gall Passion Play, the Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel and the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle.46 Elsewhere, the German tendency to centre the scene on Jesus makes its effect felt both on the arrangement of dialogue and the choice of melody. Even 40

41 42

43 44

45

46

Egerer Passionsspiel; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel; Marienberger Osterspiel; Osnabrücker Osterspiel; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 779a, Augsburg30. Line numbers as in note 33. Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 46-52. Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 29-35; Nottulner Osterspiel II, nos. 12-13; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 786, Gernrode1, ll. 51-59; 786a, Gernrode2, ll. 51-59. Nottulner Osterspiel I, MS, fol. 65, pl. VI; Nottulner Osterspiel II, nos. 12-13. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 781, Cividale2, ll. 68-73 (Cividale, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, MS 101, fols. 77-79v (esp. 78v); cf. De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 18-19. E.g. melodies transcribed in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 215; other melodies in locations in note 33. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle; Havelberger Osterspiel; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 786, Gernrode1; 786a, Gernrode2; 796, Regensburg10. Line numbers as in note 33.

371


in the thirteen which include Mary s [Quia] tulerunt Dominum meum , which is properly the answer to the angels question, the angels are the speakers only in two which preserve the double dialogue.47 And even in plays with the two dialogues, it is most unusual to give the angels their proper shorter question (John 20:13) and Jesus the longer one (John 20:15): this is done only in Osnabrück, a play whose melodic and structural particularities set it outside the mainstream.48 Elsewhere the angels sing the longer chant proper to Jesus.49 The opposite arrangement of giving Jesus the angels shorter question is all but unknown, apart from Klosterneuburg, and, interestingly, the Cividale Visitatio which resembles the St Gall Passion Play.50 None of this, however, identifies with certainty the melodic form of the St Gall Passion Play chants. No play from the same geographical area notates the exchange; indeed the two closest (Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, Frankfurter Dirigierrolle) do not even make the precise verbal form clear.51 What trends can be seen in the whole corpus of relevant German plays and ceremonies? For Mulier, quid ploras, quem quaeris? the German plays show a distinct preference not for Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2300, as Pflanz suggests, but for a section from no. 2198, from the office of Mary Magdalene:52

47

48

49 50

51 52

Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 202a-b; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, 779, Augsburg30. Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 202a-b (angels), 216a-b (Jesus). On this play s atypicality see De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 295-99 (esp. 298). Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 779, Augsburg30, ll. 47, 54, 61. Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 168-69 (first time); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 781, Cividale2, l. 69. Cf. note 46. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198. Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 174r.

372

X. The Empty Tomb

Traub notes the similarity of this antiphon to the Hodie antiphons, particularly Hodie Maria virgo .53 Of the thirty-four plays with notation, twenty-five use this chant, or what looks like a variant.54 But there is a noticeable difference between the majority, in which Mary answers with [Domine], si tu sustulisti eum , and the small group which, like the St Gall Passion Play, includes [Quia] tulerunt Dominum meum . Whereas nearly all plays in the former group use Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198,55 the minority group is less uniform. 53

54

55

Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3105. Andreas Traub, Der Debs-Codex als musikalische Quelle , in Ulrich Mehler & Anton H. Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel: Festschrift für Hansjürgen Linke zum 65. Geburtstag, AmsterdamAtlanta, 1994 (Amsterdamer Beitrage zur älteren Germanistik, 38-39), pp. 339-47, esp. 340-41, citing Antiphonale Pataviense, fol. 197, and Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936 [numerous reprints], p. 1607. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198: Admonter Passionsspiel; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil; Bozner Osterspiel II; Bozner Osterspiel III; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, B; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil; Braunschweiger Osterspiel; Breslauer Osterspielfragment; Erlau III; Münchener Hortulanusszene; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; Rabers Passion; Tiroler Osterspiel, separate Visitatio; Trierer Osterspiel; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel; Zwickauer Osterspiel I; Zwickauer Osterspiel Ia; Zwickauer Osterspiel II; Zwickauer Osterspiel III (Mehler, in Hansjürgen Linke & Ulrich Mehler (eds.), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau. Kritischer Text und Faksimilia der Handschriften, Tübingen, 1990 (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 103), p. 111, suggests Corpus antiphonalium, no. 3824). Variant of antiphon 2198: Chiemseer Osterspiel, l. 61; Egerer Passionsspiel; Engelberger Osterspiel II; Feldkircher Osterspiel, Füssener Osterspiel. Line numbers as in note 33. Exceptions: Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 121v (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, pp. 223); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 807, Erlau2, ll. 22-23.

373


Five contain no music.56 Only Eger and Füssen use 2198;57 the remaining six show considerable diversity. Nottuln uses what seems to be an ornamented form of 2300.58 Marienberg and Osnabrück have the same melody, which is like that found in Prague.59 Klosterneuburg has an elaborate melismatic melody, unlike any liturgical model, Klagenfurt a similar but simpler version.60 No clear consensus or obvious regional melodic trends can be seen. The melodies of Mary s [Quia] tulerunt Dominum meum are 61 similarly diverse. Three of the thirteen texts lack notation. Gernrode, Marienberg and Osnabrück use part of Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2300 (again found in Prague).62 The melismatic Nottuln chant is unique.63 Eger uses 5232; Klagenfurt has a similar melody.64 Füssen is broadly similar to 2210; Klosterneuburg follows it till meum ; Cividale uses a slightly variant form of the same antiphon.65 Again, 56

57 58 59

60

61

62

63

64

65

Brandenburger Osterspielfragment; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 779a, Augsburg30; 786-86a, Gernrode1-2. Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 7978c; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 113a-14. Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 29-30; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 12. Marienberger Osterspiel, l. 48; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 202a-b. Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , cites Prague, Knihovna Narodnia Universitní, MS VI. G. 10a (processional, Prague, thirteenth century), fols. 149-53v (= Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 799, Prague29); cf. other Prague ceremonies transcribed in Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, vol. II, pp. 215-16. Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 169, 174; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 790, Klagenfurt, l. 15 (unheighted neumes in both cases). Brandenburger Osterspielfragment; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 779a, Augsburg30. Ibid., no. 786, Gernrode1, ll. 55-56; no. 786a, Gernrode2, ll. 55-56; Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 45-46; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 206a-b; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 799, Prague29, ll. 34-35. Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 32-33; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 13; Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , p. 240, mistakenly classes Nottuln as similar to Gernrode and Prague. Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7990b-c; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 790, Klagenfurt, ll. 17-18. Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 116a-18; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 170-72; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 781, Cividale2, l. 71; Rankin, The Mary

374

X. The Empty Tomb

sources geographically close to the St Gall Passion Play are without notation; again, no clear regional melodic traditions can be discerned. Similarly, with [Domine,] si tu sustulisti eum , the melodic diversity which Rankin notes in her small selection66 applies to the whole corpus. In the thirty with decipherable melodies, several quite different settings are found. The largest group, nine predominantly south German plays, uses Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198.67 The Sterzing melody, also found in Admont and Brixen, resembles it but is not identical.68 Eger and Erlau have a not dissimilar one.69 Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5232 appears in Gernrode, transposed to continue from no. 2300 used for Tulerunt Dominum meum .70 An unidentified melody is found in Braunschweig, Trier and Wolfenbüttel; Engelberg is similar.71 Nottuln s unidentified melody is based on the setting of Mulier, quid ploras .72 The unusual melody in Marienberg and Osna-

66 67

68

69 70

71

72

Magdalene Scene , pp. 238, 240. Ibid., p. 240. Chiemseer Osterspiel, ll. 65-67; Einsiedler Osterspiel, ll. 63-66; Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 178-79; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 176-77; Münchener Hortulanusszene, ll. 15-16; Rheinauer Osterspiel, ll. 79-82; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 61a64; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 217a-20; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 125a-28 (Mehler, in Linke & Mehler (eds.) Die österlichen Spiele, p. 113, suggests Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5232). Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 121a-b; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 298a-99; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3207a-08; B, ll. 3205a-06; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3122a-b; Rabers Passion, ll. 3458a-b; Tiroler Osterspiel, separate Visitatio, ll. 102a-c. Admonter Passionsspiel, l. 1344; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 121v, (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 224). Egerer Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 134, ll. 8004a-c; Erlau III, ll. 1082a-d. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 786, Gernrode1, ll. 57-58; no. 786a, Gernrode2, ll. 57-58. Chant not identified by Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene . Cf. Walther Lipphardt, Die Visitatio sepulchri (III. Stufe) von Gernrode , Daphnis 1 (1972), pp. 1-14, esp. 12-13. Braunschweiger Osterspiel, ll. 78-80; Trierer Osterspiel, ll. 87a-89; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, ll. 160a-b; Engelberger Osterspiel II, p. 22. Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 34-35; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 13; Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , p. 240.

375


brück is again similar to Prague.73 Apart from the broad association of Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198 with southern Germany, and a clear Sterzing tradition shared by Admont and Brixen, regional trends and tendencies cannot be made out here either. What can be observed, however, is a very consistent correlation of melody and wording. Plays whose melodies are definitely liturgical never adapt chants verbally, but use those which contain the precise wording. Thus plays which read Quia tulerunt Dominum meum use Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2210, which contains the quia .74 Those with Tulerunt Dominum meum use chants which do not 75 (2300 or 5232). Similarly, those which read Domine, si tu sustulisti eum use Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198, which contains Domi76 ne . The two Gernrode plays, with Si tu sustulisti eum , have no. 5232, in which the initial Domine is not included.77 In the light of these patterns, and given the St Gall Passion Play s basic tendency to use liturgical material, a not unlikely choice for the 73

74

75

76

77

Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 50-52; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 220a-c; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 799, Prague29, ll. 37-39; Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , pp. 243, 245. Füssener Osterspiel, Klosterneuburger Osterspiel (cf. Lipphardt [ed.], Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 781, Cividale2). Line numbers as in note 65. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2300: Marienberger Osterspiel, Osnabrücker Osterspiel, Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 786, Gernrode1; 786a, Gernrode2 (line numbers as in note 62). Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 5232: Egerer Passionsspiel, Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 790, Klagenfurt (line numbers as in note 64). Chiemseer Osterspiel, Einsiedler Osterspiel, Feldkircher Osterspiel, Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, Münchener Hortulanusszene, Rheinauer Osterspiel, Zwickauer Osterspiel I, Zwickauer Osterspiel II, Zwickauer Osterspiel III, (cf. Lipphardt [ed.], Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 781, Cividale2). Line numbers as in note 67. Cf. the related melodies in Admonter Passionsspiel, Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, Bozner Osterspiel III, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, B, Brixener Passionsspiel, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion, Tiroler Osterspiel (line numbers as in note 68) and Egerer Passionsspiel, Erlau III (line numbers as in note 69). Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 786, Gernrode1; 786a, Gernrode2. Line numbers as in note 70.

376

X. The Empty Tomb

three incipits would be: 101: Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198, effectively the standard German chant for Mulier, quid ploras, quem quaeris? ; 102: Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2210, matching the distinctive Quia tulerunt wording; Dominum meum 103: Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198, matching the distinctive Domine, si tu . sustulisti eum

This is necessarily one of the more tentative chant identifications in the play. It is particularly noticeable that nos. 2198 and 2210 are not in the same mode, and so do not go ideally together. Yet the same juxtaposition is seen in Füssen,78 and the chants can at least be sung so that the two different finales are at the same actual pitch, a technique seen for instance in Gernrode.

79

78 79

Füssener Osterspiel: see notes 54 and 65. Gernrode: see note 70. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198: Speyer antipho-

377


Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2198, interestingly, is unknown in the Mainz office of Mary Magdalene, though familiar in Worms and Speyer.80 This may explain its absence from Alsfeld (apart from the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle the only Hessian play with a Hortulanus scene). But the chant, though associated with more southerly dioceses, probably has no direct implications for the localization of the St Gall Passion Play. It is used both in the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle and the Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel. Its presence there, and in about fifteen other plays and ceremonies from more northerly parts,81 is probably explained by the borrowing of complete Hortulanus sequences rather than by familiarity with a particular liturgical chant. Jesus now reveals himself by calling Mary by name: 104, 105 [104] Tunc Iesus dicat Maria [105] Quo audito procidens ad pedes eius cantet Iesu, nostra redemptio

(ll. 1339a-c)

Pflanz, perhaps understanding the dicat direction as meaning that Maria is simply spoken, does not list the incipit. Yet this moving climax of the Hortulanus encounter was invariably sung, and the vast majority of the over forty relevant German plays and ceremonies

80

81

nal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 174. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 2210: Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 173v (transposed). Worms breviaries: British Library, MS add. 19415, fol. 521; Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 522, fol. 31; Worms, Lu 3a, fol. 231; printed Worms breviary, c. 1475 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513), fol. 64v. Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 174; printed Speyer breviaries: 1478 (ibid., no. 5464), sig. mm5v; 1491 (ibid., no. 5465), sig. F3v. Not found in Mainz. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 296-98; Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1126a-28; Brandenburger Osterspielfragment; Braunschweiger Osterspiel; Breslauer Osterspielfragment; Havelberger Osterspiel; Hersfelder Osterspiel; Marienberger Osterspiel; Nottulner Osterspiel I & II; Osnabrücker Osterspiel; Trierer Osterspiel; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel; Zwickauer Osterspiel; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 786 and 786a, Gernrode1,2; 792, Medingen. Line numbers as in note 33.

378

X. The Empty Tomb

notate the exchange.82 In nearly every case, Mary answers Rabboni! or Rabb[on]i, quod dicitur magister .83 In lacking this response, the St Gall Passion Play is so unusual as to suggest scribal error.84 Yet the direction shows no obvious discontinuities; any error involved could have been in an earlier draft of the play. 82

83

84

In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern (no. 336; melodies in vol. II, pp. 189-91): Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1167a-b, 1173a-b; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 3231a-33; Braunschweiger Osterspiel, ll. 81-84; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 122v (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 226); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 8018a-b, 8020c-d, 8020h-i; Einsiedler Osterspiel, ll. 67-72; Engelberger Osterspiel II, p. 23; Erlau III, ll. 1145j-m; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 300-01; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1185a-87; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 179-81; Münchener Hortulanusszene, ll. 18-19; Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 36-43; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3136a-d; Rheinauer Osterspiel, ll. 8386; Trierer Osterspiel, ll. 109a-13; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, ll. 164a-66b. Not in Schuler: Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1348b-50; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 387a-89; Bozner Osterspiel II, ll. 180a-82 (cf. Traub, Kommentar, p. 152); Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 455a-457 (ibid., p. 149); Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3237 a-d; Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 57v (empty staves); Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, ll. 559a-61; Chiemseer Osterspiel, ll. 68-72; Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 189-90; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 123a-25; Havelberger Osterspiel, ll. 45-48; Hersfelder Osterspiel, ll. 54-57; Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 53-56; Nottulner Osterspiel II, nos. 16, 17; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 224 a-b; Rabers Passion, ll. 3568a-70b; Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 422a-b; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 65-66; Zwickauer Osterspiel Ia, l. 2; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 225, 230; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 133-34; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 790, Klagenfurt; 792, Medingen; 796, Regensburg10. Correction to Schuler: Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3136a-d has notation. Ibid., no. 336 (b); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, vol. IX, p. 959, Vis. IIId1, IIId2. In Feldkircher Osterspiel, ll. 193-95 and Tiroler Osterspiel, ll. 426a-b, Mary replies with the Trisagion; in Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1169a-d, she replies Heu redempcio Israhel , but sings Raboni shortly after (ll. 1173a-b); cf. Ulrich Mehler, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Regensburg, 1981 (Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120), pp. 190-91, who suggests other gaps in this section. Rab[on]i is also missing from Breslauer Osterspielfragment and Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 786-86a, Gernrode1,2, owing to textual incompleteness.

379


The melody of Maria! , which does not come from a liturgical chant, varies somewhat even within the German corpus. There is evidence of a distinctive Sterzing group melody.85 A very simple six-note ascending and descending melody is found in two north German plays, but also in Trier.86 Several other plays have a variety of different settings.87 But a score of plays from a wide geographical spread have a melody with a descending melisma:88

The rising cadence on the last two syllables of Maria found in most of these plays is Gallican rather than Roman.89 In the few which 85

86

87

88

89

Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 388, 389; Bozner Osterspiel II, ll. 181, 182; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 456, 457; Rabers Passion, ll. 3568b, 3570b; Tiroler Osterspiel, l. 422b; similar in Egerer Passionsspiel, l. 8018b. Cf. Rankin, The Mary Magdalene scene , pp. 246-47. Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, l. 560; Trierer Osterspiel, l. 110; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 792, Medingen, ll. 57-58. Admonter Passionsspiel, ll. 1349-50; Erlau III, ll. 1145j-m; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 178-79; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 14. Typical example from Braunschweiger Osterspiel, l. 82. Also in plays transcribed in Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , pp. 246-47: Chiemseer Osterspiel, l. 69; Einsiedler Osterspiel, ll. 68-70; Engelberger Osterspiel II, p. 23; Nottulner Osterspiel I, ll. 36-37; Rheinauer Osterspiel, l. 84; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, l. 65; Zwickauer Osterspiel Ia, l. 2; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, l. 225; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 133. Not considered by Rankin: Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fol. 122v (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, p. 226); Feldkircher Osterspiel, l. 190; Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 53-54; Nottulner Osterspiel II, no. 16; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, l. 224a; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, l. 3136b; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, l. 164b. Also probably Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, l. 3237b; cf. B, l. 3232 (notation in both manuscripts is slightly ambiguous); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 790, Klagenfurt. Similar in Füssener Osterspiel, l. 124. Transcribed in Rankin, The Mary Magdalene Scene , pp. 246-47: Braunschweiger Osterspiel, Chiemseer Osterspiel, Einsiedler Osterspiel, Engelberger Osterspiel II, Nottulner Osterspiel I, Rheinauer Osterspiel, Zwickauer Osterspiel I, Ia, II, III. Add: Brixener Passionsspiel, Erlau III, Feldkircher Osterspiel, Marienberger Osterspiel, Nottulner Osterspiel II, nos. 14, 16; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, Pfarrkir-

380

X. The Empty Tomb

have a falling cadence, a simple shift in underlay places the descending notes, usually four or more, on the second syllable of Maria rather than on the first.90 There is thus at least a reasonable certainty about the likely melodic shape of Maria in the St Gall Passion Play. 105 Quo audito procidens ad pedes eius cantet Iesu, nostra redemptio

(ll. 1339b-c)

Schuler, Bergmann, Mehler and Pflanz correctly identify this as the mode 4 hymn Iesu, nostra redemptio .91 However, Pflanz s treatment is summary; he finds this universally known item only in a Cologne source.92 This hymn, probably of seventh- or eighth-century origin, was extremely widespread in Europe. In the modern Roman rite it is associated with both the Ascension and Corpus Christi, in medieval books more exclusively with the former.93 It made its way into the Easter

90

91

92 93

chers Passionsspiel. Also probably Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A and B. Line numbers as in note 88. Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, Füssener Osterspiel, Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, Trierer Osterspiel, Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 790, Klagenfurt; 792, Medingen. Line numbers as in note 82; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 781, Cividale2, l. 75. Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium, no. 8331; Blume & Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica, vol. LI, no. 58, pp. 95-96; Chevalier, Repertorium Hymnologicum, no. 9582; Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus, vol. I, no. 56; Julian (ed.), Dictionary of Hymnology, pp. 592-93. Cf. Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 286, 287, Bergmann, Studien, p. 197, Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 191, and Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, pp. 108-09. Ibid., p. 109, note 2. Ascension: Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934, pp. 506-07; Antiphonale Romanum secundum liturgiam horarum [ ] dispositum, vol. I: Liber hymnarius cum invitatoriis & aliquibus responsoriis, Paris-Tournai, 1983, pp. 88-89; Breviarium Romanum, 156264, sig. BBiiira; Mainz psalter, Mainz, Martinusbibliothek, Hs. 11, fol. 143v; Mainz

381


plays and ceremonies in the twelfth century.94 Schuler s list of German plays which use the hymn can be supplemented.95 Interestingly, ceremonies and plays are anything but consistent in placing the hymn. The main variants are: at the start of the Visitatio;96

94

95

96

hymnary and sequentiary, fifteenth century, Frankfurt, Barth. 49, fol. 15v; Worms breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 522, fol. 8; Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 310; Speyer breviary, Vatican, cod. pal. lat. 514, fol. 30va. Corpus Christi: Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, neumis Laudunensibus (Cod. 239) et Sangallensibus (Codicum Sangallensis 359 et Einsidlensis 121) nunc auctum, Solesmes [etc.], 1979, pp. 854-55; Processionale monasticum, p. 85. Schmidtke, Hennig & Lipphardt, Füssener Osterspiel , p. 399; first recorded in Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 824, Tours3, thirteenth century. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 286, 287: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2746 a-c, 7274a-c (1 verse); Benediktbeurer Emmausspiel, l. 23; Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1048a-52b; Brixener Passionsspiel, ll. 4008a-c (1 verse); Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, l. 4090e; Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 7955 a-f; Erlau III, ll. 1040a-d; Erlau IV, ll. 713a-b; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1110a-14; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 213-14; Luzerner Osterspiel 1545, l. 10471b; Rheinauer Osterspiel, ll. 128-32; Trierer Osterspiel, ll. 69a-71a; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, ll. 100a-f. Not in Schuler: Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, 444, 1278; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 96a-99; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 266a-b; (cf. Traub, DebsCodex , p. 341); Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fol. 61v (1 verse; empty staves); Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, ll. 510a-12; Chiemseer Osterspiel, ll. 96-116; Erlau III, ll. 1282a-c; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 10a-36; Hersfelder Osterspiel, Visitatio, ll. 26-33; Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel, p. 487; Rabers Passion, ll. 3428a-c; Tiroler Osterspiel, separate Visitatio, ll. 94a-c; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 2a-14; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 132a-148 (and vernacular version, ll. 149-74); Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 6a-18 (vernacular only). Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 213, Gerresheim1; 238b, Köln15; 590, Indersdorf; 785, Gandersheim; 792, Medingen; 828, Delft. Füssener Osterspiel, Luzerner Passionsspiel, ll. 10471a-b; cf. Luzerner Osterspiel (Hans Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel. Gestützt auf die Textabschrift von M. Blakemore Evans und unter Verwendung seiner Vorarbeiten zu einer kritischen Edition nach den Handschriften herausgegeben, 3 vols., Bern, 1967 (Schriften herausgegeben unter dem Patronat der Schweizerischen Geisteswissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft, 7), vol III: Textteile 1597, 1616. Anmerkungen, Quellen, Glossar, p. 235, note to vor v. 10472 (after apothecary scene). Zwickauer Osterspiel I, III; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 213, Gerresheim1; 590, Indersdorf;

382

X. The Empty Tomb

between the Visitatio and the Hortulanus scene;97 when the news of the Resurrection is passed on to the apostles.98 Other locations are also found.99 The hymn frequently began the Emmaus or Peregrinus plays, though these are almost exclusively French or Italian.100 The placing of the hymn in the St Gall Passion Play is thus most unusual with reference to the overall tradition.101 Plays with notation show the standard hymn tune:

828, Delft (in apothecary scene). Line numbers as in note 95. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, Bozner Osterspiel III, Brandenburger Osterspielfragment, Egerer Passionsspiel, Erlau III, l. 1040a-d, Hersfelder Osterspiel, Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, Rabers Passion, Tiroler Osterspiel, Trierer Osterspiel, Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, Zwickauer Osterspiel II, Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 785, Gandersheim (a rather non-mimetic ceremony); 792, Medingen. Line numbers as in note 95. 98 Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil; Chiemseer Osterspiel; Erlau III, ll. 1280a-d; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel; Rheinauer Osterspiel. Line numbers as in note 95. 99 Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 2746b-c (after Mary Magdalene s repentance); ll. 7274 a-c (sung by good souls released from Hell on way to Heaven); Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, l. 4090e (before visit to apothecary); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 238b, Köln15 (1664) (end of Elevatio). 100 Benediktbeurer Emmausspiel, l. 23; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 808, Beauvais; 811, Palermo; 812-15, Rouen6-9; 817, St-Lhomer2, Blois; 819, Syracuse4; Smoldon, The Music of the Medieval Church Dramas, pp. 189-94. De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 290-91, sees the Peregrinus play or ceremony as the original context of the hymn in drama. 101 Mehler, Dicere und cantare , p. 191, note 235; Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, no. 286; vol. I, tables between pp. 16 and 17; conspectus, p. 112. 97

383

The St Gall Passion Play 2. Quae te vicit clementia, Ut ferres nostra crimina, Crudelem mortem patiens, Ut nos a morte tolleres? 3. Inferni claustra penetrans, Tuos captivos redimens, Victor triumpho nobili Ad dextram Patris residens. 4. Ipsa te cogit pietas, Ut mala nostra superes, Parcendo et voti compotes Nos tuo vultu saties.102

Pflanz s assumption that only the first verse was used, because the others transcend the context of a Passion play, is belied by the dramatic tradition: whilst some plays do restrict themselves to a single verse, others do not.103 The use of the hymn at the start of Easter plays and ceremonies, and between the Visitatio and the Hortulanus episodes, is not in the least inhibited by the fact that, especially in verses 3-5, it expresses a factual and theological view of Christ s death and resurrection which the protagonists could not have had at the time. Indeed, some plays seem deliberately to contrast the expansive joy of the hymn with a return to Mary s almost claustrophobic anxiety before the Hortulanus encounter,104 and in others the hymn is associated 102

103

104

Speyer antiphonal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 2, fol. 310. A fifth verse (doxology), recorded in Blume & Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica, vol. LI, p. 96, Antiphonale monasticum, pp. 506-07, and Processionale monasticum, p. 95 is not found in Mainz, Worms or Speyer sources (see note 93). Melody in: Benediktbeurer Emmausspiel, Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, Brixener Passionsspiel, Chiemseer Osterspiel, Egerer Passionsspiel, Erlau IV, Füssener Osterspiel, Rabers Passion, Rheinauer Osterspiel, Tiroler Osterspiel, Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, Zwickauer Osterspiel I, II, III. Line numbers as in note 95. Melodic decorations in Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 11-14, 19-22, 29-32, are highly unusual: cf. Schmidtke, Hennig & Lipphardt, Füssener Osterspiel , p. 399. Cf. Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen, p.109. Single verse: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, Brixener Passionsspiel, Rabers Passion, Tiroler Osterspiel. More than one verse: Klosterneuburger Osterspiel (precise number uncertain); Chiemseer Osterspiel (four verses plus doxology); Hersfelder Osterspiel (two verses plus doxology); Rheinauer Osterspiel (three verses); Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel (two verses); Zwickauer Osterspiel I, II, III: (three verses, plus doxology in II). Line numbers as in note 95. E.g. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1048a-78; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1110a-38; Tiroler Osterspiel, separate Visitatio, ll. 94a-c.

384

X. The Empty Tomb

with mourning Jesus s death.105 The number of verses will hardly have been limited by psychological considerations, but rather by how much time the director, or the audience, would have been prepared to concede to a sung item which was not accompanying any other action: Jesus simply stands in front of Mary as she sings. But a modern sensibility is not normative: a fourteenth-century audience might well have found the hymn theologically and aesthetically worthy of extended performance (it would in any case take only about twenty seconds per verse). In the St Gall Passion Play, from the Harrowing of Hell to the end the proportion of sung to spoken or mimetic material is very high. In the Visitatio it is at its maximum; music takes up a third or more of the total performance time.106 In a section which presents itself as largely musical, it cannot be assumed that every second of superfluous music will have been trimmed away. The other two Maries have told the apostles of Christ s resurrection (ll. 1343a-47). Peter now asks Mary Magdalene to tell him what she has seen at the tomb: 106, 107, 108 [106] Tunc veniens Maria Magdalena cantet Petrus Dic nobis, Maria, quid vidisti in via [107] Respondet Maria Sepulcrum Christi [108] Tunc Apostoli Scimus Christum surrexisse Iesus vadat ad paradysum 105

106

(ll. 1347a-e)

Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, l. 213: Apostoli sine cessatione murmurant Hymnum istum plangentes Dominum ; Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 2a-14. Approximate estimated timings: music ( Media vita ; Quem quaeritis dialogue; Christ/Mary Magdalene dialogue; Jesu, nostra redemptio ; Victimae paschali extracts): 4-4.5 minutes (assuming one verse each of Media vita and Jesu, nostra redemptio ); spoken dialogue: 6-6.5 minutes; movement not simultaneous with sung items: probably less than two minutes (l. 1131a: Maria Jacobi and Maria Salome leave the tomb; l. 1342a: Maria Jacobi and Maria Salome go to the disciples (may both be a single movement); l. 1347a: Mary Magdalene goes to the disciples).

385


The identity of the play s final chants is not in doubt; they are from the very well-known mode 1 sequence Victimae paschali : Victimae paschali laudes immolent Christiani. Agnus redemit oves; Christus innocens Patri reconciliavit peccatores. Mors et vita duello conflixere mirando; dux vitae mortuus regnat vivus. Dic nobis, Maria, quid vidisti in via? Sepulchrum Christi viventis, et gloriam vidi resurgentis; Angelicos testes, sudarium et vestes. Surrexit Christus spes mea; praecedet suos in Galilaea(m). Credendum est magis soli Mariae veraci quam Iudaeorum turbae fallaci. Scimus Christum surrexisse de mortuis vere; Tu nobis victor rex miserere.107

This sequence, in the medieval liturgy often associated with Easter Week rather than Easter Sunday as in the modern Roman rite,108 is a staple both of Easter ceremonies and drama: it appears relatively often in the German Type II Visitatio.109 Schuler lists nearly thirty German plays, and there are a good many more.110 A full treatment of the use of this sequence in drama is clearly impossible here. 107

108

109

110

Analecta Hymnica, vol LIV, no. 7; Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus, vol. II, pp. 95-97 (no. CXX); vol. V, p. 58 (no. 50); Liber usualis, p. 780. Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 170v (Tuesday of Easter Week); Mainz missal and ritual, Frankfurt, Barth. 107, fols. 61v-62; Mainz missal, Barth. 118, fol. 2 (both Easter Day); Missale Maguntinum, 1507, sig. n iir, iiiv, ivr, etc.; printed Worms missal, 1488, fols. LXXIIIva, LXXIVva, LXXVra, LXXVIvb, LXXVIIvb (= sig. k iva, iiva, iiira, ivvb, vvb) (Easter Monday and all of Easter Week); Speyer missal, Speyer, Bistumsarchiv, Hs. 1, fols. cxxivb-cxxiira, cxxxiiira; printed Speyer missal, 1501, fols. LXXIIIIrb-va, LXXVra (= sig. k iirb-va, k iiira) (Tuesday and Wednesday of Easter Week). Cf. Christian Väterlein (ed.), Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Kassel [etc.], 1982 (Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87), fol. 204 (Wednesday or Thursday of Easter Week); Liber usualis, p. 780 (Easter Sunday). Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, index (vol. IX, pp. 1066-67) records the whole sequence in forty-eight ceremonies from twenty-eight German centres (Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Bohemia), and the Dic nobis, Maria dialogue in 113 ceremonies from twenty-seven German centres. Cf. De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 101, 179-91. In Schuler, Musik der Osterfeiern, nos. 651, 652: Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll.

386

X. The Empty Tomb

The dialogic section, from Dic nobis, Maria , had of course considerable dramatic potential which its various users were not slow to realize. Repeating the question and having it answered by the three sections Sepulchrum Christi viventis , Angelicos testes and Surrexit Christus spes mea might disturb the melodic structure and flow of the sequence, but its dramatic power was clearly felt to make up for this, and this threefold repetition is found even in relatively early liturgical sources.111 The repeated question becomes a very frequent feature of ceremonies, especially from southern Germany; most are fifteenth-century or later, but there are some earlier examples.112 The heightened dramatic feeling is perhaps seen in the

111

112

7763a-79b; Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1229a-f; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, B, ll. 3333b-65; Braunschweiger Osterspiel, ll. 89-108; Brixener Passionsspiel, MS, fols. 128-129v (Wackernell [ed.], Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, pp. 235-37); cf. ll. 4254-55 (p. 424); Egerer Passionsspiel, ll. 8070a-8106d; Einsiedler Osterspiel, ll. 56-58, 105-12; Engelberger Osterspiel II, p. 26; Erlau III, ll. 1202a-42d; Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 311-15; Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel, ll. 1246a-80; Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, ll. 215-30; Nottulner Osterspiel I, pl. VI; Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, ll. 3220a-34a; Rheinauer Osterspiel, ll. 11727, 148-53; Trierer Osterspiel, ll. 179a (not dialogic); Wiener Osterspiel, l. 1023a; Wolfenbütteler Osterspiel, ll. 230a-81a. Not in Schuler: Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, ll. 1345-51; Admonter Passionsspiel, fols. 108-110v, ll. 1369-97; Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil, ll. 509b-22b; Bozner Osterspiel III, ll. 583a-623; Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A, ll. 3337b-59, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, MS, fols. 60v-61v; Chiemseer Osterspiel, ll. 118-34; Füssener Osterspiel, ll. 138a-73; Havelberger Osterspiel, ll. 67-84; Hersfelder Osterspiel, ll. 73-86; Marienberger Osterspiel, ll. 67-87; Osnabrücker Osterspiel, ll. 244a-54a, 280a-84b (from Dic nobis, Maria on); Zwickauer Osterspiel I, ll. 89a-124; Zwickauer Osterspiel II, ll. 301a-42; Zwickauer Osterspiel III, ll. 186a-252. Cf. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, items in note 109. Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus, vol. II, p. 96, citing Munich and Vatican liturgical manuscripts. Traub, Kommentar, p. 42: Durch die Wiederholung der Frage Dic nobis Maria wird zwar der Bau der Sequenzversikel gestört, aber eine formale Intensivierung des Dialogs erreicht. De Boor, Textgeschichte, pp. 101-02. Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, records the question as sung three times in about fifty ceremonies, and twice in six, in both cases predominantly from southern Germany; cf. ibid., vol. IX, index, p. 1067 (not a complete list). Early ceremonies: ibid., nos. 350, Trier4; 550, Eich-

387


fact that numerous Visitatio ceremonies give the question not to the chorus but to figures identified as apostles.113 The Passion and Easter plays make frequent use of the repeated question and answer.114 The St Gall Passion Play does not repeat the question, but it is not specified whether Mary s Sepulcrum Christi (107) ended at resurgentis , or included the next phrase Angelicos testes vestes , or even the following one, Surrexit Christus spes mea in Galilaea(m) . All the phrases cadence on the finalis D, and give a satisfactory melodic transition to Scimus Christum surrexisse . In the Visitatio ceremonies where the Dic nobis is asked only once, the practice of answering it with all three sections is widespread. Sometimes these are sung by three different clerics (who may be identified with the three Maries),115 but just as often a single figure, called or representing Mary Magdalene, sings all three sections together.116 Indeed, the ceremonies where the length of Mary s reply is uncertain are very few.117

113

114

115

116

117

stätt1; 621, Moosburg1; 635, Passau5 (all fourteenth century). Apostoli : Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 238b, Köln15; 621-21a, Moosburg1, 2; 642-43, Passau13, 14; 723-25, St Florian5, 6, 7; 740, St Pölten5. Peter and John: 625, Neumarkt; 627, Neustift2. John: 619, Mindelheim. Also Angeli : 316, Rheinau4. Cf. De Boor, Textgeschichte, p. 182. Twice: e.g. Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel, Brixener Passionsspiel, Egerer Passionsspiel, Marienberger Osterspiel. Three times: e.g. Admonter Passionsspiel, Bozner Passionsspiel 1495, A and B, Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil, Braunschweiger Osterspiel, Erlau III, Füssener Osterspiel, Havelberger Osterspiel, Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel, Zwickauer Osterspiel I, II, III, Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, no. 792, Medingen (line numbers as in note 110). Found in approximately twenty ceremonies from eight German centres: Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 190a-b, 192, 195a, Bamberg5, 6, 8, 12; 260, Mainz11; 349, 352, Trier3, 6; 486, Ansbach; 533, Berlin2; 585, Halle; 627, Neustift2; 728-732, 734-735a, St Lambrecht1-4, 6, 8-10. Found in approximately thirty ceremonies from eight German centres: Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern, nos. 585, Halle; 615, 618, Melk3, 7; 619, Mindelheim; 632-34, 637, 639-39a, 641-43, Passau2-4, 7, 9, 10, 12-14 (and in numerous other Passau ceremonies); 682, Ranshofen; 719-20, St Florian1, 2; 756, Vorau1; 761-63, Wien1-3. Ibid., nos. 374, Würzburg4; 617, Melk6; 738, St Pölten3.

388

X. The Empty Tomb

In Passion and Easter plays, the arrangement with Mary Magdalene singing all three sections is found in earlier examples, including the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle.118 Later in Hessia, in Alsfeld, the directions are not so clear.119 In this light, it looks likely that Mary Magdalene did sing right through to praecedet suos in Galilaeam . The section Credendum est magis was not included in St Gall, testimony to its general downplaying of the antisemitism so common in the German Passion plays. The melody of the sequence in medieval German sources differs slightly from the modern Roman melody in the cadences (see the chant on the next page). The play s last direction is Iesus vadat ad Paradysum (l. 1347e). This might have been one of the play s unaccompanied movements (see the discussion of chant no. 96 in Chapter IX). Another possible interpretation of the direction is that the Victimae Paschali dialogue was intended to cover Jesus s movement to Heaven, and this it would most fittingly and effectively have done.

118

119

Chiemseer Osterspiel, Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel (may have stopped at resurgentis ), Klosterneuburger Osterspiel, Nottulner Osterspiel I, Nottulner Osterspiel II (all line numbers as in note 110). Alsfelder Passionsspiel, ll. 7768a-b: Sepulcrum Christi [ ] , 7775a-b: Angelicos testes (may have stopped at vestes ).

389


120

120

Mainz gradual, Frankfurt, lat. qu. 44, fol. 170v. Also in medieval and early modern sources in note 108. Cf. modern Roman melody in Liber usualis, p. 780.

390

Chapter XI

Conclusions hat, very briefly, can be learned from this detailed examination of the musical stratum of the St Gall Passion Play? Liturgy and localization A central insight, applicable to Pflanz s only partially successful work and its critics, is that liturgical approach definitely can help to localize plays, provided it is applied to the right plays in a methodically correct way. Pflanz s mistakes show what is necessary if the method is to succeed. One must have a detailed knowledge of the liturgical tradition of the relevant diocese(s) based on familiarity with a broad range of primary sources. In the case of some uses which have not been intensively studied, this may involve primary research to locate, identify and analyse extant sources; and as with the diocese of Worms, there are uses whose medieval sources turn out to be extremely rare. One must be aware of variations in a single use both over time and between different areas within one diocese. One must recognize that the method will not always yield simple, unambivalent results, and that it will not be applicable at all to temporale chants which are not diocesespecific, so that it will not work with every play. These are significant restrictions, and scholars must beware of undue optimism. In a recent article on the Innsbrucker Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt, for instance, Neumann expresses hopes of liturgical localization of the play which may prove unwarranted.1 The play s liturgical chants are, as he recog1

Bernd Neumann, Das Innsbrucker Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt : Gedanken zu einer Neuedition , Neue Beiträge zur Germanistik (=Doitsu Bungaku) 109 (2002), pp. 191-206, esp. 203-04.


nizes, mostly from the feast of the Assumption;2 and this was one which did not exhibit many local variants, certainly not by the standards of the liturgies of locally venerated saints. Within the understood limits, however, it is a viable approach. In the particular case of the St Gall Passion Play it has proved its worth, and a number of other German plays might respond to a similar investigation. Chants as Reconstructible The St Gall Passion Play chants have proved reconstructible within a fairly small triangle of error . One reason for this is the fact that the German dramatic tradition as a whole shows remarkable consistency in the corpus of its melodies, a consistency which emerges more clearly from a detailed, discursive, comparative treatment of the evidence than from the necessarily rather lapidary presentation in Schuler. There are variations, there are questions to which (at least in the present state of our knowledge) we have no ready answers, but in general German drama does operate with a stable corpus of chants which entirely belies Schützeichel s pessimistic image of chant-incipits as hazy clues to a barely recuperable musical archaeology. Renate Amstutz s success in reconstructing the music of the Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel, and the positive results of the present investigation, strongly suggest the feasibility of recovering the musical stratum of a good many plays transmitted in incipit-only manuscripts. A systematic investigation of a number of such plays would be a sensible next step. An obvious candidate would be the Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. The manuscript, though almost entirely devoid of musical signs and information, is a strongly performance-oriented document which meticulously records stage directions and chant incipits. The play is localized in a known and well documented liturgical tradition, the Frankfurt variant of the Mainz rite. The very few items of notation suggest a careful concern for musical precision. The five neumes over 2

Ibid., pp. 197, 203.

392

XI. Conclusions

the incipit Ductus est Jesus , for instance, may seem sparse and random, but are in fact precisely enough to identify the chant as the antiphon rather than the similarly worded responsory.3 A chant reconstruction would give a much more rounded picture of this sophisticated large-scale spectacle, whose liturgico-musical stratum is particularly rich; this would complement the detailed text-philological work done in Janota s recent edition and Wolf s Kommentarband.4 In its turn, this might offer important clues to the music of the later Frankfurter Passionsspiel, and indeed of the other Hessian group plays; significant insights into the totality of that regional performance tradition could be gained as a result.5 The Meaning of Music The detailed consideration of the music of the St Gall Passion Play and of other German plays confirms very strongly that the music of medieval drama is no mere Einlage but is profoundly constitutive of the play s nature, structure and effects. The most obvious aspect is the quasi-sacramentality produced by many of the sung liturgical items. Perhaps the most interesting example of this is in the Mary Magdalene 3

4

5

René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus antiphonalium officii, Roma, 1963-79, 6 vols. (Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta. Series maior. Fontes, 7-12), nos. 2413 and 6529 respectively. Frankfurter Dirigierrolle, 32a. See chapter 5, note 117. Hansjürgen Linke, [Review of Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, vol. I: Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments und des Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragments , Tübingen, 1996], Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 121 (1999), pp. 156-62, esp. 159. Hansjürgen Linke, [Review of Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, vol. II: Alsfelder Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Frankfurter Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments . Edition der Melodien von Horst Brunner, Tübingen, 2002], Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 126 (2004), pp. 359-66, esp. 364-66.

393


scenes, with their relationship to the sacrament of penance; but the liturgischer Grundton of the play is indeed pervasive, as Hartl says. The sheer preponderance of music in the triumphal closing sequences (Visitatio Sepulchri, Hortulanus) is remarkable. The liturgical element has been present throughout the play, though always only as one stratum amongst others. Now it becomes dense and dominant; the play, as it were shifts gear. The Paschal mystery is not so much mimetically represented as quasi-liturgically enacted, proclaimed and welcomed; the audience less watching a performance than assisting at a sacramental act. Trends and Traditions Detailed examination of the German dramatic tradition reveals a considerable number of items the use of which is dictated by definite, strong trends. There is for example distinct evidence for the avoidance of liturgical chant for certain items, even at moments when a liturgical item would be fitting and might even be expected. Examples are Tristis est anima mea and Tamquam ad latronem in the Agony in the Garden sequence, where a range of plays provide convincing evidence that the expected responsories were not in fact used.6 The pattern of some movements being unexpectedly unaccompanied (for example when Jesus leads the Good Souls to Heaven) suggests performance traditions of German drama as yet not fully understood.7 We will be in a position to understand them only when a reasonably sized corpus of plays has been comparatively assessed in detail. Casting A clear idea of the actual music used in the St Gall Passion Play, and of its varying degrees of difficulty, allows a relatively detailed reconstruction of the forces needed to perform the play (see Chapter 4). 6 7

See the discussion of St Gall Passion Play chants nos. 61 and 67 in chapter 7. Ibid., chant no. 96 in chapter 9.

394

XI. Conclusions

Even if this cannot be done to the last detail, it is clear that the chants, and the performers who sing them, are matched in a systematic way, with regard to musical ability and the availability of forces. A plausible picture can be gained of the kind of centre which could have supported a play of this type, and this makes its own contribution to the localization of the play (see Chapter 5). Analyses of other plays might show whether this model of casting is generally applicable. Specifically, notice would have to be taken of several plays where the casting is known, since these tend to select their players on criteria of social precedence. In the Bozner Passionsspiel of 1495, for example, the actors were almost exclusively merchants, skilled artisans and municipal officials.8 How if at all was this hierarchical model of casting reconciled with the need to consider the musical competence of the players? Is hierarchical casting a later medieval approach which supersedes the more liturgically based distribution which seems to operate in the St Gall Passion Play? Can it be seen to correlate with a reduction or simplification of the musical material which the lay characters were expected to perform? There is scope here for well designed interdisciplinary research. The successful musical reconstruction of this play also suggests areas where further progress could readily be made. Performance Resolving most of the musical questions, and presenting the chants in a manner that is performable, will facilitate and stimulate performance of the play, and perhaps of medieval German theatre in general, encouraging German scholarship to engage with this aspect. Medieval religious theatre is a performance genre, and will only ever be ade8

Hannes Obermair, The Social Stages of the City: Vigil Raber and Performance Direction in Bozen/Bolzano (Northern Italy): A Socio-historical Outline , Concilium medii aevi 7 (2004), pp. 193-208, esp. 197-203 (http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ edoc/p/cma/7-04/obermair.pdf).

395


quately apprehended and understood in performance, as Young himself recognized.9 Here the more pragmatically theaterfreudig AngloSaxon approach may have something to give the Germanic tradition. Who can say what further insights may emerge from a vigorous tradition of performance of the German corpus? Possible Further Developments A great deal more work is needed: detailed examinations of the musical scenario of other plays would help to answer some of the questions thrown up by the St Gall Passion Play but which it has not been possible to resolve here. Even in the case of plays where localization is not a problem, comparison of how their musical material relates to their known local liturgical tradition is potentially fruitful. To what extent is melodic material and ritual action taken over directly or indirectly in the play in question? Does this vary regionally, chronologically, or both? To what extent can details of dramatic performance practice be derived from liturgical practice? Here too the Frankfurt plays, which can be assessed against a known local liturgical tradition, would be an obvious place to start, but many other German plays would no doubt respond to treatment. As is almost invariably the case in medieval literature, the comparative dimension is unavoidable. Investigating the St Gall Passion Play adequately has required engaging with an entire dramatic tradition. Similarly, the answers to many of the questions thrown up by this one play will emerge only from a thorough study of the whole genre; but in turn they will make a powerful contribution to the understanding of that genre as a whole.

9

Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church, 2 vols., Oxford, 1933, vol. I, pp. xiii-xiv.

396

Chapter XII

Bibliography

Plays and other primary sources Information on the plays is set out as follows: the title of the play used in this book, usually following Kurt Ruh [et al.], Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, Berlin-New York, 1978- [2nd ed.]. where applicable the siglum and number from Rolf Bergmann, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele und Marienklagen des Mittelalters, München, 1986. where applicable other title(s) by which the play has been or is known the manuscript source(s) of the play, with date the edition or facsimile from which the play is cited in this book other editions. Not all editions and facsimiles of every play are listed; for full details, for secondary literature, and for complete descriptions of the manuscripts, readers are referred to Bergmann, Katalog, and Ruh [et al.], Verfasserlexikon. The St Gall Passion Play: St. Galler Passionsspiel; GP; 54; St. Galler Mittelrheinisches Passionsspiel, Mittelrheinisches Passionsspiel, St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu; Sankt Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, cod. 919, pp. 197-218 (a paper booklet bound into the manuscript); Rudolf Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978, pp. 99-157 (text); pp. 331-51 (facsimile); Leben Jesu, in Franz Joseph Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters:, 2 vols., Karlsruhe, 1846-48, vol. I, pp. 49-128; Emil Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977]; Eduard Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41, Halle/Saale, 1952, pp. 56-131.


Other plays: Admonter Passionsspiel; AdP; 3; Admont, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 812, fols. 1124, 1560-90; Karl Konrad Polheim (ed.), Das Admonter Passionsspiel, 3 vols., München [etc.], 1972-80, vol. I: Textausgabe. Faksimileausgabe; vol. 2: Untersuchungen zur Überlieferung, Sprache und Osterhandlung; vol. 3: Untersuchungen zur Passionshandlung, Aufführung und Eigenart. Nebst Studien zu Hans Sachs und einer kritischen Ausgabe seines Passionsspieles. Alsfelder Dirigierrolle; AD; 7; Alsfeld, Museum der Stadt, Verschiedenes, IV, fols. 1-42, beginning of sixteenth century; Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, 2 vols., Tübingen, 1996-2002, vol. II, pp. 149-90; Christoph Treutwein (ed.), Das Alsfelder Passionsspiel: Untersuchungen zu Überlieferung und Sprache; Edition der Alsfelder Dirigierrolle, Germanistische Bibliothek, 4, Heidelberg, 1987. Alsfelder Passionsspiel; AP; 70; Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel, 2o Ms. poet. et roman. 18, fols. 1-81v, fifteenth century, with additions up to 1517; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II, pp. 191-905; Richard Froning (ed.), Das Drama des Mittelalters, Stuttgart, 1891-92 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1964], vol. II, p. 547-, vol. III, p. 864. Augsburger Osterspiel, see: Feldkircher Osterspiel. Augsburger Passionsspiel; AuP; 116; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 4370, fols. 1-65v, fifteenth century; August Hartmann (ed.), Das Oberammergauer Passionsspiel in seiner ältesten Gestalt, Leipzig, 1880. Benediktbeurer Emmausspiel; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4660a, fols. VIIr-v, first half thirteenth century; Wilhelm Meyer (ed.), Fragmenta Burana , in Festschrift zur Feier des hundertfünfzigjährigen Bestehens der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Klasse, Berlin, 1901, pp. 136-37 (text), plates 12-13 (facsimile); Otto Schumann & Bernhard Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana: Mit Benutzung der Vorarbeiten Wilhelm Meyers kritisch herausgegeben von Alfons Hilka und Otto Schumann, vol. I:3, Die Trink- und Spielerlieder. Die geistlichen Dramen. Nachträge, Heidelberg, 1970, pp. 184-86 (CB 26*); Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church, Oxford, 1933, vol. I, pp. 463-56; Walther Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, Berlin-New York, 1975-90, vol. V, pp. 1656-58 (no. 820).

398

XII. Bibliography

Benediktbeurer Osterspiel; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4660 a, fols. V-VIv, first half thirteenth century; Meyer (ed.), Fragmenta Burana , pp. 126-30 (text), plates 8-11 (facsimile); Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, vol. I:3, pp. 134-49 (CB 15*); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 432-37; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1711-18 (no. 830). (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel; BP; 119; Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4660, fols. 107-112v, 122030; Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, vol. I:3, pp. 149-172 (CB 16*); Hartl (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel, pp. 12-44; Peter Dronke (transl. and ed.), Nine Medieval Latin Plays, Cambridge Medieval Classics, 1, Cambridge, 1994, pp. 185-237; Benedikt Konrad Vollmann (ed.), Carmina Burana: Texte und Übersetzungen, Bibliothek des Mittelalters, 13, Frankfurt am Main, 1987, pp. 816-59; facsimile: Bernhard Bischoff (ed.), Carmina Burana. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München, clm 4660 + 4660a, München, 1967 [rpt. 1970]. (Kleines) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4660a, fols. IIIv-IVv, second half or end thirteenth century; Meyer (ed.), Fragmenta Burana , pp. 123-24 (text), plates 5-7 (facsimile); Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, vol. I:3, pp. 127-29 (CB 13*). Benediktbeurer Weihnachtspiel; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4660, fols. 99-105, early thirteenth century; Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, vol. I:3, pp. 86-111 (CB 227, 228). Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel; BeO; 20; Rheinisches Osterspiel; Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Ms. germ. 2o 1219, fols. 2-28, 1460; Hans Rueff (ed.), Das Rheinische Osterspiel der Berliner Handschrift Ms. germ. fol. 1219. Mit Untersuchungen zur Textgeschichte des deutschen Osterspiels, Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, N.F. 18:I, Berlin, 1925, pp. 136-206. Bordesholmer Marienklage; M 69; Kiel, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Ms. Bord. 53, fols. 1-23v, c. 1475; Gustav Kühl (ed.), Die Bordesholmer Marienklage , Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 24 (1898), pp. 40-66 (text) and Anhang , 1-14 (melodies). Bozner Abendmahlspiel; BzAb; 137/XV; Bozner Gründonnerstagsspiel; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 107v-118, fifteenth century; Walther Lipphardt & Hans-Gert Roloff (eds.), Die geistlichen Spiele

399


des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 14-19, Bern, 1980-, vol. I, pp. 373-426. Bozner Fronleichnamsspiel; BzF; 113; Meran, private collection of Dr Carl von Braitenberg, no shelfmark, pp. 1-34, 1543; Anton Dörrer (ed.), Tiroler Umgangsspiele: Ordnungen und Sprechtexte der Bozner Fronleichnamsspiele und verwandter Figuralprozessionen vom Ausgang des Mittelalters bis zum Abstieg des Aufgeklärten Absolutismus gesammelt, eingeleitet und mit besonderer Unterstützung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft ediert, Schlern-Schriften, 160, Innsbruck, 1957, pp. 193-206; Carl von Braitenberg (ed.), Der Bozner Umgang und das Georgispiel vom Jahre 1543 , Der Schlern 52 (1978), pp. 508-15. Bozner Grablegungsspiel I; BzGr I; 137/II; Bozner Grablegungsspiel, Bozner Kreuzabnahmespiel I; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 12-17v, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 51-71. Bozner Grablegungsspiel II; BzGr II; 137/XIV; Bozner Kreuzabnahmespiel II; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 102-07, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 347-71. Bozner HimmelfahrtspieI; BzH; 137/I; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( DebsCodex ), fols. 1-11, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 15-49. Bozner Marienklage I; M 124 (=137) I; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( DebsCodex ), fols. 63-75v, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 213-49. Bozner Marienklage II; M 124 (=137) II; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 91-98v, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 305-33. Bozner Osterspiel I, 1. Teil; BzO I, 1. Teil; 137/III; Bozner Osterspiel (I); Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 18-26v, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 73-106. Bozner Osterspiel I, 2. Teil; BzO I, 2. Teil; 137/V; Bozner Osterspiel (II); Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 34v-42, fifteenth century;

400

XII. Bibliography

Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 137-69. Bozner Osterspiel II; BzO II; 137/VIII; Bozner Osterspiel (III)-Fragmente; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 56-62v, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 189-212. Bozner Osterspiel III; BzO III; 137/VIII; Bozner Osterspiel (IV); Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 79-87, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 25186. Bozner Palmsonntagsspiel; BzPa; 138; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. V, fols. 173, beginning of the sixteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. IV, pp. 7-95. Bozner Passionsspiel; BzP; 1495 [Manuscript A: Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, Ms. F. 6 (Amerikaner Passion [68]); Manuscript B: Bozen, Franziskanerkloster, Ms. I 51 (23)]; Bruno Klammer (ed.), Bozner Passion 1495: Die Spielhandschriften A und B, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 20, Bern [etc.], 1986.* Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 1. Teil; BzP (1514), 1. Teil; 111; Meran, private collection of Dr Carl von Braitenberg, no shelfmark, fols. 1-26 (Maundy Thursday play), fols. 28-59v (Palm Sunday play), 1514; no edition. Cited from the photocopy of the manuscript in the library of the Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Literatur, University of Cologne. Bozner Passionsspiel 1514, 2. Teil; BzP (1514), 2. Teil; 112; Meran, private collection of Dr Carl von Braitenberg, no shelfmark, fols. 1-34 (Good Friday play), fols. 43-76 (Osterspiel), 1514; no edition. Cited from the photocopy of the manuscript in the library of the Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Literatur, University of Cologne. Bozner Verkündigungsspiel; BzVk; 137/XIII; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. IV ( Debs-Codex ), fols. 99-101v, fifteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. I, pp. 335-46. *

The standard nomenclature of these two manuscripts, given above, is reversed in Klammer s edition, which refers to the Cornell manuscript as B , the Bozen manuscript as A . In this book, the play is quoted from Klammer s edition, using his manuscript sigla.

401


Brandenburger Osterspielfragment; BdOf; 24; Brandenburg, Domstiftsbibliothek, Ms. K 466 (manuscript fragments from incunable K 466), end of the fourteenth century; Renate Schipke & Franzjosef Pensel (eds.), Das Brandenburger Osterspiel: Fragmente eines neuentdeckten mittelalterlichen geistlichen Osterspiels aus dem Domarchiv in Brandenburg/Havel, Beiträge aus der Deutschen Staatsbibliothek, 4, Berlin, 1986. Braunschweiger Osterspiel; Wolfenbüttel, Landeshauptarchiv, ms. VII B 203, fols. 23-27v (lectionary, Braunschweig, St Blasius), second half fourteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1498-1504 (no. 780); Heinrich Sievers (ed.), Die lateinischen liturgischen Osterspiele der Stiftskirche St. Blasien zu Braunschweig, Veröffentlichungen der niedersächsischen Musikgesellschaft, 2, Wolfenbüttel, 1936, pp. 23-57. Breslauer Marienklage I; M 31; Wroc ł aw, Archiwum Pánstwowe we Wroc awiu (State Archives), Ms G I, 2 (lost), first half fourteenth century; J. Klapper (ed.), Das mittelalterliche Volksschauspiel in Schlesien , Mitteilungen der schlesischen Gesellschaft für Volkskunde 29 (1928), pp. 168-216, esp. 205-08; Alwin Schultz (ed.), Bruchstücke eines Passionsspiels , Germania 16 (1871), pp. 57-60. Breslauer Osterspielfragment; BrOf; 27; Wroc aw, Bibliotheka Uniwersytecka, Mss I Q 226 A, IV Q 161, ff. I, IV, and I Q 370, ff. II, III, end of the fourteenth or beginning of the fifteenth century; Klapper (ed.), Das mittelalterliche Volksschauspiel in Schlesien , pp. 208-14 (with facsimile). Brixener Passionsspiel; BiP; 66; Innsbruck, Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, Hs FB 575, fols. 1v-137v, 1551; J. E. Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Litteratur und Sprache Österreichs und seiner Kronländer, 1, Graz, 1897, pp. 353431; also pp. 3-74, 77-177, 181-253.* Chiemseer Osterspiel; Nürnberger Osterspiel; Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Hs. 22 923, fols. 105v-107v, thirteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1507-12 (no. 782); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 632-34. *

Wackernell s editorial method means that certain line-numbers cannot be known accurately. In these cases, reference is made to the relevant page of Wackernell s edition.

402

XII. Bibliography

Docens Marienklage; M 100; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 19614, fols. 444-447v, late fourteenth century; edition of part 1 (ll. 1-74): Philipp Wackernagel (ed.), Das deutsche Kirchenlied von der ältesten Zeit bis zum Anfang des XVII. Jahrhunderts, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1864-70 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1964], vol. II, pp. 369-71; edition of part 2 (ll. 75-157b): Karin Schneider (ed.), Docens Marienklage , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 106 (1977), pp. 138-45. Donaueschinger Passionsspiel; DP; 35; Villinger Passionsspiel I; Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Hs Donaueschingen 137, fols. 1-88v, 1470-1500; Anthonius H. Touber (ed.), Das Donaueschinger Passionsspiel: Nach der Handschrift mit Einleitung und Kommentar neu herausgegeben, Stuttgart, 1985; Hartl (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. IV, pp. 5-287. Egerer Passionsspiel; EP; 122; Egerer Fronleichmamsspiel; Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Hs. 7060, fols. 1-140v, c. 1460; Gustav Milchsack (ed.), Egerer Fronleichnamsspiel, Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins Stuttgart, 156, Tübingen, 1881; important corrections to Milchsack s edition in Hansjürgen Linke, Zum Text des Egerer Fronleichnamspiels , Euphorion 78 (1984), pp. 275-79. Egmonter Osterspiel; The Hague, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Cod. 71 J 70, fols. 163v-170 (Hymnal, Benedictine abbey of St Adalbertus, Egmont), fifteenth century; Joseph Smits van Waesberghe (ed.), A Dutch Easter Play , Musica disciplina 7 (1953), pp. 15-37 (version B); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1696-1701 (no. 827). Einsiedler Osterspiel; Einsiedeln, Stiftsbibliothek, Ms. 300, pp. 93-94, twelfth-thirteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1513-1517 (no. 783); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 390-92. Engelberger Osterspiel I; Engelberg, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 103, fol. 123v (from Disdibodenberg Abbey), beginning of the thirteenth century; P. Ephrem Omlin (ed.), Das ältere Engelberger Osterspiel und der Codex 103 der Stiftsbibliothek Engelberg , in Alfred A. Schmid (ed.), Corolla Heremitana: Festschrift für Linus Birchler, Olten-Freiburg im Breisgau, 1964, pp. 101-26; Hartl (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 244-45; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. II, pp. 250-51 (no. 199). Engelberger Osterspiel II; Engelberg, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 314, fols. 75v78v, (1372); Paul-Roman Hofer (ed.), Das jüngere Engelberger Osterspiel ,

403


unpublished licentiate dissertation, Richard-Strauß-Konservatorium der Stadt München, 1970; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1517-21 (no. 784). Erlau plays; 40; Erlau (Eger, Hungary), Föegyházmegi Könyvtár (Archdiocesan Library), Cod. B.V.6., fols. 105-28, 1400-40; Wolfgang Suppan (ed.), Texte und Melodien der Erlauer Spiele; herausgegeben [ ] auf Grund einer Textübertragung von Johannes Janota, Musikethnologische Sammelbände, 11, Tutzing, 1990; Karl Ferdinand Kummer (ed.), Erlauer Spiele, Wien, 1882 [rpt. Hildesheim-New York, 1977]: Erlau I; ErW I; Erlauer Weihnachtsspiel I; fols. 105r-v (Suppan [ed.], Texte und Melodien, pp. 17-23) Erlau II; ErW II; Erlauer Weihnachtsspiel II; fols. 105v-07 (ibid., pp. 2541) Erlau III; ErO; Erlauer Osterspiel; fols. 107-16 (ibid., pp. 43-115) Erlau IV; ErM; Erlauer Magdalenenspiel; fols. 116-21 (ibid., pp. 117-151) Erlau V; ErWä; Erlauer Wächterspiel; fols. 121-24 (ibid., pp. 153-177) Erlauer Marienklage; M 44; fols. 124v-28 (ibid., pp. 179-211) Feldkircher Osterspiel; FeO; 41; Augsburger Osterspiel; Feldkirch, Bibliothek des Kapuzinerklosters, Ms. Liturg. 1 retr.m, fols. 74-92, between 1560 and 1598; Walther Lipphardt (ed.), Das lateinisch-deutsche Augsburger Osterspiel und das Passionslied des Mönchs von Salzburg. In Abbildung aus dem Ms. Liturg. 1 rtr des Kapuzinerklosters Feldkirch, Litterae, 55, Göppingen, 1978; Walther Lipphardt, Ein lateinisch-deutsches Osterspiel aus Augsburg (16. Jh.) , Jahrbuch des Vorarlberger Landesmuseumsvereins (1972 [1975]), pp. 17-29 (text and facsimiles). Frankfurter Dirigierrolle; FD; 43; Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Ms. Barth. 178 (Ausstellung 29), 1315-45; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, pp. 7-33 (diplomatic transcription), 35-52 (critical edition). Froning (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. II, pp. 340-74. References in this study are to the numbered sections of the text. Frankfurter Osterspielfragment, Fof; 43a; Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Fragm.germ. III 6, first half fourteenth century; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, pp. 422-26; Hermann Lomnitzer (ed.), Ein Textfund zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , in Volker Honemann & Nigel Palmer (eds.), Deutsche Handschriften 1100-1400: Oxforder Kolloquium 1985, Tübingen, 1988, pp. 590-608 (text: pp. 601-04; facsimile: pp. 605-08).

404

XII. Bibliography

Frankfurter Passionsspiel; FP; 42; Frankfurt am Main, Stadtarchiv, Barth. Bücher VI 63, fols. 1-81, written in 1493; Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I, pp. 55-421; Froning (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. II, pp. 375-534. Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, Hs. A; FbF (A); 44; Freiburg im Breisgau, Stadtarchiv, B I (H) No. 12, fols. 1-61v, 1599; Ernst Martin (ed.), Freiburger Passionsspiele des XVI. Jahrhunderts , Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Beförderung der Geschichts-, Altertums- und Volkskunde von Freiburg, der Breisgau und den angrenzenden Gebieten 3 (1874), pp. 1-206 (esp. 3-95). Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel, Hs. B; FbF (B); 45; Freiburg im Breisgau, Stadtarchiv, B I (H) No. 13, 1601; Martin (ed.), Freiburger Passionsspiele , pp. 96-194. Friedberger Dirigierrolle; FdD; 52; manuscript, now lost, previously in the collection of Karl Weigand, probably fifteenth century; Ernst Wilhelm Zimmermann (ed.), Das Alsfelder Passionsspiel und die Wetterauer Spielgruppe , Archiv für hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F. 6 (1909), pp. 172-203 (reconstruction). Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragment; FrPf; 53; Fritzlar, Dombibliothek, Ms. 125/30, fols. 1-4v, c. 1460; Karl Brethauer (ed.), Bruchstücke eines hessischen Passionsspiels aus Fritzlar , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 68 (1931), 17-31 (text 18-26). Füssener Osterspiel; HaO; 11; Harburger Osterspiel, also M 3: Harburger (Füssener) Marienklage I; Augsburg, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. II, 1, 4o, 62, fols. 137-41 (Osterspiel); 143-48 (Marienklage), late fourteenth century; Dietrich Schmidtke, Ursula Hennig & Walther Lipphardt (eds.), Füssener Osterspiel und Füssener Marienklage , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 98 (1976), pp. 231-88, 395-423; D. Schmidtke (ed.), Das Füssener Osterspiel und die Füssener Marienklage. Universitätsbibliothek Augsburg (ehemals: Harburg), Cod. II, 1, 4o, 62; in Abbildung herausgegeben. Mit einer literaturwissenschaftlichen Einführung von Ursula Hennig, Litterae, 69, Göppingen, 1983. St. Galler Himmelfahrtsspiel; GH; 56; St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, cod. 1006, pp. 33-44, manuscript dated 1516-26; Mone (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 251-64.

405


Göttweiger Dirigierrolle; GD; 58; Göttweiger Osterspielfragment; Bibliothek des Stiftes Göttweig, Fragm. 354, fifteenth century; Rolf Bergmann (ed.), Die Göttweiger Dirigierrolle eines Osterspiels , in Werner Besch [et al.] (eds.), Festschrift für Siegfried Grosse zum 60. Geburtstag, Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik, 423, Göppingen, 1984, pp. 325-35. Haller Passionsspiel; HlP; 145; Haller Passion; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. XI, 24, 1514; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. III, pp. 163-248. Harburger Osterspiel, see: Füssener Osterspiel Havelberger Osterspiel; Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Ms. Aug. 84. 2o, fols. 23r-v (Liber ordinarius from Havelberg), fifteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1530-33 (no. 787); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 668-69. Heidelberger Passionsspiel; HP; 62; Heidelberg, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Pal. Germ. 402, fols. 1-166v, written in 1514; Gustav Milchsack (ed.), Heidelberger Passionsspiel, Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins Stuttgart, 150, Tübingen, 1880. Hersfelder Osterspiel; St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Ms. 448, p. 106 (copy of a ritual from the Benedictine abbey of Hersfeld), fifteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1534-40 (no. 788); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 667-68. Hessisches Weihnachtsspiel; HeW; 71; Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel, 2o Ms. poet. et roman. 19, fifteenth century; Froning (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. III, pp. 902-39. Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt; IHM; 67; Innsbruck, Universitätsbibliothek, cod. 960, fols. 1-34v, 1391; Mone, Altteutsche Schauspiele, pp. 19-106 (text), 165-75 (apparatus); facsimile: Eugen Thurnher & Walter Neuhauser (eds.), Die Neustifter-Innsbrucker Spielhandschrift

Hansjürgen Linke, Bernd Neumann, Dieter Trauden & Margot Westlinning, Kollation zu Rolf Bergmann: Die Göttweiger Dirigierrolle eines Osterspiels (unpublished typescript, University of Cologne, Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Literatur, undated) offers important corrections to Bergmann s reading of the manuscript.

406

XII. Bibliography

von 1391 (Cod. 960 der Universitätsbibliothek Innsbruck), Litterae, 40, Göppingen, 1975. Innsbrucker (thüringisches) Osterspiel; IO; 67; Innsbruck, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. 960, fols. 35v-50, 1391; Rudolf Meier (ed.), Das Innsbrucker Osterspiel. Das Osterspiel von Muri. Mittelhochdeutsch und neuhochdeutsch; herausgegeben, übersetzt, mit Anmerkungen und einem Nachwort versehen, Stuttgart, 1962; facsimile: Thurnher & Neuhauser (eds.), Die Neustifter-Innsbrucker Spielhandschrift von 1391; Hartl (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. II, pp. 136-89. Kasseler (mittelniederdeutsche) Paradiesspiel-Fragmente; Kassel, Gesamthochschulbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel, 4o Ms. chem. 5 Fragm. 1, second half fourteenth century; Hartmut Broszinski & Hansjürgen Linke (eds.), Kasseler (mnd.) ParadiesspielFragmente , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 116 (1987), pp. 36-52. Kaufbeurer Passionsspiel; Ms A: Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, Cod. poet. et phil. 4o 133, 1562; Ms B: Augsburg, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. III, 2, 4o, 5; Anne Metzler (ed.), Das Kaufbeurer Passionsspiel. Das Kaufbeurer Osterspiel. Zwei Werke des reformatorischen Gemeindegeistlichen in Kaufbeuren und Augsburger Bürgers Michael Lucius aus dem Jahr 1562, Textausgabe und Spielerbiographien (Unpublished dissertation, Augsburg, 1996), pp. 56-223. Klosterneuburger Osterspiel; Klosterneuburg, Stiftsbibliothek, Hs. 574, fols. 142v-44v, twelfth-thirteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1703-11 (no. 829); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 421-29; Schumann & Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana, pp. 134-49; Hartl (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. II, pp. 32-44. Kremsmünsterer (mittelschlesisches) Dorotheenspiel; KmDof; 74; Kremsmünsterer Dorotheenspielfragment; Kremsmünster, Stiftsbibliothek, CC 81, fols. 86v-88v, mid-fourteenth century; Elke Ukena (ed.), Die deutschen Mirakelspiele des Spätmittelalters: Studien und Texte, 2 vols., Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 115, Bern-Frankfurt, 1975, pp. 313-57. Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel; KF; 128; Schwäbisch Hall, Stadtarchiv F 89, fols. 10-118v, 1479; Peter K. Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel, Ausgaben Deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama II, Berlin, 1969.

407


Luzerner Passionsspiel 1545; LuP (1545); 79; Luzerner Osterspiel; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 167 II fol., fols. 1-75; Hans Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel. Gestützt auf die Textabschrift von M. Blakemore Evans und unter Verwendung seiner Vorarbeiten zu einer kritischen Edition nach den Handschriften, 3 vols., Schriften herausgegeben unter dem Patronat der Schweizerischen Geisteswissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft, 7, Bern, 1967, vol. II, pp. 9-294. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1571; LuP (1571); 85; Luzerner Osterspiel; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 171 fol., fols. 1-110; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. I, pp. 73-362. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1583 I; LuP (1583) I; 93; Luzerner Osterspiel; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 172 VIII fol., fols. 1-4v; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. I, pp. 73-83. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1583 II; LuP (1583) II; 94; Luzerner Osterspiel; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 172 IX fol., fols. 1-48v; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. I, pp. 73-208. Luzerner Passionsspiel-Regiematerialien 1583, 2. Teil; LuPRm (1583), 2. Teil; 88; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 172 III, IV fol.; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. III, pp. 196-301 (footnotes). Luzerner Passionsspiel-Regiematerialien 1583 und 1597, 2. Teil; LuPRm (1583-1597), 2. Teil; 90; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 172 V fol.; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. III, pp. 170-73, 181-82, 241. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1597; LuP (1597); 104; Luzerner Osterspiel; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 179 V fol., fols. 1-136; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. I, pp. 267-362; vol. II, pp. 9-241; vol. III, pp. 46-47, 63, 68, 71-74, 78-79. Luzerner Passionsspiel. Musiktafeln; LuPMu; 105; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 181 fol.; no edition. Facsimile: Marshall Blakemore Evans, The Passion Play of Lucerne. An Historical and Critical Introduction, Modern Language Association of America Monograph Series, 14, New York, 1943, after p. 68; translated as: Marshall Blakemore Evans, Das Osterspiel von Luzern: Eine historisch-kritische Einleitung ; [trans.] Paul Hagmann, Schweizer Theaterjahrbuch 27 (1961), pp. 1-275, esp. section 4, Musik , pp. 69-83 and ills. 6-12.

408

XII. Bibliography

Luzerner Passionsspiel 1616, 1. Teil; LuP (1616), 1. Teil; 106; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 185 I fol., fols. 1-91, Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. I, pp. 38-44. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1616, 2. Teil; LuP (1616), 2. Teil; 107; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 185 II fol., fols. 1-80v; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. II, pp. 35-241; vol. III, pp. 57-62, 64-67, 69-74, 78-79, 80-81, 82-84. Luzerner Passionsspiel 1616, 3. Teil; LuP (1616), 3. Teil; 108; Lucerne, Zentralbibliothek, Ms 185 III fol., fols. 1-45v; Wyss (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel, vol. II, pp. 241-94, vol. III, pp. 85-94, 95-158. Maastrichter Osterspiel; The Hague, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Cod. 76 F 3, fols. 3, 14 (Evangeliary, Maastricht), c. 1200; Smits van Waesberghe (ed.), A Dutch Easter Play , (version A); Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1692-96 (no. 826). Maastrichter (ribuarisches) Passionsspiel; MP; 60; Mittelniederländisches Osterspiel, Maastrichter Osterspiel; The Hague, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Cod. 70 E 5, fols. 233v-47v, fourteenth century; Julius Zacher (ed.), Mittelniederländisches Osterspiel , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 2 (1842), pp. 302-50; H.E. Moltzer (ed.), De middelnederlandsche dramatische poëzie, Groningen, 1875, pp. 496-538. Marienberger Osterspiel; Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Cod. Guelf. 309 Novi, fols. 63-64v (Antiphonal, nunnery of Mariengarten near Göttingen), thirteenth century; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1548-51 (no. 791). Moosburger Himmelfahrtsspiel; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 9469, fols. 72v-73v, fourteenth century, before 1362; Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 484-88; Neil Brooks (ed.), Eine liturgisch-dramatische Himmelfahrtsfeier , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 62 (1925), pp. 91-96. Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Katharinenspiel; MhKa; 114; Mühlhausen (Thüringen), Stadtarchiv, Ms. 87/20, pp. 89a-94b, mid-fourteenth century; Otto Beckers (ed.), Das Spiel von den zehn Jungfrauen und das Katharinenspiel, Germanistische Abhandlungen, 24, Breslau, 1905, pp. 125-57. Neither edition has line-numbers.

409


Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel; MhZ; 114; Mühlhausen (Thüringen), Stadtarchiv, Ms. 87/20, pp. 94b-100a, mid-fourteenth century; Karin Schneider (ed.), Das Eisenacher Zehnjungfrauenspiel, Texte des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit, 17, Berlin, 1964; melodies reconstructed by Renate Amstutz, Ludus de decem virginibus: Recovery of the Sung Liturgical Core of the Thuringian Zehnjungfrauenspiel , Studies and Texts, 140, Toronto, 2002. Münchener Hortulanusszene; MüHo; 118; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 5249/57 (fragment of a ritual), fourteenth century; Meyer (ed.), Fragmenta Burana , p. 144 (text) and plates 14-15 (facsimile). Münchener Osterspiel; MüO; 115; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 147, fols. 1-27, first half sixteenth century; Barbara Thoran (ed.), Das Münchener Osterspiel (Cgm 147 der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München); mit einer Einführung in Abbildung herausgegeben, Litterae, 43, Göppingen, 1977. Nottulner Osterspiel I; Gradual of the Augustinian nunnery of Nottuln near Münster, previously in the private collection of Otto Ursprung, fols. 64v-65v, now lost, 1420; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1561-64 (no. 794); facsimile of fols. 65r-v in Otto Ursprung, Die katholische Kirchenmusik, Handbuch der Musikwissenschaft, 8, Potsdam, 1931, pl. VI. Nottulner Osterspiel II; Antiphonal of the Augustinian nunnery of Nottuln near Münster; Münster, Archiv und Bibliothek des Bistums Münster, Ms. Depositum Pfarrarchiv Nottuln 2, fols. 112-13v, second half fifteenth century; Karl Gustav Fellerer (ed.), Die Nottulner Osterfeier , Westfalia Sacra 2 (1950), pp. 215-49; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1564-69 (no. 795). Nürnberger Osterspiel, see: Chiemseer Osterspiel Osnabrücker Osterspiel; OO; 124; Osnabrück, Archiv des bischöflichen Generalvikariats, Hs. Gertrudenberg 1, fols. 130-56v, c. 1500; Hans-Hermann Breuer (ed.), Das mittelniederdeutsche Osnabrücker Osterspiel: Der Ursprung des Osterspiels und die Prozession: Untersuchungen, Einleitung und Ausgabe, Beiträge zur Geschichte und Kulturgeschichte des Bistums Osnabrück, 1, Osnabrück, 1939. Osnabrücker Passionsspielfragmente; Opf; 125; Osnabrück, Niedersächsisches Staatsarchiv, Erw. A 16 No. 130, late fourteenth century; K. Dürre

410

XII. Bibliography

(ed.), Das Osnabrücker Osterspiel , Niedersachsen 24 (1918-19), pp. 30106; L. Wolff (ed.), Das Osnabrücker Passionsspiel , Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 82 (1959), pp. 87-98. Pfarrkirchers Passionsspiel; StPfP; 148; Sterzinger Passionsspiel von a. 1486; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. XVI, fols. 1-88v, 1486; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. II, pp. 7-205; Wackernell, Altdeutsche Passionsspiele, pp. 3-276, 475-80. Prager Abendmahlspiel; PrAb; 126; Prague, Národní Knihovna, XXIII F 128 (Lobk. 490), fols. 53-55v, fifteenth century; Cobie Kuné (ed.), Das Prager Abendmahlspiel , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 128 (1999), pp. 414-24 (with facsimile). Rabers Passion; BzPVR; 136; Bozner Passionsspiel von a. 1514 (VigilRaber-Passion), Sterzinger Passionsspiel von a. 1514; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. III. 1514; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. III, pp. 7-161. Redentiner Osterspiel; ReO; 69; Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, K 369, fols. 1v-12v, 1464; Brigitta Schottmann (ed.), Das Redentiner Osterspiel: Mittelniederdeutsch und neuhochdeutsch, Stuttgart, 1975. Regensburger Osterspiel; RO; 127; Regensburg, Bischöfliche Zentralbibliothek, CH 1* (Proskesche Musikbibliothek), fols. 22-29v, 1620; Eduard Hartl (ed.), Das Regensburger Osterspiel und seine Beziehungen zum Freiburger Fronleichnamsspiel , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 78 (1941), pp. 12532; Joseph Poll (ed.), Ein Osterspiel enthalten in einem Prozessionale der Alten Kapelle in Regensburg , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 34 (1950), pp. 36-40 (text), 108 (melodies). Rheinauer Osterspiel; Zurich, Zentralbibliothek, Ms. Rh. 18, pp. 282-83, thirteenth-century addition to a twelfth-century manuscript; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1573-78 (no. 797); Young, Drama of the Medieval Church, vol. I, pp. 385-89. Rheinisches Osterspiel, see: Berliner (rheinisches) Osterspiel Saganer Grablegungspiel; SPf; 28; Saganer Passionsspielfragment, Saganer Marienklage; Wroc aw, Bibliotheka Uniwersytecka, Akc 1955/156, fifteenth century; Klapper (ed.), Das mittelalterliche Volksschauspiel in Schlesien , pp. 214-16.

411


Sterzinger Passionsspiel 1496/1503; StP; 135; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. II, fols. 1-19 (Maundy Thursday play), 22-48v (Good Friday play), 1496-1503; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. II, pp. 207-331; Wackernell (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele, pp. 9-176. Sterzinger Passionsspiel der Mischhandschrift; StPMi; 147; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, XIII, fols. 1-43 (Palm Sunday play), 50-85v (Maundy Thursday play), 1530-50; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. IV, pp. 97-180 (Palm Sunday play), 181-255 (Maundy Thursday play). Thüringisches Zehnjungfrauenspiel, see: Mühlhäuser (thüringisches) Zehnjungfrauenspiel Tiroler Dramatisierung des Johannes-Evangeliums I; TiDrJo I; 146; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. XII, fols. 1-68v, first half sixteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. V, pp. 3112, 283-90. Tiroler Dramatisierung des Johannes-Evangeliums II; TiDrJo II; 141; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. VIII, fols. 1-41v, 1526; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. V, pp. 113-90. Tiroler Himmelfahrtsspiel aus Cafless (Cavalese); TiH; 139; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. VI, fols. 1-25v, 1514 or 1517; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. IV, pp. 257-300. Tiroler Osterspiel; TiO; 140; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. VII, fols. 1-16v, 1520; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. III, pp. 299-332. Tiroler Passionsspiel; TiP; 143; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. X, fols. 1-21, first half sixteenth century; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. III, pp. 249-97. Tiroler Weihnachtsspiel; TiW; 149; Sterzing, Stadtarchiv, Hs. XVII, pp. 159, written in 1511; Lipphardt & Roloff (eds.), Geistliche Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. III, pp. 359-400. Trierer Osterspiel; TO; 158; Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Cod. 1973/63 4o, pp. 1930, mid-fifteenth century; Ursula Hennig and Andreas Traub (eds.), Trierer Marienklage und Osterspiel. Codex 1973/63 der Stadtbibliothek Trier, Litterae, 91, Göppingen, 1990.

412

XII. Bibliography

Trierer Theophilusspiel; TT; 157; Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Hs. 1120/128 4o, Fragm, fols. 1-12v, 1440-60; Robert Petsch (ed.), Theophilus: Mittelniederdeutsches Drama in drei Fassungen herausgegeben, Germanische Bibliothek, 2. Abt., 2, Heidelberg, 1908; melodies: P. Bohn (ed.), Marienklage: Handschrift der trierischen Stadtbibliothek aus dem 15. Jahrhundert , Monatshefte für Musik-Geschichte 9 (1877), pp. 24-25. Villinger Passionsspiel; VP; 36; Villinger Passionsspiel II; Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Donaueschingen 138 A, 1-133, and 138 B, 1-109, c. 1599; Antje Knorr (ed.), Villinger Passion. Literarhistorische Einordnung und erstmalige Herausgabe des Urtexts und der Überarbeitungen, Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik, 187, Göppingen, 1976. Vorauer Osterspiel; VoO; 159; Vorau, Stiftsbibliothek, Ms. 90, fols. 180v-81 (Passau breviary, pars hiemalis), text written in margins in the fourteenth century; Walter Lipphardt (ed.), Hymnologische Quellen aus der Steiermark und ihre Erforschung: Aufgaben und Wege der Hymnologie als theologischer Wissenschaft sowie Ansprachen anläßlich der Ehrenpromotion zum Doktor der Theologie am 4.12.1973, Grazer Universitätsreden, 13, Graz, 1974, pp. 65-66. Welser Passionsspielfragment; WePf; 161; Wels, Stadtarchiv, Historisches Archiv, Akten, Sch. No. 1227, late fifteenth-early sixteenth century; Ludwig Kaff (ed.), Das Welser Passionsspiel , in Festschrift des Bundesrealgymnasiums Wels, Wels, 1951, pp. 31-50. Wiener Osterspiel; WO; 162; Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 3007 (Nov. 297), fols. 163v-88, 1472; Hans Blosen (ed.), Das Wiener Osterspiel: Abdruck der Handschrift und Leseausgabe, Texte des Mittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit, 33, Berlin, 1979. Wiener Passionsspiel; WP; 167; Wiener Passionsspielfragment; Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 12887 (Suppl. 561), fols. 1-8v, thirteenth century; Ursula Hennig (ed.), Das Wiener Passionsspiel. Cod. 12887 (Suppl. 561) der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek zu Wien. Mit Einleitung und Textabdruck in Abbildung herausgegeben, Litterae, 92, Göppingen, 1986; Froning (ed.), Drama des Mittelalters, vol. I, pp. 302-24. Wolfenbüttler Osterspiel; WoO; 172; Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Cod. Guelf. 965 Helmst., fols. 181-92v, probably c. 1425; Otto Schönemann (ed.), Der Sündenfall und Marienklage: Zwei niederdeutsche Schauspiele aus den Handschriften der Wolfenbütteler Bibliothek, Hannover, 1855.

413


Zwickauer Osterspiel I; ZwO I; 193; Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Ms. Zwick. XXXVI, I,24, fols. 1-5, between 1484 and 1519-20; Hansjürgen Linke & Ulrich Mehler (eds.), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau. Kritischer Text und Faksimilia der Handschriften, Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 103, Tübingen, 1990, pp. 29-44; Lipphardt (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, vol. V, pp. 1540-46 (no. 789; wrongly ascribed to Joachimsthal). Zwickauer Osterspiel Ia; ZwO Ia; 193; The Salvatorrolle of Zwickauer Osterspiel I; Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Ms. Zwick. XXXVI, I,24, fols. 5-6, between 1484 and 1519-20; Linke & Mehler (eds.), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau, pp. 45-46. Zwickauer Osterspiel II; ZwO II; 193; Ms A: Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Ms. Zwick. I, XV,3, fols. 56-65v, between 1484 and c. 1500; Ms B: Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Ms. Zwick. XXXVI, I,24, fols. 7-10v, c. 1500; ibid., pp. 47-73. Zwickauer Osterspiel III; ZwO III; 193; Ms A: Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Ms. Zwick. I, XV,3, fols. 66-77v, between 1484 and c. 1500; Ms B: Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Ms. Zwick. XXXVI, I,24, fols. 10v-16, c. 1500; ibid., pp. 74-108.

Liturgical sources DIOCESE OF MAINZ The following is not a complete bibliography of Mainz sources, merely a list of those consulted for this study. Antiphonal, manuscripts Aschaffenburg, Stiftsbibliothek Ms. Perg. 1 (pars aestivalis), Aschaffenburg, c. 1536. Ms. Perg. 2 (pars hiemalis), probably Mainz, fifteenth century. Ms. Perg. 12 (pars aestivalis), Aschaffenburg, late fifteenth century. Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Ms. Barth. 94 (pars aestivalis), St Bartholomaeus, Frankfurt, late fifteenth century. Ms. lat. qu. 48 (pars hiemalis), St Bartholomaeus, Frankfurt, late fifteenth century.

414

XII. Bibliography

Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel 2o Ms. theol. 117, collegiate church of St Peter, Fritzlar, 1344-48. 2o Ms. theol. 124, collegiate church of St Peter, Fritzlar, 1367-78. 2o Ms. theol. 129, collegiate church of St Peter, Fritzlar, 1344-48. Antiphonal, printed book Cantus Gregoriano-Moguntinus Breviario Romano accommodatus, 2 vols., Mainz, 1666-67, vol. I: Pars hiemalis; vol. II: Pars aestiva. Breviary, manuscripts Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Ms. Barth. 44, St Bartholomaeus, Frankfurt, c. 1508. Ms. Barth. 83 (pars aestivalis), St Bartholomaeus, Frankfurt, 1468. Ms. Barth. 131, nocturnal (pars aestivalis), St Martin, Mainz, first third of the fourteenth century. Ms. Barth. 142 (pars hiemalis), Rhine/Main area, third quarter fourteenth century. Ms. Barth. 150, collegiate church, Mainz, probably written in the Liège diocese, beginning of the fourteenth century; used in Frankfurt since early fifteenth century. Ms. Barth. 154 (pars hiemalis), possibly Frankfurt, mid-fifteenth century. Ms. Barth. 159 (pars aestivalis), lower Main region, 1449. Ms. Barth. 160, Frankfurt, first half fourteenth century, with additions of the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Ms. Barth. 161 (pars hiemalis), probably Rhine/Main area, first half fourteenth century. Ms. Leonh. 3 (pars aestivalis), Mainz diocese, for Frankfurt, 1469. Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel 2o Ms. theol. 119, Fritzlar, 1342. 2o Ms. theol. 127, Diocese of Mainz, end of the fourteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 136 (pars aestivalis), Fritzlar, late fourteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 146 (pars aestivalis), Fritzlar, mid-fourteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 159 (pars aestivalis), Fritzlar, 1420. Breviary, printed books [Marienthal, Fratres vitae communis, 1474 or 1476]; Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-, no. 5392; Walter Arthur Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, 3 vols., London,

415


1895-1902, no. 3862; Hanns Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie des XV. Jahrhunderts mit Ausnahme der Missale und Livres d heures, Wien, 1911 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1960], no. 299 References are to the pagination of the copy in London, British Library, IB 9703. [Marienthal, Fratres vitae communis, c. 1475]; Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5393; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 295 (= 297). [Marienthal, Fratres vitae communis, c. 1475]; Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5394. Enchiridion seu Breuiarium: secundum morem insignis ecclesie Moguntine, necnon totius diocesis: Nouissime impressum: emendatum ac plurimis luculentissimis additamentis congestum et absolutum Feliciter incipit, Mainz, 1509; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, [ed.] Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, München & Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel, Stuttgart, 1983-, no. B8170; Hanns Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, 1501-1850, Leipzig, 1937 [rpt. Stuttgart-Nieuwkoop, 1963], no. 2449. Enchiridion seu Breuiarium: secundum morem insignis ecclesie Moguntine, necnon totius diocesis. Nouissime impressum: emendatum: ac plurimis luculentissimis additamentis congestum et absolutum [ ], Mainz, 1517; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. B8175; Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2454. Second printing of the previous item: Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2455, not listed in Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Breviarium Moguntinum. Iussu et authoritate [...] D. Danielis S. eiusdem Moguntinæ Sedis Archiepiscopi, &c. integritati pristinæ fidelißime restitutum, Cologne, 1570; Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2456; Robert Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés (Supplément aux catalogues de Weale et Bohatta): Propres des saints, Paris, 1990, no. 2456. Breviarium Moguntinum. Authoritate [...] Dn. Ioannis Suicardi, S. eiusdem Moguntinæ Sedis Archiepiscopi [...] denuò recognitum et editum, Mainz, 1611; Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2457; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2457. Hebdomadarium et commune sanctorum, Mainz, 1696. Gradual, manuscripts Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek

416

XII. Bibliography

Ms. lat. qu. 44, St Bartholomaeus, Frankfurt, second quarter fifteenth century. Kiedrich, Bibliothek des Chorstiftes Ms. A, Cathedral, Mainz, late fourteenth century. Gradual, printed books [Graduale], Speyer, 3 June 1500]; Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 10985; Ludwig Friedrich Theodor Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, in quo libri omnes ab arte typographica inventa usque ad annum MD. typis expressi ordine alphabetico vel simpliciter enumerantur vel adcuratius recensentur, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1826-38 [rpt. Milan, 1948], no. 14897; Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 4165. Graduale Missali Romano, cantui vero Gregoriano-Moguntino accommodatum [ ], Mainz, 1671. Liber Ordinarius / Ordo / Directory, manuscripts Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel 2o Ms. theol. 99, liber ordinarius and collectar of the collegiate church of St Peter, Fritzlar, first half fifteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 138, collegiate church of St Peter, Fritzlar, early thirteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 143, Mainz breviary, psalter, and liber ordinarius, Mainz, mid-fourteenth century. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek (Bischöfliches Priesterseminar) Hs. 3, Fundationes et consuetudines, Cathedral, Mainz, 1362-1511. Hs. 92, Registrum praesentiarum secundum chorum eccl. Magunt., Sakristeibuch , Cathedral, Mainz; 1544, with additions of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Hs. 233, Registrum chori, St Peter, Mainz, fourteenth-fifteenth century. Liber Ordinarius / Ordo / Directory, printed books [Ordo, 1484-1485 (Mainz, 1484)]; Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 8466. [Ordo, 1485-1486 or 1496-1497 (Mainz, 1485 or 1496)]; ibid., no. 8467. [Ordo, 1488-1489 or 1494-1495 (Mainz, 1488 or 1494)]; ibid., no. 8468. Directorium Misse, Mainz, 1506; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. D2015. Directorium Misse, Mainz, 1508; ibid., no. D2016.

417


Directorium Misse de nouo perspectum & emendatum. secundum frequentiorem cursum diocesis Maguntinensis, Mainz, 1509; ibid., no. D2017. Missal, manuscripts Darmstadt, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Hs. 3183, festal and votive missal and ritual for a parish church, Mainz, c. 1175. Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Ms. Barth. 31, Rorbach-Missale , Rhine/Main area, c. 1460. Ms. Barth. 107, missal and ritual, first half fourteenth century. Ms. Barth. 118, neumed missal (pars aestivalis), central Rhineland, mideleventh century. Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel 2o Ms. theol. 100, full neumed missal, Fritzlar, first third thirteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 122 (pars aestivalis), Fritzlar, second half fourteenth century. 2o Ms. theol. 125 (pars hiemalis), Fritzlar, late fourteenth century. Mainz, Stadtbibliothek Hs. II 163, dating uncertain. Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek M.p.th.f. 85, mid-fourteenth century. Missal, printed books Missale Maguntinum. denuo exactissima cura recognitum et a prioribus quibusdam mendis operose ac solecter emaculatum, Mainz: 1 September 1507; William Henry James Weale, Bibliographia liturgica: Catalogus Missalium ritus latini ab anno 1474 impressorum; ed. Hanns Bohatta, London-Leipzig, 1928 [rpt. Stuttgart, 1990], no. 631; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 631; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. M5591. Missalis Moguntiaci. hoc presens et luculentum profecto et divinum opus [ ] uberrime castigatum, [Speyer, 30 April 1520]; Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 635; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. M5596. Missale Moguntinum Compluribus in locis, tum ex manuscriptis eisdemque vetustissimis exemplaribus. Tum ex Romano emendatum. Et ad pristinam normam ac ordinem Breuiarij restitutum, Mainz, 1602; Weale, Biblio-

418

XII. Bibliography

graphia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 637; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 637. Missale Romano-Moguntinum, Mainz, 1698; Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 638. Processional, manuscripts Aschaffenburg, Stiftsbibliothek Ms. Perg. 32, Aschaffenburg, fifteenth century. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek (Bischöfliches Priesterseminar) Hs. 100, undated (fifteenth-sixteenth century?), may have been used in Mainz. Hs. 110, Processionale Sumptibus Joannis Kleij Metropolitanae Ecclesiae Vicarij conscriptum. Anno 1704, Cathedral, Mainz, 1704. Hs. 118, St Peter, Mainz, fifteenth-sixteenth century. Hs. 121, Liebfrauen, Mainz, 1762 (without musical notation). Hs. 142, probably Liebfrauen, Mainz, eighteenth century. Mainz, Stadtbibliothek Hs. II 74, Cathedral, Mainz, early fifteenth century, also containing notation from the 16th-17th and 17th-18th centuries. Hs. II 303, Cathedral, Mainz, late fifteenth century. Munich, St. Anna, Zentralbibliothek der bayerischen Franziskanerprovinz ms. 12o Cmm 82, Mainz, c. 1400. Speyer, Archiv des Bistums Speyer Hs. 4, Cathedral, Mainz, eighteenth century. Hs. 5, Cathedral, Mainz, eighteenth century. Speyer, Gymnasium am Kaisersdom (Gymnasialbibliothek) (No shelfmark), Cathedral, Mainz, eighteenth century. Psalter, manuscripts Aschaffenburg, Stiftsbibliothek Ms. Perg. 9, Mainz, after 1400. Kassel, Universitätsbibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel 2o Ms. theol. 143, breviary, psalter, and liber ordinarius, Mainz, midfourteenth century. Mainz, Martinusbibliothek (Bischöfliches Priesterseminar) Hs. 11, St Peter, Mainz, twelfth century.

419


Mainz, Stadtbibliothek Hs. I 357a, Mainz, after 1300. Psalter, printed books [Psalterium], Mainz: J. Fust & P. Schöffer, 1457. [Psalterium], Mainz: P. Schöffer, 1502. Ritual, manuscripts Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 488, noted ritual, fifteenth century (Salmon, Pierre, Les manuscrits liturgiques de la Bibliothèque Vaticane, 5 vols., Studi e Testi, 251270, Vaticano, 1968-72, vol. III, no. 198, and vol. II, no. 313). cod. pal. lat. 490, ritual and processional, Lorsch, fourteenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. III, no. 199). Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Ms. Barth. 107, missal and ritual, first half fourteenth century. Ritual, printed books [Rituale], Mainz: [J. Numeister], 1480 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 468; Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 369; Hermann Josef Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , in Idem, Der Taufritus in den Ritualien von den ersten Drucken bis zur Einführung des Rituale Romanum, Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 47, Münster, 1968, pp. 212-84, no. 191). Agenda ecclesie Moguntinensis, [Strasbourg: J. Prüß, c. 1492] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 469; Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 130; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 192). Agenda Maguntina cum vtilissimis scituque dignissimis (prioribus tamen non insertis) quibusdam notabilibus: iam nouiter ac diligenter jmpressa, Mainz: J. Schöffer, 1513 (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. A717; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 194). Agenda Maguntina [ ], Mainz: J. Schöffer, 1513, 7 September (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. A718; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 194); second printing of the previous item. Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis [...] Per reverendissimum [...] Dominum [...] Sebastianum, Archiepiscopum Moguntinum [...] denuo Typis euulgata, Mainz: F. Behem, 1551 (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich er-

420

XII. Bibliography

schienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. A 719; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 195). Agenda Ecclesiae Moguntinensis. Per reverendissimum [...] Dominum [...] VVolfgangum, Archiepiscopum Moguntinum [...] denuò typis euulgata, Mainz: B. Lippius, 1599 (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. A 720; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 196). Rituale sive Agenda ad usum Ecclesiarum Metropolitanæ Moguntinæ, et Cathedralium Herbipolensis et Wormatiensis, edita Jussu et Authoritate [...] D. Ioannis Philippi S. Sedis Moguntinæ Archiepiscopi [...], Würzburg: E.M. Zinck, 1671 (Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 197). Rituale sive Agenda, ad usum Ecclesiae Metropolitanae Moguntinae [ ], Mainz: J. Mayer, 1695 (Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 198; JeanBaptiste Molin & Annick Aussedat-Minvielle, Répertoire des rituels et processionaux imprimés conservés en France, Paris, 1984, no. 2773). Rituale sive Agenda, Ad usum Archi-Di ceseos Moguntinæ edita jussu et auctoritate [...] D. Lotharii Francisci, S. Sedis Moguntinæ Archi-Episcopi [...], Mainz: J. Mayer, 1696. Others, manuscripts Frankfurt am Main, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Ms. Barth. 49, hymnary and sequentiary, Frankfurt, mid-fifteenth century. London, British Library Ms add. 19768, noted cantatorium, twelfth century. Mainz, Stadtarchiv Hs. HBA I 50, pp. 78-79, Elevatio and Visitatio Sepulchri ceremonies from the Kirchenordnung of St Quintin, Mainz, 1585 (transcript of 1771). Mainz, Stadtbibliothek Hs. I 44, legendary (pars aestivalis), second quarter fifteenth century. Hs. I 123, manual for a hebdomadarius in the Carthusian order, fourteenthfifteenth century. Hs. I 433, manual, dating uncertain. Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 485, sacramentary from the monastery of Lorsch, nineth-tenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 20). cod. pal. lat. 495, sacramentary from the monastery of Lorsch, c. 980, (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 23).

421


cod. pal. lat. 496, sacramentary, Würzburg, twelfth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 24). cod. pal. lat. 499, sacramentary from the monastery of Lorsch, mideleventh century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 25). Others, printed books Manuale Ecclesiasticum Pro Archidi cesi Moguntina, Jussu et auctoritate [ ] D. Lotharii Francisci [ ] editum [ ], Mainz: J. Mayer, 1701. Responsoria Moguntina, Mainz: Peter Schöffer the Younger, [c. 1515] (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. R1196). DIOCESE OF WORMS In the case of Worms and Speyer, the lists are complete lists of the two dioceses liturgical sources to the late sixteenth century, with selected items from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Antiphonal, mauscripts and printed books None extant. Breviary, manuscripts London, British Library Ms add. 19415, complete breviary, c. 1475. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Ms. lat. 1310, Cathedral, Worms, 1472. Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 515 (temporale, pars hiemalis), fifteenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 285). cod. pal. lat. 516 (pars aestivalis), fifteenth century (ibid., vol. I, no. 286). cod. pal. lat. 518 (pars hiemalis), 1401 (ibid., vol. I, no. 288). cod. pal. lat. 519 (pars hiemalis), fifteenth century (ibid., vol. I, no. 289). cod. pal. lat. 520, complete nocturnal, fifteenth century (ibid., vol. I, no. 290). cod. pal. lat. 524 (pars hiemalis), 1452 (ibid., vol. I, no. 292). cod. pal. lat. 530 and 531, diurnal (pars hiemalis and pars aestivalis), 1514-15 (ibid., vol. I, no. 298). Worms, Stadtbibliothek

422

XII. Bibliography

Lutherbibliothek, 3a (pars aestivalis), c. 1475 (missing from the library, September 2002). Breviary, printed books [Breviarium], [Marienthal: Fratres vitae communis, c. 1475] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5513; Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 3953; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 553). [Breviarium], [Speyer: P. Drach, c. 1483] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5514; Reichling, Appendices ad Hainii-Copingeri, no. 94; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 554). [Breviarium], [Strasbourg: J. Grüninger, c. 1490] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5515; Reichling, Appendices ad Hainii-Copingeri, no. 95; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 552). Diurnale quadragesimale secundum ordinem ecclesie Wormatiensis, [Cologne or upper Rhine?, c. 1490] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 8564; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 650). [Breviarium], [Speyer: P. Drach, c. 1495] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5516); only the pars aestivalis of the proprium de tempore and proprium sanctorum survives. Diurnale quadragesimale secundum dyocesim wormaciensem. vna cum lxx. et quinquagesima de tempore et Sanctis nouiter additis, [Speyer: P. Drach III, c. 1505] (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. B8203). Breviarium juxta ritum et ordinem Ecclesie Wormatiensis, Mainz: [J. Schöffer], 1516 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2886; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2886). Breviarium iuxta ritum et ordinem ecclesiae Wormatiensis. Iussu et authoritate [...] D. Theodorici eiusdem ecclesiae [...] Episcopi, studiose recognitum & emendatum, Mainz: C. Behem, 1576 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2887; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2887; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. B8205). Gradual, manuscripts and printed books None extant. Liber Ordinarius / Ordo / Directory, manuscript Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana

423


cod. pal. lat. 521 and 522, complete ordo breviarii, fourteenth-fifteenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 177). Liber Ordinarius, Ordo, Directory, printed books [Ordo, September 1482-April 1483], [Strasbourg, J. Prüß, 1482] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 8474). [Ordo, September 1488-April 1489], [Speyer: J. & K. Hist, 1488] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 8475). Missal, manuscript Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 524, fols. 364-74v, a mass for the Presentation in a Worms breviary (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 324). Missal, printed books [Missale], fol 9: Liber missalis secundum ordinem ecclesie Wormatiensis, [Basel: M. Wenssler, 1488] (Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 1649; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 1649). As previous item, a second printing with slightly different foliation (Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 1650; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 1650). Missale secundum ritum et obseruantiam Ecclesie & diocesis wormatiensis, [Speyer: P. Drach III], 1522 (Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 1651; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 1651; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. M5638). Officia Propria, manuscripts None extant. Officia Propria, printed book Officia Propria Sanctorum Et Patronorum Ecclesiae Et Dioecesis Wormatiensis. Ad Formam Breviarii Romani Redacta [ ], Mainz: J. Mayer, 1716. Processional, manuscripts None extant. Processional, printed book Processionale ad usum ecclesiarum collegiatarum civitatis Wormatiensis, Frankenthal: Gegel, 1777. Psalter, manuscript Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana

424

XII. Bibliography

cod. pal. lat. 39, St Michael s monastery near Heidelberg, eleventh century, with late-thirteenth-century additions for Corpus Christi (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 35). Psalter, printed books None extant. Ritual, manuscripts None extant. Ritual, printed books Agenda secundum ritum & ordinem ecclesie wormaciensis, [Speyer: P. Drach, c. 1500-10] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 477; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. A771; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 366; Reichling, Appendices ad Hainii-Copingeri, no. 369). Agenda pastoralia, sive Ritualia Archi-Dioecesium Moguntinae, Trevirensis, et Coloniensis, uti et in Wormatiensi, Spirensi, aliisque dioecesibus: in compendium redacta ad usum Sacerdotum, Mainz: J. Mayer, 1734. Rituale sive Agenda, ad usum dioeceseos Wormatiensis edita, ad normam Ritualis Romani accommodata. Jussu et auctoritate [...] D. Francisci Georgii [...] S. Sedis Trevirensis Archi-episcopi, [...] et Episcopi Wormatiensis, Mannheim: J. Mayer, 1740. (Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 367). Compendium Ritualis Moguntini, Wormatiensis, Spirensis et Trevirensis per Ildephonsum Viadanum, Mainz: Ockel, 1752. Others, manuscripts Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 477, legendary, fifteenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. IV, no. 72). cod. pal. lat. 478, legendary (pars aestivalis), fifteenth century (ibid., vol. IV, no. 73). cod. Vat. lat. 10644, 72-79, fragment of a collectar, fourteenth century (ibid., vol. I, no. 168). Worms, Stadtarchiv Abt. 106/1 (previously Abt. 112/1), manual from an Augustinian nunnery (commonly known as the Richardikonvent ), Worms, fifteenth century. Others, printed books None extant.

425


DIOCESE OF SPEYER Antiphonal, manuscripts Aachen, Suermondt-Museum Fragment (4 fols) of a Speyer Cathedral antiphonal, c. 1478-79. Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv 65/738, fragment (38 folios) of a Speyer mass and office antiphonal, fifteenth century. 65/740, fragment of an antiphonal, diocese unidentified. Speyer, Archiv des Bistums Speyer Hs. 2, Cathedral, Speyer (pars aestivalis), c. 1500-10. Antiphonal, printed books None extant. Breviary, manuscripts Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek cod. Bruchsal 10 (pars hiemalis), c. 1458. Speyer, Gymnasium am Kaisersdom (Gymnasialbibliothek) A.D. 3, psalter and neumed breviary, possibly adapted for Speyer use (late twelfth century?) (held in Speyer, Pfälzische Landesbibliothek). Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 514 (pars aestivalis), fifteenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. I, no. 284). Breviary, printed books [Breviarium], Speyer, P. Drach, 19 November 1478 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5464; Reichling, Appendices ad Hainii-Copingeri, no. 3940; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 502). [Diurnale], [Speyer: P. Drach, c. 1478] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 8559; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 644 [= 646]). [Breviarium], [Strasbourg: J. Grüninger, 1491] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5465; Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 1316; Bohatta, Liturgische Bibliographie, no. 500). Breuiarium Spirense. Pars Hyemalis, [Strasbourg: J. Prüß?, c. 1500] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5466). Orarium Spirense (pars hiemalis), Venezia: Julianus de Castello & Johann Hertzog, 1507. Ferial psalter, temporale and sanctorale of the pars hiema-

426

XII. Bibliography

lis (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2748; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2748). [Orarium Spirense] (pars aestivalis), Venezia: Julianus de Castello & Johann Hertzog, 1509. Ferial psalter, temporale and sanctorale of the pars aestivalis (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2749; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2749). Breviarium Spirense [ ] iussu Eberhardi episc. Editum, [s.l.], 1590 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2750); no copies known. Breviarium Spirense, Cologne: G. Calenius & heirs of J. Quentell, 1591 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2751; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2751). Gradual, manuscripts / printed books None extant. Liber ordinarius / Ordo / Directory, manuscripts Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv 67/452, Registrum camerariorum sive regulae campanatoris, liber ordinarius, Cathedral, Speyer, known as Karsthans , begun between 1438 and 1470. Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Cod. Vindob. 1882, liber ordinarius, Cathedral, Speyer, thirteenth century. Liber ordinarius / Ordo / Directory, printed books [Ordo, 1483-84], [Speyer: P. Drach, 1483] (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 8469). [Ordo, 1484-85], [Speyer: P. Drach, 1484] (ibid., no. 8470). [Ordo, 1493-94], [Speyer: P. Drach, 1493] (ibid., no. 8471). [Ordo, May-November 1494], [Speyer: P. Drach, 1494]. (ibid., no. 8472). [Ordo, 1498-99], [Speyer: K. Hist, 1498] (ibid., no. 8473). [Ordo, 1507], Speyer: [s.n.], 1507 (Rolf Bohlender, Dom und Bistum Speyer: Eine Bibliographie, Speyer, 1979, no. 1424). [Ordo, 1514], Speyer: [s.n.], 1514 (Bohlender 1425). Directorium horarum canonicarum secundum ritum dioecesis Spirensis dicendarum cum novo kalendario iussu et mandato [ ] D. Georgii [ ] episcopi Spirensis, [s.l.: s.n.], 1522) (Bohlender 1426). Missal, manuscripts Darmstadt, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek

427


Hs. 889, festal missal (pars hiemalis), from the Carmelite monastery of Hirschhorn, c. 1380. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 10076 (pars hiemalis), mid-fourteenth century (before 1352). Speyer, Archiv des Bistums Speyer Hs. 1, noted plenary missal, Cathedral, Speyer, c. 1343. Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Cod. Vindob. 1845, c. 1080, probably written for Bamberg but used in the Abbey of St. Germanus in Speyer in the thirteenth century. Missal, printed books [Missale], Speyer: P. Drach, 1484 (Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 1481*; Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 11426). Missale secundum ordinem ecclesie spirensis, [Bamberg: J. Sensenschmidt & H. Petzensteiner, 1487] (Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 1482; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 1482; Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 11427). [Missale], Speyer, P. Drach, 13 August 1500 or 12 August 1501 (Copinger, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, vol. II, no. 4233; Weale, Bibliographia liturgica; [ed.] Bohatta, no. 1484, 1485; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 1484, 1485; Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. M5624). [Missale], Speyer: P. Drach, 1509; as previous item, with critical comments of Jodocus Gallus, sig. Ai-Biiv. Missæ et collectæ propriæ Sanctorum civitatis et dioecesis Spirensis, Eminentissimi et Reverendissimi Domini, D. Joannis Hugonis, Archi-Episcopi & Principis Electoris Trevirensis, quà Episcopi Spirensis, &c. jussu et auctoritate recognitæ, atque ad normam Missalis Romani [...] accommodatæ, Mainz: J. Mayer, 1707. Officia propria, manuscripts None extant. Officia propria, printed books Officia propria sanctorum et patronorum ecclesiae et dioecesis Spirensis ad formam breviarii Romani redacta et jussu [ ] Joannis Hugonis [ ] edita, Mainz: J. Mayer, 1707 (Bohlender, no. 1410).

428

XII. Bibliography

Proprium Spirense in festis sanctorum ecclesiae et dioecesis Spirensis, Bruchsal: N.C. Mannhardt, 1762 9Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. P 2038; Bohlender, no. 1411). Proprium diocesis Spirensis continens festa propria una cum annexis festis novioribus, Bruchsal: N.C. Mannhardt, [1789] (ibid., no. 1412). Processional, manuscripts None extant. Processional, printed book Processionale dominicale et festivale pro choro ecclesiae cathedralis Spirensis. Auctoritate rev. et illustr. capituli eiusdem cathedralis Spirensis editum, Mainz: Häffner, 1755. Psalter, manuscript Sélestat, Bibliothèque Municipale Ms. 127, fifteenth century. Psalter, printed book Psalterium Spirense: ad vsum orandi et cantandi, Speyer: P. Drach, 1515. Ritual, manuscripts None extant. Ritual, printed books Agenda Spirensis, [Speyer: P. Drach III, 1512] (Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, no. A 760; Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 324; Alois Lamott, Das Speyerer Diözesanrituale von 1512 bis 1932: Seine Geschichte und seine Ordines zur Sakramentenliturgie, Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 5, Speyer, 1961, pp. 43-51). Agenda pastoralia sive ritualia archidioecesium Moguntinae et Trevirensis in compendium redacta. Ad usum sacerdotum in praefatis archidioecesibus, uti et in dioecesibus Wormatiensi, Spirensi aliisque curam animarum habentium, Mainz: J. Mayer, 1703. Rituale Spirense sive Agenda Pastoralia Ecclesiae et Diocesis Spirensis ad Ritualis Romani usum accommodata, Rastatt: F.G. Tusch, 1719 (Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 325; Lamott, Das Speyerer Diözesanrituale, pp. 72-76). Rituale Spirense, authoritate Francisci Christophori episcopi Spirensis [ ] in gratiam & usum di cesis Spirensis editum, Bruchsal: A.G. Godeschall, 1748 (Spital, Bibliographie der Ritualien , no. 326; Molin & Aus-

429


sedat-Minvielle, Répertoire, no. 2787; Lamott, Das Speyerer Diözesanrituale, pp. 81-86). Other manuscripts Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek cod. Bruchsal 1, evangeliary, Bruchsal, thirteenth century. cod. Bruchsal 2, evangeliary for sanctoral feasts, Bruchsal, thirteenth century. Speyer, Pfälzische Landesbibliothek Hs. 2, fragments of various liturgical books (antiphonal, gradual, etc.), probably 1500-10. Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek cod. Brev. 144, Evangelia secundum ordinem Ecclesiae Spirensis, fourteenth century. Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 9, epistolary and evangeliary, Hospital of Jerusalem, Speyer, 1345 (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. II, no. 93). Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Cod. Vindob. 377, passional, eleventh century. Cod. Vindob. 553, passional, eleventh-twelfth century. OTHER DIOCESES AND PROVENANCES Manuscripts, attribution uncertain Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek cod. St. Blasien 15, antiphonal, south-western Germany, first half fifteenth century. Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana cod. pal. lat. 619, miscellany including ritualis elementa, Worms or Trier, twelfth-thirteenth century (Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques, vol. III, no. 210). Augsburg manuscript Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 7461, passional (all four Gospels), Indersdorf, fifteenth century. Augsburg printed books Liber Ritualis Episcopatus Augustensis, Dillingen: J. Mayer, 1612.

430

XII. Bibliography

[Obsequiale Augustense], Augsburg: E. Ratdolt, 1487 (Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 11925). Obsequiale sive Benedictionale secundum eclesiam Augustensem, [Augsburg]: E. Ratdolt, 1499. Agenda: seu liber obsequiorum, iuxta ritum, & consuetudinem Di cesis Augustensis, Ingolstadt: A. Weissenhorn, 1547. Ritus ecclesiastici Augustensis episcopatus, Dillingen: J. Mayer, 1580. Rituale Augustanum Ad Normam Ritualis Romani à glor. mem. Benedicto XIV. anno 1752. Romae correctiùs editi, nec non conformiter ad laudabiles Germaniae Consuetudines denuo recognitum, Augsburg: Widow of J.A. Labhart, 1764. Ritus ecclesiastici Augustensis episcopatus, tribus partibus siue libris comprehensi, nuncque primùm recogniti, editi atque promulgati. Auctoritate [...] D. Marquardi Episcopi Augustensis, Dillingen: J. Mayer, 1580. Bamberg printed book Agenda Bambergensis Hoc est, Rituum Ecclesiasticorum, secundum usum imperialis ecclesiae et episcopatus Bambergensis solida & accurata descriptio, Ingolstadt: D. Sartorius, 1587. Cologne manuscript London, British Library Ms add. 31913, noted breviary (temporale only), fourteenth century. Coutances printed book [Breviarium], Aira: [ ] incipit breuiarium secundum vsum ecclesie constantiensis, Rouen: Jean le Bourgeois for Pierre Regnault, 1499, 13 August (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5327). Essômes printed book Breuarij totius anni prima pars/ ab Aduentu vsq[ue] ad Trinitatem/ ad vsum insignis ecclesie Sosmensis, Paris: Regnault & Claude Chaudière, 1548 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2747). Moosburg manuscript München, Universitätsbibliothek 2o Cod. ms. 156, Graduale (David Hiley [ed.], Moosburger Graduale, 2o Cod. ms. 156. Faksimile mit einer Einleitung und Registern, Veröffentlichungen der Gesellschaft für Bayerische Musikgeschichte, Tutzing, 1996).

431


Passau manuscript Gottschalk Antiphonary, originally Abbey of Lambach, twelfth century, fragments now dispersed (Lisa Fagin Davis, The Gottschalk Antiphonary: Music and Liturgy in Twelfth-Century Lambach, Cambridge, 2000). Passau printed books Antiphonale Pataviense (Karlheinz Schlager [ed.], Antiphonale Pataviense, (Wien, 1519), Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88, Kassel [etc.], 1985). Graduale Pataviense (Christian Väterlein [ed.], Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87, Kassel [etc.], 1982). Regensburg printed book Obsequiale siue benedictionale secundum consuetudinem ecclesie et dyocesis Ratisponensis, Nuremberg: J. Stuchs, 1491 (Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, no. 11931). Reims printed book Breuiarium secundum vsum insignis ac metropolis ecclesie Remensis [ ] Pars hyemalis, Paris: T. Vivien, 1543 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2611). Roman use printed books Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934. Antiphonarii, Iuxta Breuiarium Romanum restitutum, Pars Hyemalis, Antwerp: Christophe Plantijn, 1572. Antiphonarii, Iuxta Breuiarium Romanum restitutum, Pars Aestiualis, Antwerp: Christophe Plantijn, 1573. Antiphonale sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae pro diurnis horis a Pio Papa X. restitutum et editum, Paris [etc.], 1949. Antiphonale Romanum secundum liturgiam horarum ordinemque cantus officii dispositum a Solesmensibus monachis praeparatum, vol. II: Liber hymnarius cum invitatoriis et aliquibus responsoriis, Solesmes, 1983. Breviarium Romanum optime recognitum, Venezia: Heirs of Luca Antonio Giunta I, 1564 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 254; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 254). Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, Solesmes [etc.], 1979.

432

XII. Bibliography

Liber antiphonarius pro diurnis horis juxta ritum monasticum kalendario generali ordinis Sancti Benedicti accommodatus, cum supplemento pro aliquibus locis, Solesmes, 1897 [2nd ed.]. Liber cantualis, Solesmes, 1983. Liber responsorialis juxta ritum monasticum, Solesmes, 1895. Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis, Paris [etc.], 1936. Officium majoris hebdomadæ et octavæ Paschæ [ ] cum cantu juxta ordinem Breviarii, Missalis et Pontificalis Romani. Editio typica Vaticana, Roma, 1922. Psalterium cum canticis Novi et Veteris Testamenti iuxta regulam S.P.N. Benedicti et alia schemata liturgiæ horarum monasticæ cantu Gregoriano cura et studio monachorum Solesmensium, Solesmes [etc.], 1981. Rouen printed book [Breviarium], [Paris: Louis Martineau (?)], 25 May 1480 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5437). Salzburg printed book [Breviarium], pars aestivalis, p. aira: Incipit psalterium secundum vsum ecclesie saltzburgensis , Venezia: [Johannes Hamann for] Johann Oswalt, 1502, 13 August (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2660; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2660). Sarum (Salisbury) printed books Portiforium seu Breuiarium, ad insignis Sarisburiensis, ecclesie vsum, London: J. Kingston & H. Sutton, 1556 (Bohatta, Bibliographie der Breviere, no. 2708; Amiet, Missels et bréviaires imprimés, no. 2708). Processionale ad Usum Sarum, London: R. Pynson, 1502. Trier manuscript Trier, Stadtbibliothek Ms. 469/1904, Trier breviary, fourteenth century. Trier printed books Libri officialis sive agendae S. ecclesiae Treverensis pars prior, Trier: J. Rotaeus, 1574. Liber officialis seu agendorum pastoralium S. Trevirensis ecclesiæ ad Ritualis Romani usum passim accommodatus, Mainz: C. Küchler, 1697. Rituale Trevirense, autoritate [...] D. Joannis Philippi [...] Archiepiscopi Trevirensis [...] editum, 2 vols., Luxemburg: Heirs of A. Chevalier, 1767.

433


Utrecht printed book [Breviarium insignis ecclesie Traiectensis], title in colophon, Paris: J. Philippe for J. W. Doliatoris, 1498 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5491). York printed book [Breviarium] (S.W. Lawley [ed.[, Breviarium ad usum insignis ecclesie Eboracensis, 2 vols., Publications of the Surtees Society, 71 & 75, Durham [etc.], 1880-83. MONASTIC USES Benedictine printed book Breviarium monasticum Pauli V. P.M. authoritate recognitum, Paris: Societas Typographica Librorum Ecclesiasticorum ordinis D. Benedicti, 1613. Carthusian manuscripts Mainz, Stadtbibliothek Hs. I 365, breviary, Mainz, fifteenth century. Hs. I 438, breviary, Mainz, fourteenth century. Hs. I 439, breviary, Mainz, twelfth-thirteenth century. Dominican manuscript Cologne, Historisches Archiv der Stadt Köln W.f. 104, breviary, Cologne, fourteenth century. Dominican printed book [Breviarium], Basel: Jakob Wolff for Jakob von Kirchen, 1492 (Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, no. 5224). Franciscan manuscript Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 8814, noted passional (all four Gospels), Munich, sixteenth century.

Secondary sources: Library and archive catalogues, Reference works and studies Antiphonale monasticum pro diurnis horis juxta vota RR. D. Abbatum congregationum conf deratarum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti a Solesmensibus monachis restitutum, Paris [etc.], 1934.

434

XII. Bibliography

Antiphonale Romanum secundum liturgiam horarum [ ] dispositum, vol. I: Liber hymnarius cum invitatoriis & aliquibus responsoriis, Paris-Tournai, 1983. Biblia sacra cum glossa ordinaria, [...] opera et studio Theologorum Duacensium diligentissime emendatis, 6 vols., Douai: Balthazar Bellère & Antwerp: Jan Keerberghen, 1617. CANTUS: A Database for Latin Ecclesiastical Chant. URL: http://publish. uwo.ca/~cantus Catalog der Lyceumsbibliothek zu Speier. Erste abtheilung, Speyer, 1866. Catalog der k. Lycealbibliothek in Speier. Zweite Abtheilung, Speyer, 1873. Catalogue of Additions to the Manuscripts in the British Museum in the Years MDCCCXLVIII-MDCCCLIII, London, 1868 [rpt. 1965]. Catalogue général des manuscrits latins [de la] Bibliothèque Nationale, 12 vols., Paris, 1939-83. Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig [etc.], 1925-. Graduale Missali Romano, cantui vero Gregoriano-Moguntino accommodatum [ ], Mainz, 1671. Graduale triplex seu Graduale Romanum Pauli PP. VI cura recognitum et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus monachis ornatum, neumis Laudunensibus (Cod. 239) et Sangallensibus (Codicum Sangallensis 359 et Einsidlensis 121) nunc auctum, Solesmes [etc.], 1979. Die Handschriften der Badischen Landesbibliothek in Karlsruhe, vol. X: Die Handschriften von St. Peter im Schwarzwald, part 1: Klaus Niebler, Die Papierhandschriften, part 2: Felix Heinzer & Gerhard Stamm, Die Pergamenthandschriften, vol. XII: Peter Höhler & Gerhard Stamm, Die Handschriften von St. Blasien, vol. XIII: Armin Schlechter & Gerhard Stamm, Die kleinen Provenienzen, Wiesbaden, 1979-2000. Die Handschriften der Stadtbibliothek Mainz, vol. I: Gerhard List & Gerhardt Powitz, Hs. I 1 - Hs. I 150, vol. II: Gerhard List, Hs. I 151 - Hs. I 250, Wiesbaden, 1990-98. Liber usualis missae et officii pro dominicis et festis cum cantu Gregoriano ex Editione Vaticana adamussim excerpto, Paris [etc.], 1936 [numerous reprints]. Officium majoris hebdomadæ et octavæ Paschæ [ ] cum cantu juxta ordinem Breviarii, Missalis et Pontificalis Romani. Editio typica Vaticana, Roma, 1922. Paléographie musicale: Les principaux manuscrits de chant grégorien, ambrosien, mozarabe, gallican, publiés en facsimilés phototypiques, Solesmes, 1889-, First series, no. 1: Codex 339 de la Bibliothèque de Saint-Gall

435


(Xe siècle): antiphonale missarum Sancti Gregorii; no. 4: Le codex 121 de la Bibliothèque d Einsiedeln (Xe-XIe siècle): antiphonale missarum Sancti Gregorii; no. 9: Antiphonaire monastique (XIIe siècle): codex 601 de la Bibliothèque capitulaire de Lucques; no. 12: Antiphonaire monastique (XIIIe siècle): codex F. 160 de la Bibliothèque de la Cathédrale de Worcester; no. 19: Le manuscrit 807 Universitätsbibliothek Graz (XIIe siècle): graduel de Klosterneuburg, Second series, no. 1: Antiphonaire de l office monastique transcrit par Hartker: MSS. Saint-Gall 390-391 (980-1011) [2nd ed. 1970]; no. 2: Cantatorium (IXe siècle): no. 359 de la Bibliothèque de Saint-Gall. Processionale monasticum ad usum Congregationis Gallicae Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, Solesmes, 1893 [rpt. Paris-Tournai, 1983]. Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1983-. Amiet, Robert, Missels et bréviaires imprimés (supplément aux catalogues de Weale et Bohatta): Propres des saints, Paris, 1990. Ammerich, Hans, Das Fürstbistum Speyer im Zeichen der tridentinischen Erneuerung , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 41 (1989), pp. 81-104. Amstutz, Renate, The Latin Substratum of the Thuringian Ludus de decem virginibus: Its Liturgical Roots and its Dramatic Relevance for the MixedLanguage Music Drama , PhD thesis, University of Toronto, 1991. -----, Ludus de decem virginibus: Recovery of the Sung Liturgical Core of the Thuringian Zehnjungfrauenspiel , Studies and Texts, 140, Toronto, 2002. Andermann, Kurt, Hochstift Speyer , in Meinrad Schaab & Hansmartin Schwarzmaier (eds.), Handbuch der baden-württembergischen Geschichte, vol. II: Die Territorien im alten Reich, Stuttgart, 1995, pp. 481-90. Arlt, Gustave O., Musik. B. Die Judengesänge , in Evans, Osterspiel von Luzern , pp. 75-83. Arx, Walter von, Das Klosterrituale von Biburg, Spicilegium Friburgense, 14, Fribourg, 1970. Bäumer OSB, Dom Suitbert, Geschichte des Breviers, Freiburg, 1895. -----, Histoire du bréviaire, trans. and adapted by Dom Réginald Biron, Paris, 1905 [rpt. Roma, 1957]. Bäumker, Wilhelm, Das katholische deutsche Kirchenlied in seinen Singweisen von den frühesten Zeiten bis gegen Ende des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts, 4 vols., Freiburg, 1886-1911 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1962]. Becker, Albert, Die Speyerer Palmsonntagsprozession , Palatina (1922), pp. 55-56.

436

XII. Bibliography

-----, Prozessionen in der alten Pfalz , Bayerischer Heimatschutz 31 (1935), pp. 84-85. Bergmann, Rolf, Studien zu Entstehung und Geschichte der deutschen Passionsspiele des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts, Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 14, München, 1972. -----, Zur Überlieferung der mittelalterlichen geistlichen Spiele , in Edith Ennen, Günter Wiegelmann [et al.] (ed.), Festschrift Matthias Zender. Studien zu Volkskultur, Sprache und Landesgeschichte, 2 vols., Bonn, 1972, vol. II, pp. 900-09. -----, Aufführungstext und Lesetext. Zur Funktion der Überlieferung des mittelalterlichen geistlichen deutschen Dramas , in Herman Braet, Johan Nowé & Gilbert Tournoy (eds.), The Theatre in the Middle Ages, Medievalia Lovaniensia, Series I, Studia, 13, Leuven, 1985, pp. 314-51. -----, Katalog der deutschsprachigen geistlichen Spiele und Marienklagen des Mittelalters, München, 1986. -----, St. Galler (mittelrheinisches) Passionsspiel , in Ruh [et al.], Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, vol. II, cols 1042-44. Bernard, Philippe, Le cantique des trois enfants (Dan. III, 52-90) , Musica e storia 1 (1993), pp. 231-72. [Berry, Mary] Mother Thomas More, The Performance of Plainsong in the Later Middle Ages and the Sixteenth Century , Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 92 (1965-66), pp. 121-34. Bevington, David, The Staging of Twelfth-Century Liturgical Drama in the Fleury Playbook , in Campbell & Davidson (eds.), Fleury Playbook, pp. 62-81. Binkley, Thomas, The Greater Passion Play from Carmina Burana: An Introduction , in Peter Reidemeister & Veronika Gutmann (eds.), Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, Sonderband zum 50. Jubiläum der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, Winterthur, 1982, pp. 144-57. ----- (dir.), [Recording of] The Greater Passion Play, Reconstructed from the Thirteenth-Century Manuscript Carmina Burana , Focus, 831, Singers and instrumentalists of the Early Music Institute, Indiana University School of Music, 1983. ----- (dir.), [Recording of] Das große Passionsspiel Carmina Burana (13. Jh.), Deutsche Harmonia Mundi, IC 2LP 165, Mittelalterensemble der Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, 1984.

437


Blosen, Hans, Zum Lied der Wächter im Wiener Osterspiel : Zugleich Bemerkungen zum Refrain in mittelhochdeutscher Lyrik , Orbis Litterarum 29 (1974), pp. 183-215. Blume, Clemens, Der Cursus S. Benedicti Nursini und die liturgischen Hymnen des 6.-9. Jahrhunderts in ihrer Beziehung zu den Sonntags- und Ferialhymnen unseres Breviers: Eine hymnologisch-liturgische Studie auf Grund handschriftlichen Quellenmaterials, Hymnologische Beiträge, 3, Leipzig, 1908. ----- & Guido M. Dreves (eds.), Analecta Hymnica medii aevi, 55 vols., Leipzig, 1886-1922 [rpt. Frankfurt, 1961]; Register, ed. by M. Lütolf, 2 vols. in 3 parts, Bern-München, 1978. Blume, Friedrich, Handbuch der Musikwissenschaft, vol. V: Die evangelische Kirchenmusik, Wildpark-Potsdam, 1931. ----- (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 16 vols., Kassel, 194979. Bohatta, Hanns, Bibliographie der Breviere 1501-1850, Leipzig, 1937 [rpt. Stuttgart-Nieuwkoop, 1963]. -----, Liturgische Bibliographie des XV. Jahrhunderts mit Ausnahme der Missale und Livres d heures, Wien, 1911 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1960]. Bohlender, Rolf, Dom und Bistum Speyer: Eine Bibliographie, Speyer, 1979 [2nd ed.]. Bohn, Peter, Das liturgische Rezitativ und dessen Bezeichnung in den liturgischen Büchern des Mittelalters , Monatshefte für Musikgeschichte 19 (1887), pp. 29-36, 45-52, 61-68, 78-80. Boletta, William Louis, The Role of Music in Medieval German Drama: Easter Plays and Passion Plays , Diss. Vanderbilt University, 1967. Boor, Helmut de, Die lateinische Grundlage der deutschen Osterspiele , Hessische Blätter für Volkskunde 41 (1950), pp. 45-66. -----, Die Textgeschichte der lateinischen Osterfeiern, Hermaea, Germanistische Forschungen, n.s., 22, Tübingen, 1967. Bourgeault, Cynthia, Liturgical Dramaturgy and Modern Production , in Campbell & Davidson (eds.), Fleury Playbook, pp. 144-60. Bowles, Edmund A., The Role of Musical Instruments in Medieval Sacred Drama , Musical Quarterly 45 (1959), pp. 67-84. -----, Were Musical Instruments used in the Liturgical Service during the Middle Ages? , Galpin Society Journal 10 (1957), pp. 40-56; 12 (1959), pp. 89-92.

438

XII. Bibliography

Breuer, Wilhelm, Zur Aufführungspraxis vorreformatorischer Fronleichnamsspiele in Deutschland , Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 94 (1975), Sonderheft: Mittelalterliches deutsches Drama, pp. 50-71. Brockett, Clyde W., Osanna! New Light on the Palm Sunday Processional Antiphon Series , Plainsong and Medieval Music 9 (2000), pp. 95-129. Brou OSB, L., Le répons Ecce quomodo moritur dans les traditions romaine et espagnole , Revue Bénédictine 51 (1939), pp. 144-68. Brück, Anton, Mainz , in Höfer & Rahner (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, vol. VI, cols. 1300-05. -----, Mainz , in Galling [et al.] (eds.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. IV, cols. 614-17. Bryden, John R. & Hughes, David G., An Index of Gregorian Chant, 2 vols., vol. I: Alphabetical Index, vol. II: Thematic Index, Cambridge, Mass., 1969. Bukofzer, Manfred F., Caput: a Liturgico-Musical Study , in Bukofzer, Manfred F., Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Music; London, 1951, pp. 217-310. Campbell, Thomas P. & Clifford Davidson (eds.), The Fleury Playbook: Essays and Studies, Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series, 7, Kalamazoo, MI, 1985. Cappelli, Adriano, Lexicon Abbreviaturarum: Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane [ ], Milan, 1929. Chevalier, Ulysse, Repertorium Hymnologicum: Catalogue des chants, hymnes, proses, séquences, tropes en usage dans l église latine depuis les origines jusqu à nos jours, 6 vols., Subsidia hagiographica, 4, LouvainBruxelles, 1892-1921. Clemm, L., Zur Topographie der Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Beiträge zur hessischen Kirchengeschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F., Ergänzungsband 9, Darmstadt, 1931, pp. 437-70. Copinger, Walter Arthur, Supplement to Hain s Repertorium bibliographicum, 3 vols., London, 1895-1902. Crocker, Richard L., An Introduction to Gregorian Chant, New Haven, CT, 2000. Daniel, Hermann Adalbert, Thesaurus hymnologicus sive hymnorum canticorum sequentiarum collectio amplissima, 5 vols., Leipzig, 1855-56. Davis, Lisa Fagin, The Gottschalk Antiphonary: Music and Liturgy in Twelfth-Century Lambach, Cambridge, 2000.

439


Demandt, Karl E., Das Chorherrenstift St. Peter zu Fritzlar: Quellen und Studien zu seiner mittelalterlichen Gestalt und Geschichte, Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Hessen, 49, Marburg, 1985. Dörrer, Anton, Baldemar von Peterweil , in Wolfgang Stammler & Karl Langosch (eds.), Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, Berlin-Leipzig, 1933-55, vol. I, cols. 155-58. Doll, Anton, Die Karwoche im Speyerer Dom vor 500 Jahren , Der christliche Pilger. Bistumsblatt für die Diözese Speyer 101 (1951), p. 164. -----, Eine Osterfeier im Dom zu Speyer: Nach einem Zeremonienbuch des Domsakristans aus dem 16. Jahrhundert , Pfälzische Heimatblätter 2 (1954), p. 32. Dreimüller, Karl, Die Musik des Alsfelder Passionsspiels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in den geistlichen Spielen des deutschen Mittelalters. Mit erstmaliger Veröffentlichung der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels (Landes-Bibl. Kassel 2o Mss. poet. 18) , 3 vols., Doctoral thesis Universität Wien, 1935, vol. I: Abhandlungen; vol. II: Das musikalische Szenarium des Alsfelder Passionsspiels. Mit Ergänzung und Bestimmung der liturgischen Texte und einem Anhang von 45 Melodien zu lateinischen Textparallelen im Egerer Fronleichnamsspiel, aus der Handschrift Ludus de creacione mundi no 7060 des Germanischen Nationalmuseums in Nürnberg; vol. III: Die Melodien des Alsfelder Passionsspiels. Übertragungen der Melodien aus der Kasseler Handschrift des Alsfelder Spiels. -----, Die Musik in den mittelalterlichen Spielen des Rheinlandes , Rheinische Blätter 15 (1939), pp. 383-88. -----, Die Alsfelder Marienklage , Zeitschrift für Kirchenmusik 69 (1949), pp. 35-38. -----, Die Musik im geistlichen Spiel des späten deutschen Mittelalters: Dargestellt am Alsfelder Passionsspiel , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 34 (1950), pp. 27-34. Du Méril, Edélestand, Origines latines du théâtre moderne, Paris, 1849. Dutka, JoAnna, Music in the English Mystery Plays, Early Drama, Art, and Music Reference Series, 2, Kalamazoo, MI, 1980. Eid, Ludwig, Zur Geschichte der alten Speyerer Dommusik , Musica sacra 63 (1933), pp. 234-37. Eisenhofer, Ludwig, Handbuch der katholischen Liturgik, 2 vols., Freiburg, 1932-33. Eizenhöfer, Leo & Hermann Knaus, Die Handschriften der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt, vol. II: Die liturgischen Hand-

440

XII. Bibliography

schriften der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt, Wiesbaden, 1968. Elliott, John R., Playing God, Toronto, 1990. Elliott, J. K. (trans. & ed.), The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation, Oxford, 1993. Ettlinger, Emil, Die Handschriften der Großherzoglichen Badischen Hofund Landesbibliothek in Karlsruhe, Beilage III: Die ursprüngliche Herkunft der Handschriften die aus Kloster-, bischöflichen und RitterschaftsBibliotheken nach Karlsruhe gelangt sind, Heidelberg, 1901. Evans, Marshall Blakemore, The Passion Play of Lucerne, New York-Oxford, 1943. -----, Das Osterspiel von Luzern. Eine historisch-kritische Einleitung , [trans.] Paul Hagmann, Schweizer Theaterjahrbuch 27 (1961), pp. 1-275. Falk, Franz (ed.), Die pfarramtlichen Aufzeichnungen (Liber consuetudinum) des Florentius Diel zu St. Christoph in Mainz, 1491-1518, Erläuterungen und Ergänzungen zu Janssens Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, Band 4, Heft 3, Freiburg, 1904. Fellerer, Karl Gustav, Kirchenmusikalische Vorschriften im Mittelalter , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 40 (1956), pp. 1-11. Finkel, Klaus, Liturgisches Drama am Mittelrhein , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 57 (1973), pp. 25-28. -----, Musikalische Aufführungspraxis besonderer Meßstiftungen und Feierlichkeiten im fürstbischöflichen Dom zu Speyer , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 58-59 (1974-75), pp. 47-56. -----, Die Speyrer Domkantorei im Mittelalter, Schriften des Diözesanarchivs Speyer, 1, Speyer, 1975. -----, Musik in Speyer: Ein Überblick zur Speyerer Musikgeschichte bis zur Gegenwart, Beiträge zur Speyerer Stadtgeschichte, 4, Speyer, 1975. Finscher, Ludwig (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, KasselStuttgart, 1994- [2nd rev. ed.]. Flanigan, C. Clifford, Medieval Latin Music-Drama , in Simon (ed.), Theatre of Medieval Europe, pp. 21-41. Franz, Adolph, Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Liturgie und des religiösen Volkslebens, Freiburg, 1902 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1963]. Froning, Richard (ed.), Das Drama des Mittelalters, Deutsche NationalLitteratur, 14:1-3, 3 vols., Stuttgart, 1891-92 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1964].

441


Galling, Kurt [et al.] (eds.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft, 7 vols., Tübingen, 1957-65 [3rd ed.]. Gensicke, H., Worms , in Galling [et al.] (eds.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VI, col. 1808. Gottron, Adam, Tausend Jahre Musik in Mainz, Mainz: Geschichte und Kultur einer Stadt, 2, Mainz-Berlin, 1964 [2nd revised ed.]. -----, Mainz , in Blume (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VIII, cols. 1522-29. Gräf, Christine, Inkunabeln und Frühdrucke des Diözesan-Archivs Würzburg, Würzburg, 1992. Gstrein, Rainer, Anmerkungen zu den Gesängen der Osterspiele des Sterzinger Debs -Kodex , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 91-98. Gugumus, Johannes Emil, Ein Speyerer Kalendar des 15. Jh. aus Cod. Pal. 514 der Vatikanischen Bibliothek , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 11 (1959), pp. 245-53. -----, Die alte Heidelberger Bibliotheca Palatina: Eine pfälzische Forschungsaufgabe , Pfälzische Heimatblätter 9 (1961), pp. 19-21. -----, Dedicatio Spirensis Ecclesiae Antiqua. Zur Weihe des frühsalischen Domes im Jahr 1061 , in Ludwig Stamer (ed.), 900 Jahre Speyerer Dom: Festschrift zum Jahrestag der Domweihe, Speyer, 1961, pp. 175-87. Haas, Robert, Zu Walther s Choralpassion nach Matthäus , Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 4 (1922), pp. 24-47. -----, Handbuch der Musikwissenschaft, vol. III: Aufführungspraxis der Musik, Wildpark-Potsdam, 1931. Haffner, Franz, Der Gründonnerstag im alten Speyer , Die Rheinpfalz 19-20 April 1973, p. 15. Hain, Ludwig Friedrich Theodor, Repertorium bibliographicum, in quo libri omnes ab arte typographica inventa usque ad annum MD. typis expressi ordine alphabetico vel simpliciter enumerantur vel adcuratius recensentur, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1826-38 [rpt. Milan, 1948]. Hammerstein, Reinhold, Die Musik der Engel: Untersuchungen zur Musikanschauung des Mittelalters, Bern-München, 1962. Harper, John, The Forms and Orders of Western Liturgy from the Tenth to the Eighteenth Century: A Historical Introduction and Guide for Students and Musicians, Oxford, 1991. Hartl, Eduard, Untersuchungen zum St. Galler Passionsspiel , in Gerhard Eis, Johannes Hansel & Richard Kienast (eds.), Festschrift für Wolfgang

442

XII. Bibliography

Stammler zu seinem 65. Geburtstag dargebracht von Freunden und Schülern, Berlin-Bielefeld, 1953, pp. 109-29. ----- (ed.), Das Drama des Mittelalters, 3 vols., Leipzig, 1937-42 [rpt. Darmstadt, 1964-69]. ----- (ed.), Das Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel: Das St. Galler Passionsspiel, Altdeutsche Textbibliothek, 41, Halle/Saale, 1952, pp. 56-131. Heinemeyer, Karl, Mainz I , TRE, 21, pp. 710-17. Hennig, Ursula, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919] , Daphnis 8 (1979), pp. 351-55. -----, Die Beteiligung von Frauen als Darstellerinnen an lateinischen Osterfeiern , in Carola L. Gottzmann & Herbert Kolb (eds.), Geist und Zeit: Wirkungen des Mittelalters in Literatur und Sprache: Festschrift für Roswitha Wisniewski zu ihrem 65. Geburtstag, Frankfurt am Main, 1991, pp. 211-27. -----, Die lateinische Sequenz Planctus ante nescia und die deutschen Marienklagen , in Nikolaus Henkel & Nigel F. Palmer (eds.), Latein und Volkssprache im deutschen Mittelalter 1100-1500: Regensburger Kolloquium 1988, Tübingen, 1992, pp. 164-77. -----, Der Descensus Jesu ad Inferos in den Spielen des 16. Jahrhunderts , in Mehler & Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel, pp. 199-212. Hesbert, René-Jean, Corpus antiphonalium officii, 6 vols., Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Series maior, Fontes, 7-12, Roma, 1963-79. Hiley, David, Western Plainchant: A Handbook, Oxford, 1993. -----, Responsorium , in Finscher (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VIII, cols. 176-200. ----- [ed.], Moosburger Graduale, 2o Cod. ms. 156: Faksimile mit einer Einleitung und Registern, Veröffentlichungen der Gesellschaft für Bayerische Musikgeschichte, Tutzing, 1996. Höfer, Josef & Rahner, Karl (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, 11 vols., Freiburg, 1957-67 [2nd ed.]. Hofmann, Josef, Dom und Bistum Speyer. Literatur-Nachweis anläßlich des 900jährigen Domjubiläums, Mitteilungen der Pfälzischen Landesbibliothek, Jahrgang 1930, 1, Speyer, 1930. ----- & Hermann Hauke, Die Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek und der Stiftskirche zu Aschaffenburg, Veröffentlichungen des Geschichts- und Kunstvereins Aschaffenburg e.V., 16, Aschaffenburg, 1978. Hucke, Helmut, Responsorium , in Blume (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. XI, cols. 313-25. -----, Zur Situation der musikalischen Mittelalterforschung in Deutschland , Die Musikforschung 37 (1984), pp. 257-59.

443


Hürlimann, Gebhard, Das Rheinauer Rituale (Zürich Rh 114, Anfang 12. Jh.), Spicilegium Friburgense, 5, Freiburg, 1959. Hughes, Andrew, Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Office: A Guide to their Organization and Terminology, Toronto [etc.], 1982. -----, Liturgical Drama: Falling between the Disciplines , in Simon (ed.), Theatre of Medieval Europe, pp. 42-62. Huglo, Michel, Liturgische Gesangbücher , in Finscher (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. V, cols. 1412-37. Illert, F.M., Worms , in Höfer & Rahner (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, vol. X, cols. 1224-29. Janota, Johannes, Studien zu Funktion und Typus des deutschen geistlichen Liedes im Mittelalter, Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 23, München, 1968. -----, Auf der Suche nach gattungsadäquaten Editionsformen bei der Herausgabe mittelalterlicher Spiele , in Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel, pp. 74-87. -----, [Review of Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen] , Germanistik 20 (1979), pp. 148-49. -----, Zur Funktion der Gesänge in der hessischen Passionsspielgruppe , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 109-20. ----- (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, vol. I: Frankfurter Dirigierrolle. Frankfurter Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments und des Fritzlarer Passionsspielfragments ; vol. II: Alsfelder Passionsspiel. Mit den Paralleltexten der Frankfurter Dirigierrolle , des Frankfurter Passionsspiels , des Heidelberger Passionsspiels , des Frankfurter Osterspielfragments ; Edition der Melodien von Horst Brunner, Tübingen, 1996-2002. ----- (ed.), see also: Wolf. Jöckle, Clemens & Jürgen Vorderstemann, Schmuckblatt zum Beginn des Sommerteils eines Brevierantiphonales: Hs. 2 Fol. 1 der Pfälzischen Landesbibliothek Speyer, Speyer, 1980. Johner, Dominicus, Die Sonn- und Festtagslieder des vatikanischen Graduale, nach Text und Melodien erklärt, Regensburg, 1928. Jülicher, Adolf (ed.), Itala: Das Neue Testament in altlateinischer Überlieferung, vol. IV: Johannes-Evangelium, Berlin, 1963.

444

XII. Bibliography

Julian, John (ed.), A Dictionary of Hymnology Setting Forth the Origin and History of Christian Hymns of All Ages and Nations, London, 1908 [rev. ed.]. Kahlfuß, Hans-Jürgen (ed.), Die Handschriften der Gesamthochschulbibliothek Kassel Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel (since 2002: Die Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Kassel Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel, vol. I, part 1: Konrad Wiedemann, Manuscripta theologica. Die Handschriften in Folio; vol. I, part 3: Idem, Manuscripta theologica. Die Handschriften in Oktav: vol. IV, part 2: Birgitt Hilberg, Manuscripta poetica et romanensia. Manuscripta theatralia, Wiesbaden, 1993-2002. Kantorowicz, Hermann, Einführung in die Textkritik, Leipzig, 1921. Kasper, Walter [et al.] (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, Freiburg, 1993- [3rd ed.]. King, Archdale A., Liturgies of the Religious Orders, London, 1955. -----, Liturgies of the Primatial Sees, London, 1957. -----, Liturgy of the Roman Church, London, 1957. -----, Liturgies of the Past, London, 1959. Klein, Michael, Die Handschriften der Staatsarchive Baden-Württembergs, vol. II: Die Handschriften 65/1-1200 im Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe; herausgegeben von der Landesarchivdirektion Baden-Württemberg, Wiesbaden, 1987. Klein, Theodor Heinrich, Die Prozessionsgesänge der Mainzer Kirche aus dem 14. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 7, Speyer, 1962. Klotz, Fritz, Zwei Blätter eines Rituale des 15. Jahrhunderts , Pfälzische Heimat 15 (1964), pp. 103-04. Köllner, Georg Paul, Der Accentus Moguntinus. Ein Beitrag zur Frage des Mainzer Chorals , Diss. Johannes Gutenberg Universität Mainz, 1950. -----, Die Bedeutung des Johann Philipp von Schönborn für die Reform des liturgischen Kirchengesangs , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 39 (1955), pp. 55-70. -----, Der Accentus Moguntinus nach den Schönborn-Drucken , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 40 (1956), pp. 44-62. -----, Zur Tradition des Accentus Moguntinus , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 42 (1958), pp. 39-46. Körndle, Franz [et al.], Liturgische Dramen, geistliche Spiele , in Finscher (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. V, cols 1388-1412.

445


Köttelwesch, Clemens (ed.), Die Kataloge der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main, vol. I: Gerhardt Powitz, Die Handschriften des Dominikanerklosters und des Leonhardstifts in Frankfurt am Main, vol. II: Gerhardt Powitz & Herbert Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts und des Karmeliterklosters in Frankfurt am Main, vol. III: Karin Bredehorn & Gerhardt Powitz, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Gruppe Manuscripta latina, Frankfurt, 1968-79. Korth, Michael (ed.), Carmina Burana: Lateinisch-deutsch. Gesamtausgabe der mittelalterlichen Melodien mit den dazugehörigen Texten; übertragen, kommentiert und erprobt von René Clemencic; Textkommentar von Ulrich Müller; Übersetzung von René Clemencic und Michael Korth, München, 1979. Kroos, Renate, Drei niedersächsische Bildhandschriften, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 3. Folge, 56, Göttingen, 1973. Kühebacher, Egon (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel. Beiträge zur Theatergeschichte des Alpenraumes, Schriftenreihe des Südtiroler Kulturinstitutes, 3, Bozen, 1976. Kuné, Cobie, Er taufte mit Wasser: Zur Taufe Christi im deutschen religiösen Drama und in der bildenden Kunst des späten Mittelalters , Neophilologus 84 (2000), pp. 241-53. Kuné, J. H., In the Beginning was the Word : Das Prager Abendmahlspiel : The Words Rendered into Actions and Images , Neophilologus 87 (2003), pp. 79-96. Kurras, Lotte, Kataloge des Germanischen Nationalmuseums Nürnberg, vol. I, part 1: Die deutschen mittelalterlichen Handschriften. Erster Teil: Die literarischen und religiösen Handschriften, Wiesbaden, 1974. Labhardt, Frank, Das Cantionale des Kartäusers Thomas Kreß. Ein Denkmal der spätmittelalterlichen Musikgeschichte Basels, Publikationen der Schweizerischen Musikforschenden Gesellschaft, Ser. 2, 20, Bern-Stuttgart, 1978. Lamott, Alois, Zur Geschichte der Germansverehrung in der Speyerer Liturgie , in St. German in Stadt und Bistum Speyer: Festschrift zur Weihe der Kirche des Priesterseminars St. German in Speyer, Speyer, 1957, pp. 4971. -----, Codex Vindobonensis 1882: Ein Liber ordinarius des Speyerer Domes aus dem 13. Jahrhundert , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 13 (1961), pp. 27-48.

446

XII. Bibliography

-----, Das Speyerer Diözesanrituale von 1512 bis 1932: Seine Geschichte und seine Ordines zur Sakramentenliturgie, Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte, 5, Speyer, 1961. Lehnen, Brigitte, Das Egerer Passionsspiel, Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 1034, Frankfurt, 1988. Lengeling, Emil Josef, Missale Monasteriense, 1300-1900: Katalog, Texte und vergleichende Studien, (eds.) Benedikt Kranemann & Klemens Richter, Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 76, Münster, 1995. Levy, Kenneth J., A New Look at Old Roman Chant - II , Early Music History 20 (2001), pp. 173-97. -----, Trisagion , in Sadie (ed.), New Grove, vol. XXV, pp. 745-46. Linke, Hansjürgen, [Review of Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 81 (1970), pp. 69-72. -----, Bauformen geistlicher Dramen des späten Mittelalters , in Karl-Heinz Schirmer & Bernhard Sowinski (eds.), Zeiten und Formen in Sprache und Dichtung: Festschrift für Fritz Tschirch zum 70. Geburtstag, Köln-Wien, 1972, pp. 203-25. -----, Ist das Tiroler Schauspiel des Mittelalters Volksschauspiel? , in Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel, pp. 88-109. -----, Das volkssprachige Drama und Theater im deutschen und niederländischen Sprachbereich , in Willi Erzgräber (ed.), Neues Handbuch der Literaturwissenschaft, vol. VIII: Europäisches Spätmittelalter, Wiesbaden, 1977, pp. 733-63. -----, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 90 (1979), pp. 154-60. -----, Drama und Theater des Mittelalters als Feld interdisziplinärer Forschung , Euphorion 79 (1985), pp. 43-65. -----, Versuch über deutsche Handschriften mittelalterlicher Spiele , in Volker Honemann & Nigel F. Palmer (eds.), Deutsche Handschriften 11001400: Oxforder Kolloquium 1985, Tübingen, 1988, pp. 527-89. -----, A Survey of Medieval Drama and Theatre in Germany , Comparative Drama 27 (1993), pp. 17-53. -----, Germany and German-speaking Central Europe , in Simon (ed.), Theatre of Medieval Europe, pp. 207-24. -----, Beobachtungen zu den geistlichen Spielen im Codex Buranus , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 128 (1999), pp. 185-93.

447


-----, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. I] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 121 (1999), pp. 156-62. -----, [Review of Janota (ed.), Hessische Passionsspielgruppe, vol. II] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 126 (2004), pp. 359-66. -----, Bernd Neumann, Dieter Trauden & Margot Westlinning, Kollation zu Rolf Bergmann: Die Göttweiger Dirigierrolle eines Osterspiels , unpublished typescript, University of Cologne, Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Literatur, [s.d.]. Lipphardt, Walther, Liturgische Dramen , in Finscher (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VIII, cols. 1010-51. -----, Mitten wir im Leben sind : Zur Geschichte des Liedes und seiner Weise , Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie 8 (1963), pp. 99-118. -----, Die Mainzer Visitatio Sepulchri , in Ursula Hennig & Herbert Kolb (eds.), Mediævalia litteraria: Festschrift für Helmut de Boor zum 80. Geburtstag, München, 1971, pp. 177-91. -----, Die Visitatio Sepulchri (III. Stufe) von Gernrode , Daphnis 1 (1972), pp. 1-14. -----, Die Visitatio Sepulchri in Zisterzienserinnenklöstern der Lüneburger Heide , Daphnis 1 (1972), pp. 119-28. -----, Die lateinischen Osterspiele im Alpenraum und ihr Zusammenhang , in Kühebacher (ed.), Tiroler Volksschauspiel, pp. 110-26. -----, Musik in den spätmittelalterlichen Passionsspielen und Osterspielen von Bozen, Sterzing und Brixen , in ibid., pp. 127-66. ----- (ed.), Lateinische Osterfeiern und Osterspiele, 9 vols., Ausgaben deutscher Literatur des XV. bis XVIII. Jahrhunderts, Reihe Drama, 5, BerlinNew York, 1975-90. ----- & Roloff, Hans-Gert (eds.), Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 14-19, Bern, 1980-. List, Gerhard, Die Handschriften der Dombibliothek Fritzlar, Wiesbaden, 1984. Litzenburger, L., Speyer , in Kasper [et al.] (eds.), Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, vol. IX, cols. 961-63. Lutz, K., Speyer , in Galling [et al.] (eds.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VI, cols. 241-42. Macardle, Peter, Die Gesänge des St. Galler Mittelrheinischen Passionsspiels : Ein Beitrag zu Rekonstruktion und Lokalisierung , in T. Jackson,

448

XII. Bibliography

N. Palmer & A. Suerbaum (eds.), Die Vermittlung geistlicher Inhalte im Mittelalter, Tübingen, 1997, pp. 255-70. McDonald, William J. [et al.], New Catholic Encyclopedia, New York [etc.], 1967-. McGee, Timothy J., The Liturgical Origins and Early History of the Quem Quaeritis Dialogue , Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1974. -----, The Role of the Quem quaeritis Dialogue in the History of Western Drama , Renaissance Drama, n.s. 7 (1976), pp. 177-91. -----, Drama, Liturgical , in Strayer (ed.), Dictionary of the Middle Ages, vol. IV, pp. 272-77. -----, The Sound of Medieval Song: Ornamentation and Vocal Style according to the Treatises, Oxford, 1998. Mantello, Frank Anthony Carl & A.G. Rigg (eds.), Medieval Latin: An Introduction and Bibliographical Guide, Washington, D.C., 1996. Marbach, Carl, Carmina scripturarum, Strasbourg, 1907 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1963]. Mehler, Ulrich, [Review of Pflanz, Lateinische Textgrundlagen] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 91 (1980), pp. 120-24. -----, Dicere und cantare : Zur musikalischen Terminologie und Aufführungspraxis des mittelalterlichen geistlichen Dramas in Deutschland, Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung, 120, Regensburg, 1981. -----, Marienklagen im spätmittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Deutschland: Textversikel und Melodietypen, Amsterdamer Publikationen zur Sprache und Literatur, 128-129, Amsterdam-Atlanta, 1997. ----- & Anton H. Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel: Festschrift für Hansjürgen Linke zum 65. Geburtstag, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik, 38-39, Amsterdam-Atlanta, 1994. Meier, Adolf & Fritz Reuter, Worms , in Blume (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. XIV, cols 864-74. Meredith, Peter & John E. Tailby (eds.), The Staging of Religious Drama in Europe in the Later Middle Ages: Texts and Documents in English Translation, Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series, 4, Kalamazoo, MI, 1983). Meyer, Hans, Die Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Beiträge zur hessischen Kirchengeschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F., Ergänzungsband 9 (1931), pp. 340-431. -----, Topographie der Diözese Worms im Mittelalter , Archiv für hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, N.F. 17 (1932), pp. 1-92.

449


Meyer, Wilhelm (ed.), Fragmenta Burana , in Festschrift zur Feier des hundertfünfzigjährigen Bestehens der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Klasse, Berlin, 1901, pp. 1-190, and 15 pls. Miazga, Tadeusz, Die Gesänge zur Osterprozession in den handschriftlichen Überlieferungen vom 10. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, Graz, 1979. Migne, J.-P. (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus [ ] Series Latina, 221 vols., Paris, 1844-90. Milchsack, Gustav, Die Oster- und Passionsspiele: Literarhistorische Untersuchungen über den Ursprung derselben bis zum 17. Jahrhundert, vornehmlich in Deutschland, Wolfenbüttel, 1880. Möller, Eberhard, Liturgische Osterspiele im vorreformatorischen Zwickau , Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch 79 (1995), pp. 7-19. Molin, Jean-Baptiste & Annick Aussedat-Minvielle, Répertoire des rituels et processionaux imprimés conservés en France, Paris, 1984. Mone, Franz Joseph (ed.), Altteutsche Schauspiele, Bibliothek der gesammten deutschen National-Literatur von der ältesten bis auf die neuere Zeit, 21, Quedlinburg-Leipzig, 1841. ----- (ed.), Schauspiele des Mittelalters:, 2 vols., Karlsruhe, 1846-48. Moore, John Robert, The Tradition of Angelic Singing in English Drama , Journal of English and Germanic Philology 22 (1923), pp. 89-99. Muir, Lynette R., The Biblical Drama of Medieval Europe, Cambridge, 1995. Neumann, Bernd, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919] , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen), 104 (1982), 318-23. -----, Geistliches Schauspiel im Zeugnis der Zeit: Zur Aufführung mittelalterlicher religiöser Dramen im deutschen Sprachgebiet, 2 vols., Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 84-85, München-Zürich, 1987. -----, Das Innsbrucker Spiel von Mariae Himmelfahrt : Gedanken zu einer Neuedition , Neue Beiträge zur Germanistik (=Doitsu Bungaku) 109 (2002), pp. 191-206. Norton, Michael, The Type II Visitatio Sepulchri: A Repertorial Study , Diss. Ohio State University, 1983. -----, Of Stages and Types in Visitatio Sepulchri , Comparative Drama 21 (1987), pp. 34-61, 127-44. Nowé, Johan, Dramaturgische Technik und thematische Demonstration: Das Regieverfahren im Alsfelder Passionsspiel , in Luc Lamberechts & Johan

450

XII. Bibliography

Nowé (eds.), Bild-Sprache: Texte zwischen Dichten und Denken. Festschrift für Ludo Verbeeck, Symbolae facultatis litterarum et philosophiae Lovaniensis, Series D, Litteraria, 5, Leuven, 1990, pp. 159-75. -----, Die Regie als symbolstiftende Instanz des Alsfelder Passionsspiels , Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 45 (1995), pp. 3-23. Obermair, Hannes, The Social Stages of the City: Vigil Raber and Performance Direction in Bozen/Bolzano (Northern Italy) a Socio-historical Outline , Concilium medii aevi 7 (2004), pp. 193-208 (internet publication). Obhof, Ute, Zur Geschichte der Bibliothek des ehemaligen Karmeliterklosters Hirschhorn am Neckar , Bibliothek und Wissenschaft 27 (1994), pp. 56-148. Ornithoparchus, Andreas, Musice Actiue Micrologus, Leipzig: V. Schurmann, 1517 [rpt. in Ornithoparchus/Dowland, A Compendium of Musical Practice [ ], (eds.) Gustave Reese & Steven Ledbetter, New York, 1973, pp. 3-109. Osthoff, Helmuth, Deutsche Liedweisen und Wechselgesänge im mittelalterlichen Drama , Archiv für Musikforschung 7 (1942), pp. 65-81. -----, Die Musik im Drama des deutschen Mittelalters: Quellen und Forschungsziele , Deutsche Musikkultur 8 (1943), pp. 29-40. Overgaauw, Eef A., Saints in Medieval Calendars from the Diocese of Utrecht as Clues for the Localization of Manuscripts , Codices Manuscripti 16 (1992), pp. 81-97. Pascher, Joseph, Das Stundengebet der römischen Kirche, München, 1954. Pelzer, Auguste, Abréviations latines médiévales: Supplément au Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane de Adriano Cappelli, Bruxelles, 1966 [rpt. 1982]. Pflanz, Hermann Manfred, Die lateinischen Textgrundlagen des St. Galler Passionsspieles in der mittelalterlichen Liturgie, Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 1, 205, Frankfurt [etc.], 1977. Pietzsch, Gerhard, Zur Geschichte der Musik in Worms bis zur Mitte des 16. Jahrhunderts , Der Wormsgau 3 (1956), pp. 249-82. -----, Gedanken zu einer pfälzischen Musikgeschichte , Pfälzer Heimat 7 (1956), pp. 1-10. -----, Zur Musikgeschichte von Speyer vor der Reformation , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 9 (1957), pp. 51-67. Polheim, Karl Konrad, [Review of Liebenow (ed.), Das Künzelsauer Fronleichnamsspiel] , Zeitschrift für Volkskunde 67 (1971), pp. 286-88.

451


Praet, Joseph Basile Bernard van, Catalogue des livres imprimés sur vélin, qui se trouvent dans les bibliothèques tant publiques que particulières [ ], Paris, 1824-28, 4 vols. Ranke, Friedrich, Von der ritterlichen zur bürgerlichen Dichtung, 12301430 , in Heinz Otto Burger (ed.), Annalen der deutschen Literatur, Stuttgart, 1971 [2nd revised ed.], pp. 179-253. Rankin, Susan K., The Mary Magdalene Scene in the Visitatio Sepulchri Ceremonies , Early Music History 1 (1981), pp. 227-55. -----, From Memory to Record: Musical Notations in Manuscripts from Exeter , Anglo-Saxon England 13 (1984), pp. 97-112. -----, Musical and Ritual Aspects of Quem queritis , Münchener Beiträge zur Mediävistik und Renaissanceforschung 36 (1985), pp. 181-92. -----, [Review of Thomas Binkley (dir.), Recordings of (Großes) Benediktbeurer Passionsspiel] , Early Music 14 (1986), pp. 443-46. -----, The Music of the Medieval Liturgical Drama in France and England, 2 vols., Outstanding Dissertations in Music from British Universities, New York-London, 1989. Rastall, Richard, The Heaven Singing: Music in Early English Religious Drama, Cambridge, 1996, vol. I. Rau, Johannes, Tropus und Sequenz im Mainzer Cantatorium Cod. Lond. Add. 19768 , Unpub. Diss., University of Heidelberg, 1959. Reichling, Dietrich, Appendices ad Hainii-Copingeri Repertorium bibliographicum: Additiones et emendationes. Supplement, Monasterii, 1914. Reifenberg, Hermann, Der Ordo Missae Moguntinus seit dem 14. Jahrhundert , Unpub. Diss., University of Mainz, 1952. -----, Messe und Missalien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Zeitalter der Gotik, Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 37, Münster, 1960. -----, Das Diurnale Moguntinum von 1612 , Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 36 (1961), pp. 172-76. -----, Vom Missale Moguntinum des Jahres 1602 zum Missale Romano-Moguntinum von 1698 , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 13 (1961), pp. 432-39. -----, Das Mainzer Schöffer-Brevier von 1517 , Mainzer Almanach (1962), pp. 107-12. -----, Eine Sonderausfertigung des Breviarium Moguntinum von 1509 , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 14 (1962), pp. 459-66. -----, Stundengebet und Breviere im Bistum Mainz seit der romanischen Epoche, Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 40, MünsterAschaffendorff, 1964.

452

XII. Bibliography

-----, Sakramente, Sakramentalien und Ritualien im Bistum Mainz seit dem Spätmittelalter, 2 vols., Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 53-54, Münster, 1971-72. -----, Mainzer Liturgie vor dem Hintergrund des Mainzer Chorals , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 27 (1975), pp. 9-17. -----, Gottesdienst in den Kirchen des deutschen Sprachgebietes: Bestand und Wünsche wissenschaftlicher Bemühungen um die teilkirchliche Liturgie im Laufe eines Jahrhunderts , Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft 22 (1981), pp. 30-92. Remak-Honnef, Elisabeth & Hermann Hauke, Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Die Handschriften der ehemaligen Mannheimer Hofbibliothek Clm 10 001-10 930, Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, Tomus IV, Series nova, Pars 1, Wiesbaden, 1991. Robinson, John W., Studies in Fifteenth-Century Stagecraft, Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series, 14, Kalamazoo, MI, 1991. Rudick, Michael, Theme, Structure and Sacred Context in the Benediktbeuern Passion Play , Speculum 49 (1974), pp. 267-86. Rueff, Hans, [Review of Wolter (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu] , Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 38 (1919), 6670. Ruh, Kurt [et al.], Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, Berlin-New York, 1978- [2nd ed.]. Sadie, Stanley (ed.), The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., London, 2001 [2nd ed.]. Salmon, Pierre, Les manuscrits liturgiques de la Bibliothèque Vaticane, 5 vols., Studi e Testi, 251-270, Vaticano, 1968-72, vol. I: Psautiers, antiphonaires, hymnaires, collectaires, bréviaire; vol. II: Sacramentaires, épistoliers, évangéliaires, graduels, missels; vol. III: Ordines Romani, pontificaux, rituels, cérémoniaux; vol. V: Liste complémentaire; tables générales. Saulnier, Dom Daniel, La résurrection de Lazare , Etudes grégoriennes 25 (1997), pp. 7-11. Schäfer, Thomas, Die Fußwaschung im monastischen Brauchtum und in der lateinischen Liturgie: Liturgiegeschichtliche Untersuchung, Texte und Arbeiten der Erzabtei Beuron, I, 47, Beuron, 1956. Schannat, Johann Friedrich, Historia Episcopatus Wormatiensis pontificum romanorum bullis, regum, imperatorum diplomatibus [ ] aliisque pluribus documentis authenticis asserta ac illustrata [ ], Frankfurt am Main, 1734.

453


Scheel, Katja (ed.), Et respondeat : Studien zum deutschen Theater des Mittelalters. Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Johan Nowé anlässlich seiner Emeritierung, Medievalia Lovaniensia, Series I, Studia, 32, Leuven, 2002. Schlager, Karlheinz, Passion A. Die einstimmige Passion , in Finscher (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. VII, cols 1452-56. -----, Über den Choralgesang in Mainz , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 27 (1975), pp. 19-26. ----- (ed.), Antiphonale Pataviense (Wien 1519), Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 88, Kassel [etc.], 1985. Schmidt, Herman A. P., Hebdomada sancta. I. Contemporanei textus liturgici, documenta Piana et bibliographica. II. Fontes historici. Commentarius historicus, 2 vols. in 3 parts, Rome-Freiburg-Barcelona, 1956-57. Schützeichel, Rudolf, Zum Mittelrheinischen Passionsspiel der St. Galler Handschrift 919 , in Hennig & Kolb (eds.), Mediævalia litteraria, pp. 53139. -----, Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel. Paläographie und Edition , in Idem, Textgebundenheit: Kleinere Schriften zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur, Tübingen, 1981, pp. 164-72. ----- (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919, Tübingen, 1978. Schuldes, Luis, Die Teufelsszenen im deutschen geistlichen Drama des Mittelalters: Versuch einer literarhistorischen Betrachtung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der geistesgeschichtlichen Gesichtspunkte, Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik, 116, Göppingen, 1974. Schuler, Ernst August, Die Musik der Osterfeiern, Osterspiele und Passionen des Mittelalters, Kassel-Basel, 1951 [Vol. II: Melodienband , only as doctoral thesis, Universität Basel, 1940]. Schulz, Frieder, Singen wir heut mit einem Mund , Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie 32 (1989), pp. 29-71. Schulze, Ursula, Schmerz und Heiligkeit: Zur Performanz von Passio und Compassio in ausgewählten Passionsspieltexten (Mittelrheinisches, Frankfurter, Donaueschinger Spiel) , in Horst Brunner & Werner WilliamsKrapp (eds.), Forschungen zur deutschen Literatur des Spätmittelalters: Festschrift für Johannes Janota, Tübingen, 2003, pp. 211-32. Schumann, Otto & Bernhard Bischoff (eds.), Carmina Burana: Mit Benutzung der Vorarbeiten Wilhelm Meyers kritisch herausgegeben von Alfons Hilka und Otto Schumann, vol. I:3, Die Trink- und Spielerlieder. Die geistlichen Dramen. Nachträge, Heidelberg, 1970.

454

XII. Bibliography

Sheerin, Daniel, The Liturgy , in Mantello & Rigg (eds.), Medieval Latin, pp. 157-82. Siebert, Hermann, Die alten Speyerer Agenden , Der Katholik 92 (1912), pp. 182-93. Sievers, Heinrich, Die lateinischen liturgischen Osterspiele der Stiftskirche St. Blasien zu Braunschweig, Veröffentlichungen der niedersächsischen Musikgesellschaft, 2, Wolfenbüttel, 1936. Siller, Max (ed.), Osterspiele: Text und Musik: Akten des 2. Symposiums der Sterzinger Osterspiele (12.-16. April 1992), Schlern-Schriften, 293, Innsbruck, 1994. Simon, Eckehard, [Review of Schützeichel (ed.), Das Mittelrheinische Passionsspiel der St. Galler Hs. 919] , Speculum 54 (1979), pp. 627-28. -----, Drama, German , in Strayer (ed.), Dictionary of the Middle Ages, vol. IV, pp. 266-72. ----- (ed.), The Theatre of Medieval Europe: New Research in Early Drama, Cambridge, 1991. -----, Das Egerer Fronleichnamspiel in den Stadtrechnungen , in Mehler & Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel, pp. 299-311. Smoldon, William L., Liturgical Drama , in Dom Anselm Hughes (ed.), The New Oxford History of Music, vol. II: Early Medieval Music up to 1300, London [etc.], 1954, pp. 175-219. -----, The Melodies of the Medieval Church-Dramas and their Significance , Comparative Drama 2 (1968), pp. 185-89. -----, The Music of the Medieval Church Dramas, (ed.) Cynthia Bourgeault, London [etc.], 1980. Spital, Hermann Josef, Bibliographie der Ritualien , in Idem, Der Taufritus in den Ritualien von den ersten Drucken bis zur Einführung des Rituale Romanum, Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 47, Münster, 1968, pp. 212-84. Stäblein, Bruno, Deutschland B , in Blume (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. III, cols. 272-86. -----, Lektionston , in ibid., vol. VIII, cols. 595-96. -----, Passion. A. Die einstimmige lateinische Passion , in ibid., vol. X, cols. 886-98. -----, Psalm. B: Lateinischer Psalmengesang im Mittelalter , in ibid., vol. X, cols. 1676-90. Stammler, Wolfgang & Karl Langosch (eds.), Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters. Verfasserlexikon, 5 vols., Berlin-Leipzig, 1933-55. Stapper, Richard, Die älteste Agende des Bistums Münster, Münster, 1906.

455


Staub, Kurt Hans, Geschichte der Dominikanerbibliothek in Wimpfen am Neckar (ca. 1460-1803): Untersuchungen an Hand der in der Hessischen Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek Darmstadt erhaltenen Bestände, Studien zur Bibliotheksgeschichte, 3, Graz, 1980. Steer, Georg, Carmina Burana in Südtirol: Zur Herkunft des Clm 4660 , Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 112 (1983), pp. 127. Steinbach, Rolf, Die deutschen Oster- und Passionsspiele des Mittelalters: Versuch einer Darstellung und Wesensbestimmung nebst einer Bibliographie zum deutschen geistlichen Spiel des Mittelalters, Kölner Germanistische Studien, 4, Köln, 1970. Stemmler, Theo, Liturgische Feiern und geistliche Spiele: Studien zur Erscheinungsformen des Dramatischen im Mittelalter, Buchreihe der Anglia, Zeitschrift für englische Philologie, 15, Tübingen, 1970. Stevens, John, Music in Mediaeval Drama , Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 84 (1957-58), pp. 81-95. -----, Words and Music in the Middle Ages: Song, Narrative, Dance and Drama, 1050-1350, Cambridge Studies in Music, Cambridge, 1986. -----, Richard Rastall & Jack Sage, Medieval Drama , in Sadie (ed.), New Grove, vol. XVI, pp. 227-67. Stevenson Jr., Henricus, Codices Palatini latini, vol. I: Codd. 1-921, Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae codices manu scripti recensiti, Roma, 1886. Stopp, Hugo, Untersuchungen zum St. Galler Passionsspiel , Diss. University of Saarbrücken, 1959. Strayer, Joseph R. (ed.), Dictionary of the Middle Ages, 13 vols., New York, 1982-89. Suppan, Wolfgang, Zur Musik der Erlauer Spiele , Studia musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 11 (1969), pp. 409-21. Tailby, John, Schwierigkeiten der Dramenedition , in Anton Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur: Beiträge der Bamberger Tagung Methoden und Probleme der Edition mittelalterlicher deutscher Texte , 26.-29. Juli 1991, Litterae, 117, Göppingen, 1994, pp. 251-54. -----, Drama and Community in South Tyrol , in Hindley, Alan (ed.), Drama and Community: People and Plays in Medieval Europe, Medieval Texts and Cultures of Northern Europe, 1, Turnhout, 1999, pp. 554-66. Thoran, Barbara, Frauenrollen und Rolle der Frauen in der Geschichte der deutschsprachigen Passionsspiele , in Michael Henker (ed.), Hört, sehet, weint und liebt : Passionsspiele im alpenländischen Raum. Katalogbuch

456

XII. Bibliography

zur Ausstellung im Ammergauer Haus, Oberammergau, 28. Mai bis 30. September 1990, Veröffentlichungen zur bayerischen Geschichte und Kultur, 20, München, 1990, pp. 113-19. -----, Das Lied der Wächter auf dem Weg zum Grab Jesu in österlichen Spielen des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts , in Dorothee Lindemann, Berndt Volkmann & Klaus-Peter Wegera (eds.), bickelwort und wildiu maere: Festschrift für Eberhard Nellmann zum 65. Geburtstag, Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik, 618, Göppingen, 1995, pp. 398-407. Thurn, Hans, Die Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Würzburg, vol. II: Handschriften aus benediktinischen Provenienzen, I; vol. IV: Die Handschriften der kleinen Provenienzen und Fragmente, Wiesbaden, 1973-95. Tischendorf, L. F. C von (ed.), Evangelia apocrypha, adhibitis plurimis codicibus Graecis et Latinis maximam partem nunc primum consultis atque ineditorum copia insignibus, Leipzig, 1876 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1966]. Touber, Anthonius H., Schreibfehler in mittelalterlichen Spielhandschriften am Beispiel des Donaueschinger Passionsspiels , editio 6 (1992), pp. 123-30. -----, Das Osterspiel im Donaueschinger Passionsspiel: Text und Musik , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 203-09. Traub, Andreas, Zur Musik der Trierer Marienklage und des Trierer Osterspiels , Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (Tübingen) 110 (1988), pp. 78-100. -----, [Review of Linke & Mehler (eds.), Die österlichen Spiele aus der Ratsschulbibliothek Zwickau] , Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 27 (1992), pp. 258-60. -----, Zwischen Aufgezeichnetem und Nichtaufgezeichnetem: Probleme bei der Edition der Melodien der Sterzinger Spiele , in Siller (ed.), Osterspiele, pp. 211-18. -----, Überlegungen zur Edition von Melodien in geistlichen Spielen an Beispielen aus dem Sterzinger Spielarchiv , in Anton Schwob (ed.), Editionsberichte zur mittelalterlichen deutschen Literatur: Beiträge der Bamberger Tagung Methoden und Probleme der Edition mittelalterlicher deutscher Texte , Litterae, 117, Göppingen, 1994, pp. 255-59. -----, Der Debs-Codex als musikalische Quelle , in Mehler & Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel, pp. 339-47. -----, Die geistlichen Spiele des Sterzinger Spielarchivs, vol. VI:2: Kommentar zur Edition der Melodien, Mittlere Deutsche Literatur in Neu- und Nachdrucken, 19:2, Bern, 1996.

457


Trauden, Dieter, Archetyp oder Aufführung? Überlegungen zur Edition mittelalterlicher Dramen , Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 37 (1993), pp. 131-45. Väterlein, Christian (ed.), Graduale Pataviense (Wien 1511), Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 87, Kassel [etc.], 1982. Veit, Andreas Ludwig, Kirche und Kirchenreform in der Erzdiözese Mainz im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung und der beginnenden tridentinischen Reformation (1517-1618), Erläuterungen und Ergänzungen zu Janssens Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, Band 10, Heft 3, Freiburg, 1920. -----, Kirchliche Reformbestrebungen im ehemaligen Erzstift Mainz unter Erzbischof Johann Philipp von Schönborn, 1647-1673, Studien und Darstellungen aus dem Gebiete der Geschichte, 7, Heft 3, Freiburg, 1910. Völker, Paul-Gerhard, Schwierigkeiten bei der Edition geistlicher Spiele des Mittelalters , in Hugo Kuhn, Karl Stackmann & Dieter Wuttke (eds.), Kolloquium über Probleme altgermanistischer Editionen, Marbach am Neckar, 26. und 27. April 1966. Referate und Diskussionsbeiträge, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Forschungsberichte, 13, Wiesbaden, 1968, pp. 160-68. -----, Überlegungen zur Geschichte des geistlichen Spiels im Mittelalter , in Ingeborg Glier [et al.] (eds.), Werk Typ Situation: Studien zu poetologischen Bedingungen in der älteren deutschen Literatur, Stuttgart, 1969, pp. 252-80. Vogel, Cyrille, Introduction aux sources de l histoire du culte chrétien au moyen âge, Biblioteca degli Studi Medievali, 1, Spoleto, 1981. -----, Medieval Liturgy: An Introduction to the Sources, (trans. and rev.) William Storey & Niels Rasmussen, NPM Studies in Church Music and Liturgy, Washington, 1986. Vorderstemann, Jürgen, Die Büchersammlungen des Speyerer Domes in tausend Jahren: Ein Überblick aus Anlaß der 950-Jahr-Feier im Jahre 1980 , Archiv für Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 33 (1981), pp. 45-61. Vijfvinkel, Elly, Das letzte Abendmahl in dem Donaueschinger Passionsspiel, dem Luzerner Osterspiel und in der Bibel , in Mehler & Touber (eds.), Mittelalterliches Schauspiel, pp. 377-85. Wackernagel, Karl Eduard Philipp (ed.), Das deutsche Kirchenlied von der ältesten Zeit bis zu Anfang des XVII. Jahrhunderts, 5 vols., Leipzig, 186477 [repr. Hildesheim, 1964]. Wackernell, J. E. (ed.), Altdeutsche Passionsspiele aus Tirol, Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Litteratur und Sprache Österreichs und seiner Kronländer, 1, Graz, 1897.

458

XII. Bibliography

Wagner, Günter, Mainz , in Finscher (ed.), Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. V, cols. 1592-97. Wallace, Robin, The Role of Music in Liturgical Drama: A Revaluation , Music and Letters 65 (1984), pp. 219-28. Weale, William Henry James, Bibliographia liturgica. Catalogus Missalium ritus latini ab anno 1474 impressorum; ed. Hanns Bohatta, London-Leipzig, 1928 [rpt. Stuttgart, 1990]. Weinhold, Karl, Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik, Paderborn, 1883 [rpt. Paderborn, 1967]. Werhahn, Heinz Martin, Hymnarium Aquense: Ein bisher unbekanntes Mainzer Hymnar aus der Fragmentensammlung Stephan Beißel in der Öffentlichen Bibliothek der Stadt Aachen , in Anon. (ed.), Geschichte im Bistum Aachen, Aachen-Kevelaer, 1996, pp. 155-84. Werner, Wilfried, Studien zu den Passions- und Osterspielen des deutschen Mittelalters in ihrem Übergang vom Latein zur Volkssprache, Philologische Studien und Quellen, 18, Berlin, 1963. Wilmotte, Maurice, Les passions allemandes du Rhin dans leur rapport avec l ancien théâtre français, Paris, 1898. Wimmer, Ruprecht, Deutsch und Latein im Osterspiel: Untersuchungen zu den volkssprachlichen Entsprechungstexten der lateinischen Strophenlieder, Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 48, München, 1974. Wimpfeling, Jakob, Laudes ecclesiae Spirensis, (ed.) Jodocus Gallus, Basel, 1486. Wittwer, Peter, Identifikation liturgischer Handschriften aufgrund der Matutinresponsorien des Offiziums , Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft 41 (1999), pp. 41-62. Wolf, Klaus, Kommentar zur Frankfurter Dirigierrolle und zum Frankfurter Passionsspiel , Tübingen, 2002 [Ergänzungsband 1 of Johannes Janota (ed.), Die hessische Passionsspielgruppe. Edition im Paralleldruck, Tübingen, 1996-2002]. -----, Verfremdung oder Identifikation? Zur Problematik einer Rekonstruktion des Kostüms im geistlichen Spiel des Spätmittelalters , in Horst Brunner & Werner Williams-Krapp (eds.), Forschungen zur deutschen Literatur des Spätmittelalters: Festschrift für Johannes Janota, Tübingen, 2003, pp. 255-64. -----, Für eine neue Form der Kommentierung geistlicher Spiele: Die Frankfurter Spiele als Beispiel der Rekonstruktion von Aufführungswirklichkeit ,

459


in Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (ed.), Ritual und Inszenierung. Geistliches und weltliches Drama des Mittelalters, Tübingen, 2004, pp. 3-32. Wolter, Emil (ed.), Das St. Galler Spiel vom Leben Jesu: Untersuchungen und Text, Germanistische Abhandlungen, 41, Breslau, 1912 [rpt. Hildesheim, 1977]. Wordsworth, John & Henry Julian White (eds.), Novum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi latine secundum editionem Sancti Hieronymi, vol. I: Quattuor Evangelia, Oxford, 1889-98. Wright, Stephen K., The Ingressus Pilatus Chant in Medieval German Drama , Comparative Drama 28 (1994), pp. 348-66. -----, Drama , in Mantello & Rigg (eds.), Medieval Latin, pp. 574-81. Würdtwein, Stephan Alexander, Commentatio historico-liturgica de stationibus ecclesiae Moguntinae, ex antiquitatibus ecclesiasticis eruta et addito ecclesiarum Trevirensis et Coloniensis ritu illustrata, Mainz [= Frankfurt], 1782. Wyss, Hans (ed.), Das Luzerner Osterspiel. Gestützt auf die Textabschrift von M. Blakemore Evans und unter Verwendung seiner Vorarbeiten zu einer kritischen Edition nach den Handschriften, 3 vols., Schriften herausgegeben unter dem Patronat der Schweizerischen Geisteswissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft, 7, Bern, 1967, vol. I: Text des ersten Tags, vol. II: Text des zweiten Tags, vol. III: Textteile 1597, 1616. Anmerkungen, Quellen, Glossar. Young, Karl, The Harrowing of Hell in Liturgical Drama , in Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters, 16, Part II, Madison, WI, 1909, pp. 889-947. -----, The Drama of the Medieval Church, 2 vols., Oxford, 1933.

460

The St Gall Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Play the St George

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play Of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

The St Gall Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Play the St George

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Passion Play

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play Of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Play of Passion

Recommend Documents