wmmHm

its

TRANSACTIONS

OF THE

mWwtwm

WISCONSIN ACADEMY

OF

SCIENCES, ARTS AND LETTERS

as

• «i Jv

IP

VOL. XX.

§p|

NATURAE SPECIES RATIOGUE

MADISON, WISCONSIN

1921

i

The Fiftieth Anniversary volume of the Transactions of the

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters is issued

under the editorial supervision of Charles E. Allen and the

Secretary.

Arthur Beatty,

Secretary.

TRANSACTIONS

OF THE

WISCONSIN ACADEMY

OF

SCIENCES, ARTS AND LETTERS

VOL. XX.

MADISON, WISCONSIN

1921

CONTENTS.

Page

Ordo Prophetarum. Karl Young . 1

Richard Wagner’s “Die Meistersinger von Niirnberg” and

its Literary Precursors. Edwin C. Roedder . 83

The Passing of a Historic Highway. F. E. Williams . 131

/ The Arsenical Solutionsj^No. 1. Liquor Potassii Arsenitis

(Fowler’s Solution). H. A. Langenhan . 141

\/ ''The Development of the Frenulum of the Wax Moth* Gal¬

leria mellonella Linn. (With Plate I.). William S.

Marshall . 199

/ The American Water Mites of the Genus Neumania.l\ (With

Plates II-IV.) Ruth Marshall . 205

\/ Syrphidae of Wisconsin.' (With Plates V-VI.) Charles

L. Fluke . 215

v Some Experiments with the Larva of the Bee Moth,' Galleria

mellonella L. Joy E. Andrews . 255

vThe Length of Life of the Larva of the Wax Moth, Galleria

mellonella L., in its different Stadia. (With one

Figure.) Ruth Chase . 263

v A Preliminary Study of the Digestive Secretions of Pickerel

and Perch. Caroline Walker Munro . 269

The Organization of the Nuclei in the Root Tips of Podo¬

phyllum Peltatum.\\ (With Plate VII.) James Bert¬

ram Overton . 275

v The Phytoplankton of the Muskoka Region, Ontario, (Canada.

(With Plates VIII-XIII.) Gilbert Morgan Smith. . 323

v Species of Lentinus in the Region of the Great Lakes.

(With Plates NIV-XXVIII.) Edward T. Harper.. 365

y Cytological Studies of the Lower Basidiomycetes ’ I.

Dacrymyces. (With Plate XXIX.) E. M. Gilbert

(One Figure) . 387

Notes on Parasitic Fungi in Wisconsin, VII. (With Plates

XXX-XXXII, and one Figure.) J. J. Davis . 389

Page

Notes on Parasitic Fungi in Wisconsin, VIII. (With three

Figures.) J. J. Davis. . . . 413

Experimental Work on the Relation of Soil Temperature to

Disease in Plants. (With Plates XXXIII-XXXVII,

and four Figures.) L. R. Jones . 433

Quantitative Studies of the Bottom Fauna in the Deeper

Water of Lake Mendota. (With one Figure.) Chan-

cey Juday . 461

A Survey of the Larger Aquatic Plants of Lake Mendota.

(With one Figure). R. H. Denniston . 495

A Quantitative Study of the Larger Aquatic Plants of Lake

Mendota. (With Plate XXXVIII.) H. W. Rickett 501

Notes on the Chemical Composition of Some of the Larger

Aquatic Plants of Lake Mendota. I. Cladophora and

Myriophyllum. Henry A. Schuette and Alice E.

Hoffman . 529

A Second Report on Limnological Apparatus. (With

Plates XXXIX-XL, and five Figures.) Edward A.

Birge . 533

The Rotifers of Wisconsin. (With Plates XLI-LXI, and

four Figures.) H. K. Harring and F. J. Myers . 553

Thure Kumlien (With Plates LXII-LXIV.) Publius V.

Lawson . 663

Proceedings of the Academy, 1919 and 1920 . 687

Programme of the Exercises in Commemoration of the

Fiftieth Anniversary of the Academy . 693

The Academy Medallion, 187CL1920 (With Plate LXV)

Edward A. Birge . 711

List of Officers and Members . 717

Charter of the Academy . 751

Constitution of the Academy . 754

General Index of Volumes I-XX . 759

ORDO PROPHETARUM

KARL YOUNG

As has often been observed by recent writers on the subject,1 the

liturgical plays of the Christmas season may be divided into the

following groups: (1) a play of the shepherds (Officium Pas-

torum), performed on Christmas Day;2 (2) a play of the Magi

(Officium Stellce), for Epiphany;3 (3) a play representing the

Slaughter of the Innocents (Or do Rachelis), for performance on

Epiphany or on Innocents Day (December 28) ;4 * 6 and (4) a play of

the prophets (Or do Prophet arum) , associated with Christmas Day,

or with the octave of Christmas.

In undertaking a special study of the Ordo Prophetarum 5 1 wish,

in both introduction and conclusion, to pay homage to M. Marius

Sepet, whose brilliant monograph Les Prophetes du Christ 6 not

1 See, for example, E. K. Chambers, The Mediaeval Stage , Vol. II, Oxford.

1903, pp. 41-56 ; or the present writer, Ordo Rachelis (University of Wisconsin

Studies in Language and Literature , No. 4, Madison, 1919), p. 3.

2 The most extensive treatment of this play, so far as I know, is a study by

the present writer entitled Officium Pastorum: A Study of the Dramatic De¬

velopments within the Liturgy of Christmas, in Transactions of the Wisconsin

Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters, Vol. XVII, Part I (1912), pp. 299-396.

3 The most thorough study of this play is by H. Anz, Die lateinischen Magier-

spiele, Leipzig, 1905.

4 This play has recently been treated by the present writer in a special study

entitled Ordo Rachelis, mentioned above.

6 For general purposes, I use the designation found at the head of the version

from Laon. See below, p. 40.

6 Sepet’s monograph appeared first in serial form in Bibliotheque de Vficole des

Chartes (Vols. XXVIII, 1867, pp. 1-27, 211-264 ; XXIX, 1868, pp. 105-139,

261-293; XXXVIII, 1877, pp. 397-443), and then as a separate volume, Les

Prophetes du Christ, Paris, 1878. I make my references throughout to the

separate volume. E. Mart&ne (Tractatus de Antiqua Ecclesioe Disciplina, Lyons,

1706, pp. 78, 106-107) was familiar with the phenomenon of the Ordo Prophet¬

arum, but he presents no full text of it, and does not trace its origin. E. Du-

M§ril (Les Origines Latines du TM&tre Moderne, Caen, 1849, p. 180), in editing

the Limoges version of the Ordo Prophetarum, bases upon a passage in Durandus

the following remark: “II [the Limoges version] avait aussi son origine dans

9

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

only first disclosed the essential nature of this liturgical play, but

also described the early stages of its genesis in general terms that

may still be accepted. The discovery of new examples and new

facts, however, has rendered Sepet’s demonstration noticeably in¬

complete, and calls for a fresh survey of the phenomena. Upon

such a survey I now venture, calling attention to the fact that the

present study differs from that of Sepet in several particulars.

Whereas, in the first place, Sepet considered the prophet-play both

in its relations to the liturgy and in its later developments in the

vernaculars, I confine myself to the Ordo Prophetarum as a strictly

liturgical play. Secondly I re-edit from the manuscripts all the

dramatic texts known to me. Sepet presented none of these texts

in extenso, and with one important version he was not acquainted.7

Finally, from manuscripts and printed books, I offer materials that

are, I believe, brought into this consideration for the first time.

Within its limited field, then, I hope that my study may be found

relatively complete.

I

Among apocryphal works -of St. Augustine is found a sermon of

substantial length entitled Contra Judceos , Paganos, e’t Arianos

Sermo de Symbolo.* 1 Although the Augustinian authorship has

been generally discredited in modern times,2 the attribution to the

la liturgie catholique.” L. Petit de Julleville (Les. My sieves, Vol. I, Paris, 1880,

pp. 35-45) bases his account of the prophet-play frankly upon Sepet. P. Weber

( G-eistliches Schauspiel und kirchliche Kunst, Stuttgart, 1894, pp. 41-48) surveys

Sepet’s work with approval, and adds certain contributions of detail. W. Meyer

( Fragmenta Bur ana, Berlin, 1901, pp. 50-56) accepts Sepet’s demonstration of

the origin of the Ordo Prophetarum and adds important suggestions ; but upon

later parts of Sepet’s study he passes certain strictures, for which he is appro¬

priately rebuked by W. Creizenach ( Liter at urblatt fur germanische und roman-

ische Philologie, Vol. XXIII, 1902, col. 203.) Chambers (Vol. II, pp. 52-55) pays

explicit homage to Sepet, and follows him avowedly ; but he includes a consid¬

eration of the Laon play, which was unknown to the French savant, and adds

significant observations upon details. The one or two minor contributions of

Chasles (Les Prophetes du Christ, in La Vie et les Arts Liturgiques, 3e Annee,

No. 25, January, 1917, pp. 121-134) are mentioned in appropriate places below.

7 1 refer to the version from Laon. See below pp. 39—49.

1 This sermon is found in the Benedictine edition of St. Augustine’s works,

Sancti Aurelii Augustini . . . Opera, Vol. VIII, Paris, 1688, Appendix,

col. 11-20. It is reprinted by Migne, Pat. Lat., Vol. XLII, col. 1117-1130.

2 The Benedictine editors (loc. cit., col. 11-12) cite the dictionis barbaries and

the multa . . . delibata ex Augustino. See Weber, p. 41 ; Sepet, p. 8, note 2.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

3

great bishop persisted throughout the middle ages.3 The sermon

was written manifestly during the period in which the Arian heresy

throve; hence, before the year 600.4 Since, moreover, the author

seems to have made use of a translation of the Old Testament older

than the Yulgate, we may place the date of composition before the

middle of the fifth century.5

Of the twenty-two chapters, or sections, into which the discourse

is divided in the Benedictine edition, the first six are addressed

to the Faithful by way of an exhortation to resist the devil and to

cling to their Christian faith, to be worthy of their baptism, and

to believe in the Trinity.6 In Sections seven to ten the preacher

arraigns the heretics and brings before them the relation of the Son

to the Father, and Christ’s birth from the Virgin.7 Section ten as¬

sails Herod for his cruel designs against Jesus, and passes into a

denunciation of the Jews as a whole. Sections eleven to eighteen,

addressed to the Jews, attempt primarily to convict them of error

through utterances of their own prophets and of certain Gentiles.

The preacher summons the prophets and Gentiles singly by

name, and delivers their successive testimonies.8 Section nineteen

inveighs once more against the Arians.9 The last three sections are

an appeal to the Faithful to prepare for the eternal life.10

3 For example, in Ms. Vatic. Regin. 125, a version of the passage beginning

Vos} inquam, convenio (fol. 74r-76v, written at Forcalquier in the thirteenth

century) bears the following heading: Sermo beati Augustini Episcopi de

Natale Domini. See also below, pp. 5, 18.

4 See Weber, p. 41.

5 See Meyer, p. 50. Chambers assumes (Vol. II, p. 52) that it was “probably

written in the sixth century.” In regard to date and provenience the Benedictine

editors (loc. cit., col. 11—12) write, “Iste quoque Sermo sub Arianorum dominatu

habitus est, eo tempore quo haereticis illis disputantibus, & catholicos, alios pol-

licitatione ac praemio, alios vi potentiaque deducere a fide nitentibus obsistere

nullus audebat.” Hauck (as reported by Weber, p. 41) infers as follows:

“Der Sermo gehort entweder nach Gallien unter die Westgotenherrschaft, Oder

nach Afrika unter die Vandalenherrschaft.”

6 The headings of the first six sections, given by the Benedictines in side-votes,

are as follows : Caput I, Christianse vigiliae ; Caput II, Diabolus qui sit ; Caput

III, Renuntiare satanae, quid ; Caput IV, Relapsus a baptismo ; Caput V, Triadis

Unitas ; Caput VI, Trinitas incomprehensibilis. These headings may be merely

editorial.

7 The headings are as follows : Caput VII, Contra Arianos ; Caput VIII,

^Equalitas personarum ; Caput IX, Christi nativitas ; Caput X, Crudelitas Herodis.

8 The headings are these : Caput XI, Contra Judseos ; Caput XII, Ex Daniele ;

Caput XIII, Testimonia ex Lege & Prophetis ; Caput XIV, Simeonis & Zacharies

testimonium ; Caput XV, Ex libris Ethnicorum ; Caput XVI, De Sibyllinis vati-

ciniis ; Caput XVII (no heading) ; Caput XVIII, Ex eventis.

9 Caput XIX, Contra Arianos.

10 Caput XX, Resurrectio ; Caput XXI, Differentia temporalis vitae & aeternse ,*

Caput XXII, De via ad patriam.

4 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters .

The outstanding rhetorical characteristic of the sermon is its

lively dramatic quality.11 Aside from the part in which the proph¬

ets are summoned to confute the Jews, direct address is employed

effectively. Section seven, for example, begins as follows :12

Die mihi, HaBretice, qui audes dicere quod minor sit Dei sapientia: die

mihl, altitudo cseli quanta sit, latitudo terrae, profundum abyssi?

Section ten ends with the following passage :13

Die, Herodes, si te Christus ideo offendit, quia ejus Magis annuntiantibus

audisti regnum, quid te offenderunt bi qui tecum adversus Christum

sentiebant principes Judaeorum, quorum filios interficiens ipsos magis

atrocissima poena in suis filiis afflixisti? Nam Christum minime invenire

potuisti. Sed quid tecum diutius agam? Ipsos, ipsos conveniam Judaeos,

qui dum infantem Christum noluerunt agnoscere, filios suos cum illo

compulsi sunt amittere: quos quidem occidit mortique propinavit Herodes

vester amicus; sed his mortalitatem aeternamque vitam donavit Christus,

quern vestrum etiam nunc dicitis inimicum.

It appears, then, that at several points the sermon contains dra¬

matic elements and verges upon a dramatic presentation of its

theme.

II

For our present purpose, however, we may dismiss considerations

bearing upon the sermon as a whole and may center our attention

upon the sections addressed to the Jews (Cap. xi-xviii). Almost

the whole of this part is frequently found during the middle ages

as a separate liturgical lectio for use in Matins of Christmas or of

some other day of the Christmas season. This liturgical use is

seen in the following text found in a lectionary of the twelfth

century from Arles i* 1

11 On the literary qualities see Sepet, p. 9.

12 Benedictine edition, Vol. VIII, col. 14.

13 This passage serves as a transition to the part beginning Vos, inquam, con -

venio, O Judcei, to be studied below.

1 Paris, Bibl. Nat., Ms. latin 1018, Lectionarium Arelatense ssec. xii, fol.

129r— 132v. This is the text printed by Sepet (pp. 3-8). My text differs from

his only in a few details, all of which are recorded in my foot-notes. I have

seen no cogent reason for collating the texts in Paris, Bibl. Nat., Ms. latin 16819

(Lectionarium Compendiense ssec. xi, fol. 12v-14r), Oxford, Bodleian Library,

Ms. Canonici Liturg. 391 (Lectionarium ssec. xii, fol. llv-13v), and Rome, Bibl.

Vatic., Ms. Vat. Regin. 125 (Lectionarium Porcalqueriense ssec. xiii, fol. 74r-76v),

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

5

Sermo Beati Augwstini Episcopi de Natale DomiNi

Lectio vi

“Vos, inquam, conuenio, o Iudei, qui usqwe in hodiernum diem negatis

Filium Dei. Nonne uox uesfra est ilia quando eum uidebatis miracula

facientem atq ue temptantes dicebatis: Quousqwe animas nostras sus-

pendis? Si tu es Xpisiws, die nobis palam. Ille autem uos ad cowsidera-

tionem mittebat miraculorum, dicens: Opera que ego facio ipsa testi¬

monium perhibent de me; ut Xpisio testimonium dicerent now verba, s ecZ

facta. Vos autem no n agnoscentes Saluatorem qwi operabatwr salutem

in medio uesire terre, adicientes in malo aistis: Tu de te ipso testi¬

monium dicis; testimonium tuum now est uerum. Sed ad hec ille quid

uobis respowderit, aduertere noluistis. Nowne scriptum est in lege uestra

qwod duorwm hominum testimonium uerum sit? Preuaricatores legis,

intendite legem. Testimonium queritis de XpisZo: in lege uestra scriptum

est qwod duorwm hominum testimonium uerum sit. Procedant ex lege now

tantum duo sect eciam plures testes Xpisti, et cowuincant auditores legis,

now factores.* 2

Die, Ysaya,3 testimonium Xptsto. Ecce, inquit,4 uirgo in utero con-

cipiet et pariet filium, et uocabitwr nomew eiws Hemanuhel, qwod est

interpretatum : Nobiscum Dews.5

Accedat et alius testis.5

Die et tu, Iheremia,6 testimonium Xpisfo. Hie est, inqwit, Dews noster,

et now <fol. 129v> estimabitur alius absqwe illo qui inuenit omnem uiam

scientie et dedit earn Iacop puero suo et7 Israel dilecto suo. Post hec in

terris uisus est, et cum hominibws cowuersatws est.8 Ecce duo testes

idonei ex lege uestra ad quorwm testimonia non suwt compuncta corda

uestra. Sect alii atqwe alii ex lege testes Xpisti introducantur, ut frontes

durissime inimicorwm conterantwr.9

all of which are before me as I write. In my foot-notes I indicate the marginal

entries and unusual rubrications in Mss. Vat. Regin. 125 and Canonici Liturg.

391. The headings of the texts are as follows: in Ms. 391, Sermo Beati Augustini

Episcopi; in Ms. 125, Sermo Beati Augustini Episcopi de Natale Domini; in Ms.

16919, none. These three manuscripts are not mentioned by Sepet. The manu¬

scripts containing the sermo under discussion must be numerous.

2 Followed by a vertical line indicating separation or paragraph division

(Ms. 1018).

3 Ysaya] In the right margin, opposite the line in which the name occurs, is

written the rubric: Ysayas (Mss. 1018 and 391). All the marginal entries in

Ms. 391 seem to me to be of the 15th century. In the left margin, a later hand

has written: i prophetia (Ms. 125).

4 Ecce inquit . . . nobiscum Deus] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: i (Ms. 125).

5 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

6 Iheremia] Opposite this name in the margin: Iheremias (Ms. 1018);

Ieremias (Ms. 391).

7 dedit earn Jacop puero suo et] Written in the margin by a later hand

(Ms. 1018).

8 Hie est inquit . . . conuersatus est] encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: ii (Ms. 125).

9 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

6

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

Veniat et ille Danihel10 sanctus, iuuenis quidem etate, senior uero

scientia ac mawsuetudine, et conuincat omwes falsos testes et sic ut conuicit

seniores impudicos, ita suo testimonio Xpisti conterat inimicos. Die,

sancte Danihel, die de Xpisto qwod nosti. Cum uenerit, inquit, Sanctus

Sanctorum, cessabit unetio.* 11 Quare, illo presente, cui insultantes dice-

batis: Tu de te testimonium dicis, testimonium tuum no n est uerum;

cessauit unetio uestral Nisi quia ipse est qwi venerat Sanctus Sanctorum.

Si enim, sicw£ uos dicitis, now dum uenit, s ed expectatur ut ueniat Sanctus

Sanctorum, demonstrate unctionem: si autem, quod uerum est, cessauit

uestra, unetio, agnoscite uenisse Sanctum Sanctorum. Ipse est enim et

lapis ille abscisus12 de monte sine manibws concidentium, id est Xpistus

natus de uirgine sine manibws complectentium, qui tantum creuit ut mons

magnus fleret, et impleret uniuersam faciem terre. De quo monte dicit

propheia: Venite, ascendamws in montem Domini; et de quo Dauid dicit:

Mons Dei, mons uber, ut quid suspicamini montes incaseatos, mowtem in

quo placuit Deo habitare in ipso. Cum enim ipse Dominws Xpistus dis-

cipwlos suos interrogaret quern dicerewt esse homines Filium hominis,

responderunt: Alii Helyam, alii Iheremiam aut unum ex prophets; et

ille, vt quid suspicamini montes incaseatos, montem in quo placuit Deo

habitare in eo, hunc cognouit Petrus dlcens: Tu es Xpistus, Filius Dei.

Agnouit montem et ascendit in montem; testimonium dixii ueritati, et

dilectus est a ueritate. Super petram fundatus est Petrus, ut montem

susciperet ilium amando quern ter negauerat timendo.13

Die et Moyses,14 legislator, dux popwli Israel, testimonium Xpisto.

Prophetam, inquit, uobis suscitabit Deus de fratribws uesJris; omwis awima

que now audierit prophetam ilium, exterminabitur de popwlo suo.15 Pro¬

phetam autem dictum Xpistum ipswm audi in Buangelio dicentem: Non

est,16 inquit, propheta sine honore, nisi in patria sua.17

Accedat autem Dauid18 sawetws, testis fidelis, ex cuiws semine processit

ipse <fol. 130r> cui lex et prophete testimonium dieuwt, dicat et ipse de

Xpisto. Adorabunt, inquit, eum omwes reges terre, omwes gentes seruient

illi.19 Cui seruiewt? die, cui seruient? Vis audire cui? Dixit Dominws

Domino meo: Sede ad dexteram meam, donee ponam inimicos tuos scabel-

hxm pedum tuorwm.20 Et expressiws atqwe nominatim: Quare, inquit,

10 Danihel] Opposite this name in the margin: Daniel (Ms. 391).

11 Cun uenerit . . . cessabit unetio] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: iii (Ms. 125).

12 abscisus] abcisus (Sepet).

13 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

14 Moyses] Opposite this name in the margin: Moyses (Ms. 391).

15 Prophetiam inquit . . . de populo suo] Encircled by red lines, with il¬

legible marginal numeral (Ms. 125).

16 Non est . . . patria sua] Encirled by red lines, without marginal numeral

(Ms. 125).

17 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

18 Dauid] opposite this name in the margin: Dauid (Ms. 391).

19 Adorabunt . . . seruient illi] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: v (Ms. (125).

20 Dixit Dominus . . . pedum tuorum] Encircled by red lines, without

marginal numeral (Ms. 125).

Young— Or do Prophet arum.

7

tumultuate sunt gentes, et popwli meditati sunt inania? Astiteruwt reges

terre et principes comienerunt in unum aduersus Dominwm et aduersws

Xpistum. ei us.21

Accedat et alius testis. Die et tu, Abacuch22 prophefa, testimonium de

Xpisto. Domine, inquit, audiui auditum tuum et timui; consideraui opera

tua et expaui.23 Que opera Dei iste mirato expauit? Numqsud fabricam

rnundi iste miratus expauit? Absi]t. S ed, audi, aliquid expauit. In

medio, inquit, duum awimalium cognosceris. Opera tua, Deus, Uerbmw,

caro factum est. In medio duum animalium cognosceris. Qui quousqwe

descendisti, expauescere me fecisti; Uerbum, per quod facta sunt omnia,

in presepe iacuisti. Agnouit bos possessorem suum et asinus presepe

Domini sui. In medio duum ammalium cognosceris. Quid est in medio

duum ammalium cognosceris? nisi aut in medio duorwm testamentor^m,

aut in medio duorwm latronum, aut in medio Moysi24 et Helye cum eo in

monte sermocinantium. Ambulauit, inquit, Uerbum et exiuit in campis.

Verbum caro factum est et habitauit in nobis. Hoc et Iheremias ait:

Post hec in terris uisus est, et cum hominibns conuersatus est.25 Ecce

quemadmodum sibi conueniunt testes Ueritatis, ecce quemadmodum conuin-

cunt filios falsitatis. SufRciunt uobis ista, o Iudei, an adhuc ad uesiram

confusionem ex lege et ex gente uesfra alios introducemus testes ut illi

testimonium perhibeant cui perdita mente insultantes dicebatis: Tu de

te ipso testimonium dicis, testimonium26 tuum non est verum? Quod si

uelim ex lege et ex prophetis omnia que de Xpisto dicta sunt colligere,

facilius me tempns quam copia deseret.27

Verumptamen senem23 ilium ex gente uesira natum, s ed in errore uestro

non relictum. Symeonem sanctum in medio introducam, qui meruit teneri

decrepitus in hac luce quousqne uideret lucem. Quern quidem iam etas

compellebat ire, s ed expectabat suscipere quern sciebat uenire; cum iste

senex admonitns esset a Spiriiu sancto quod non an te moreretur quam

videret Xpisfnm Dei natum, quern cognoscens perrexit ad templum.

<fol. 130v> Vbi uero eum portari matris manibns uidit et diuinam in-

fantiam pia senectus agnouit, tulit infantem in manibns suis. Ille qui¬

dem Xpis£nm <infantem>29 ferebat, s ed Xpistus senem regebat. Regebat

qui portabatur ne ille ante promissum a corpore solueretnr. Quid tamen

dixerit, quern tamen confessus fuerit aduertite inimici, non Xpisti, s ed

21 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

22 Abacuch] Opposite this name in the margin: Abacuc (Ms. 391).

23 Domine . . . et expaui] Encircled by red lines, with marginal numeral:

vi (Ms. 125).

24 Moysi] Moyse (Sepet). The last letter of this word is blurred in the

manuscript. I print it as it appears to me.

25 Post hec . . . conuersatus est] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: vii (Ms. 125).

26 dicis testimonium] Supplied in the right margin by a later hand (Ms. 1018).

27 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

28 senem] Opposite this word in the margin: Symeon (Ms. 391).

29 Following Sepet, I supply the word infantem from the Benedictine edition

of the entire sermon Contra Judceos, mentioned above. The word is not present

in Mss. 1018, 125, 16819, and 391.

8

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

ues£ri. Benedicts Dominion exclamauit senex ille et dixit: Nunc dimit-

tis,30 Domine, seruum tuum in pace, quia uideruwt oc%li mei salutare

tuum.31

Illi eciam parentes Ioh<mnis, Zacharias et Elisabeth,32 iuuenes steriles,

in senecta fecuwdi, dicawt eciam ipsi testimonium Xpisto; dicant de Xpisto

quid sentiant et testem idoneum Xpisto nutriant. Aiunt enim suo paruulo

nato: Tu puer propheta Altissimi uocaberis, preibis enim ante faciem

Domini parare uiam eius.33 Ipsiqne matri et uirgini, Helisabeth ait:

Vnde mihi hoc ut ueniat mater Domini mei ad me? Ecce enim ut facta

est uox salutationis tue in auribns meis, exultauit in gaudio infans in

utero meo.31 Intelligens enim Iohannes35 matrem Domini sui uenisse ad

suam matrem inter ipsas angustias uteri adhuc po situs, motu salutauit

quern uoce non poterat. Qui postea ipse Iohannes precursor et amicns,

humiUimns et fidelissimns seruus, testis fidelis idoneus effectns, tanto

maior inter natos mulierum quanto existimabatur esse qnod non erat.

Xpistum enim eum esse Iudei credebant, s ed ille non se esse clamabat

dicens: Quern me suspicamini esse, non sum ego. Sed ecce uenit post

me cuins pedum non sum dignus soluere corrigiam calciamenti.33 O fidelis

testis et amice ueri sponsi, quanto te humiliauisses si ad corrigiam cal-

ciamenti eins soluendam dignum te esse, dixisses! Sed dum ad hoc non

te dignum dicis, ludeis falsis testibns contradicis. Et hec a te dicta sunt

antequam Xpistnm videres, qui cum ad te ipse uenit excelsus humilis,

implende dispensationis sue gratia, ut a te baptizaretur qui nullum habebat

omnino peccainm, quid responderis, quern cognoueris, qnod testimonium

protuleris audiant inimici qui audire nolunt. Ecce, inquit, agnus Dei,

ecce qni tollit peccaia mundi. Et adiecit: Tu ad me uenis baptizari.

Ego a te debeo baptizari.37 Agnouit seruus dominion, agnouit uincnlis

<fol. 131r> originalis peccofi obligates ab omni nexu peccaii liberum.8'

Agnouit preco iudicem, agnouit ereatura creatorem, agnouit paranimphus

sponsum. Nam et hec uox Ioh&nnis est: Qui habet sponsam sponsus est,

amicus autem sponsi qui stat et audit eum gaudio gaudet propter uocem

sponsi.39

30 Nunc dimittis . . • . salutare tuum] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: vlii, written twice (Ms. 125).

31 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

32 Zacharias et Elisabeth] Opposite these names in the margin : Zacharias,

Helisabeth (Ms. 391).

83 Tu puer . . . uiam eius] Encircled by red lines, with marginal numeral :

ix (Ms. 125).

34 Vnde mihi ... in utero meo] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral : x (Ms. 125).

35 Iohannes] Opposite this name in the margin: Iohannes (Ms. 391).

36 Quern me suspicamini . . . corrigiam calciamenti] Encircled by red

lines, with marginal numeral: xi (Ms. 125).

87 Ecce inquit agnus . . . debeo baptizari] Encircled by red lines, with¬

out marginal numeral (Ms. 125).

38 liberum] obligatum (Sepet).

39 Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

Young — Ordo Prophetarum.

9

Sufficiunt uobis ista, O Iudei, sufficiimt uubis tanti testes, tot testimonia

ex lege uesfra et ex gente uesfra? An adhuc impudentia nimia audebitis

dicere quod alterias gentis uel nationis homines Xpisto deberewt testi¬

monium perhibere? S ed si hoc dicitis, respondet quide?n ille uobis:

Non sum missus nisi ad oues que perierunt dom us Israel. S ed, sic ut uos

in Actibus aposfoloram increpat Paulus, uobis primum oportuerat an-

nuntiare Uerbum Dei, sed quia repulistis ilhtd nec uos dignos uite eterne

iudicastis: Ecce, inquit, cotiuertimzts nos ad gentes. Demonstremws

eciam nos ex gentibas testimonium Xpisto fuisse prolatum, quoniam

Ueritas no n tacuit clamando eciam per linguas inimicoram suorum.

Nonne quando ille poeta40 facutidissimi&s inter sua carmina:

lam nova progenies403 celo demittit^r alto,41

dicebat, Xpisto testimonium perhibebat? In dubium hoc ueniat nisi alios

ex gentibws idoneos testes pluraqwe dicentes in medio introducam.42

Ilium, ilium43 regem qui uesiram superbiam captiuando perdomuit,

Nabuchodonosor, regem scilicet Babilonis, no n pretermittam. Die, Na-

buchodonosor, quid in fornace uidisti quando tres uiros iustos iniuste

illuc miseras, die, die quid tibi fuerit reuelatum. Nonne, inquit, tres

uiros misinms in fornace ligatos? Et aiunt ei: Vere, rex. Ecce, inquit,

ego uideo quatuor uiros solutos deambulantes in medio ignis, et corruptio

nulla est in eis, et aspectus quarti simiUs est Filio Dei.44 Alienigena,

unde tibi hoc? Quis tibi annunciauit Filium Dei? Que lex? Quis pro-

phefa tibi annuntiauit Filium Dei? Nondum quidem mundo nascitur et

similitudo nascentis a te cognoscitur. Vnde tibi hoc? Quis tibi istwd

annuntiauit nisi quia sic te diuinus ignis i ntus illuminauit ut cum illic

apud te captiui tenerentur inimici Iudei, sic diceres testimonium Filio

Dei? S ed quia in ore duorttm uel trium testium stat omne Uerbum,

sic ut ipse Bominus uesiram contumaciam confutans: <fol. 131v> in

lege, inquit, uesira scriptum est quod duorum hominum testimonium

uerum sit; etiam ex gentibns45 tercius testis introducatur ut testimonium

ueritatis ex onmi parte roboretur.46

Quid Sibilla47 uaticinando etiam de Xpisto clamauerit in medium pro-

feramns ut ex uno lapide utrorztmqwe frontes percuciantur, Iudeornm

scilicet ntque Paganornm SL+que suo gladio, sic ut Golias, Xpisti omwes per¬

cuciantur inimici. Audite quod dixerit:

"poeta] Opposite this word in the margin: Virgilius (Ms. 391).

40a progenies] proienies (Ms. 1018).

41 lam noua . . . dimittitur alto] Encircled by red lines, without marginal

numeral (Ms. 125).

"Followed by a paragraph sign (Ms. 1018).

"ilium] Opposite this word in the margin: Nabuchodonosor (Ms. 391).

44 Ecce inquit ego . . . Filio Dei] Encircled by red lines, with marginal

numeral: xii (Ms. 125).

45 ex gentibus] exigentibus (Sepet).

46 Followed by a paragraph sign.

47 Sibilla] Opposite this word in the margin: Sibilla (Ms. 391).

10

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

4SJvdicii sign um: tellus sudore madescet;

E celo rex adueniet per secla futurus,

<S>cilicet in carne presens ut iudicet orbem,

Ynde Deum cement incredulus atq ue fidelis

Celsum49 cum sanctis, euiB0 iam termino in ipso

Sic anime cum carne aderunt quas iudicat ipse,

Cum iacet incultus densis in uepribus orbis.

Reicient simulacra uiri cunctam quoq ue gazam,

Exuret terras ignis, pontumque polumque: <fol. 132r>

Inquirens tetri portas effringet Auerni;

Sanctorum sed enim cuncte lux libera carni,

Tradentur sontes, eterna61 flamma cremabit.

Occultos actus retegens, tunc quisque loquetur

Secreta, atq ue Deus reserabit pectora luci..63

Tunc erit et luctus, stridebunt dentibus omnes.

Eripitur solis iubar, et chorus interit astris,

Soluetur celum lunaris splendor obibit,

Deiciet colles, ualles extollet ab imo:

Non erit in rebus hominum sublime uel altum.

Turn equantur campis montes, et cerula ponti <fol. 132v>

Omnia cessabunt, tellus confracta peribit:

Sic pariter fontes torrentur fluminaq ue igni.

Et tuba tunc sonitum tristem demittet ab alto

Orbe, gemens facinus miserum, uariosque labores,

Tarthareumque chaos monstrabit terra de<h>i<s>cens

Et coram hie domino reges sistentur ad unum:

Decidet e celo ignisque et sulphuris amnis.

Hec de Xpisti natiuitate, passione, et resurrectione atq ue secuudo ei us

adueutu ita dicta sunt ut si quis in greco capita horum uersuum discer-

nere uoluerit inueniet: Ihesus Xpisfus, Yos Theu, Soter; quod in latino

ita interpretatur: Ihesus Xp istus, films Dei, Saluator; quod et in latinum

translatis eisdem uersibus, apparet, pret er hoc quod grecarum litterarum

proprietas nou adeo potuit obseruari. Credo iam uos, o inimici Iudei,

tantis testibus ita53 obrutos confutatosque esse ipsa ueritate ut nichil

ultra repugnare, nichil querere debeatis.64

In view of the importance of this lectio in the dramatic develop¬

ment under consideration, we must examine its content in detail.

48 The verses of the Sibyl (Judicii signum . . . sulphuris amnis) are fur¬

nished with musical notation in Ms. 1018, and the first two verses are thus

furnished in Ms. 125.

49 Celsum] Selsum (Ms. 1018).

60 eui] cui (Sepet) ; eui (Ms. 125); euis (Ms. 391); aeui (Ms. 16819).

61 eterna] eternaque (Sepet).

62 luci] lucis (Ms. 1018).

63 ita] Omitted (Sepet).

S4 Followed immediately by the rubric : Lectio Sancti Euangelii secundum

Lucam (Ms. 1018).

Young~Ordo Prophet arum.

11

But before we undertake this examination we may pause to observe

certain variations of content in the extant versions, and certain

facts concerning its position in the liturgy.

In some churches the lectio was substantially abbreviated. Thus

in a French breviary of the thirteenth century55 it appears as

Lectio vi of Christmas, but is reduced by almost one-half in length.

The lesson retains only the introduction, the prophecies of Isaiah,

Jeremiah, and Daniel, and the concluding prophecy of the Sibyl.

The shortest form that I have observed is the following from a

breviary of the fourteenth century from Saintes, used as the sixth

lectio of Christmas Matins :56

Lee tio via

Vos, inquam, conuenio, o Iudei, qui usqwe in hodiernum diem negastis

Filium Dei. Nowne uestra uox est ilia quando eum uidebatis miracula

facientem atqwe temptantes dicebatis: Quousqwe awimas nostras tollis?

Si tu es Xpistuc, die nobis palam. Ille autem ad consideracionem miracu-

lorwm uos mittebat dicews: Opera que ego facio ipsa testimonium peri-

bent de me, ut Xpisfo testimonium dicerewt non uerba set facta. Vos

astern now agnoscentes Saluatorem qui operabatur salutem in medio

uestre terre, adiciewfes maledixistis: Tu de te ipso testimowium peribes;

testimonium tuum now est uerum. Sed ad hec ille quod testimowium

uobis responderit auertere noluistis: Nowne scriptum est in lege quia

qwod duorwm hominum <tdstimonium> uerum sit? Preuaricatores legis,

intewdite legem. Testimonium queritis de Xpisto. In lege uestra scrip¬

tum est quod duorwm hominum testimonium uerum sit. Preuaricatores

legis intendite legem. Testimonium queritis de Xpisto: in lege uestra

scriptum est quo<d> duorwm hominum <testimonium> uerum sit.57

Procedant ex lege now tantum duo s ed eciam plures testes Xpisti cowuiw-

cant auditores legis et now faefores.

Die, Ysaya, testimonium de Xpisto. Ecce, inquit,58 uirgo in utero con-

cipiet et pariet filium, et uocabitur nomew eius Hemanuel, qwod est inter-

pretatum nobiscum Dews.

65 Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Ms. lat. 1255, Breviarium Gallicanum ssec.

xiii, fol 84r— 85r. Sepet (See p. 2, note 1) was familiar with this version. The

exact provenience of this manuscript I have not been able to determine. In

Catctlogus Codicum Manuscript orum Bibliothecae Regice, Vol III, Paris, 1744,

p. 99, the content of this manuscript is described as follows: Breviarium ad

usum monasterii cujusdam Gallicani, ordinis Sancti Benedicti. That this

breviary is not for monastic use, however, seems to be shown by the presence of

nine lectiones in Matins of Epiphany.

56 Paris, Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 16309, Breviarium Santonense saec. xiv, fol. 31r.

This version is now published for the first time. The same manuscript con¬

tains (fol. 40v-41v) another excerpt from the pseudo-Augustinian sermo , used

as the sixth lectio of Matins for the Circumcision. See below, note 77.

57 1 print the text as it stands in the manuscript, with its obvious repetition.

“inquit] inquid (Ms.).

12

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

Accedat et alius testis. Die et tu, Iheremia, testimonium Xpisto. Hie

est <inquit> Deus noster, et non estimabitur alius absqne illo, qui inuenit

omnem uiam sciencie, et dedit earn Iacob puero suo et Israel dilecto suo.

Post hec in terris uisus est, et cum hominibns conuersatus est.

Ecce duo59 testes ex lege uestra ex quornm testimonio non snnt com-

puncta corda uestra.60

Since this version contains only the nsnal introduction and the

first two prophecies (Isaiah and Jeremiah), one might surmise that

other parts of the sermo supplied one or more of the succeeding

lectiones of Matins at Saintes ;61 hut such is not the case.

Somewhat different from the versions previously cited is the

following Lectio ix for Christmas Matins in a breviary of the four¬

teenth century from Carcassonne :62

Lectio ix

Inter pressuras atqne angustias presentis temporis in nostre seruitutis

officia eogimur, Dilectissimi, non tacere cum pocius expediat flere magis

quam aliquid dicere. Uerumptamen ne quid minus lucri arche dominice

accedens dicatur nobis: Serue neqnam et piger tu erogares peccuniam

meam et ego ueniens cum usuris exigerem.63

Procedant ex lege non tantum duo s ed etiam plures testes Xpisti et

conuinean£ uos Iudeos auditores legis non autem facJores.

Die, Ysaia, testimonium Xpisto.

Ecce, inquit, uirgo concipiet et pariet filium et uocabitur nomen eius

Emanuhel, qztod interpretatur : Nobiscum Dens.

Accedat et alius testis. Die, Iberemias, testimonium de Xpisto.

Hie est, inqnit, Deus nosier et non estimabiinr alius absqne illo qni

inuenit omnem scienfiam et dedit earn Iacob puero suo et Israel dilecto

suo.

Quid enim Sibilla uaticinando de Xpisto clamauerit in medium profer-

amus. Audite quid dixerit:

59 duo] duos (Ms.).

60 The sixth responsory follows immediately : Responsorium : Sancti et in-

maculata uirginitas.

61 For excerpts from the sermo serving in a series of lectiones see the use of

Sarum, cited below, note 74.

62 Paris, Bibl. Nat., ;Ms. lat. 1035, Breviarium Carcassonense ssec. xiv,

fol. 3 Or— 31r. This text is now published for the first time. In the manuscript

it is immediately preceded by the following henedictio: Initium et finis, Alius

Marie uirginis eruat nos a peccatis et uitiis.

63 This introductory paragraph (Inter pressuras . . . exigerem) consists

of the opening sentences of the complete Contra Judaeos, Paganos, et Arianos

Sermo de Symbolo. See above, pp. 2 ff.

Young — Or do Prophetarum.

Versus Sibille

Iudicii84 signum: tellus sudore madescet;

E celo rex adueniet per secla futurus

Scilicet in carne presens \it iudicet orbem.

Post: Iudicii.

Unde Deum cement incredulus atq ue fidelis

Celsum cum sanctis, euis iam termino in ipso.

Posi : Iudicii

Sic anime cum carne aderunt, quas iudicat ipse

Cum iacei incultus densis in uepribns orbis.

Posi: Iudicii.

Deicient simulacra uiri, cunctam quoqne gazam;

Exure£ terras ignis, ponthumqne polumqne.

Pos£: Iudicii.

Inquirens tetri portas effringei Auerni;

Sanctorum sed erit cuncte lux libera carni.

Pos£: Iudicii.

Tradentur sontes, eterna flamma cremabit.

Occultos actus retegens tunc quisqne looretur.

Post : Iudicii.

Secreta atqne Dens reserabit pectora luci.

Tunc erit et luctus, stridebunt dentibns omnes.

Post: Iudicii.

Eripitur solis iubar, et corpus interit astris;

Soluetnr celum, lunaris splendor obibit.

Post : Iudicii.

Deicient col<fol. 30v>les, ualles extoilet ab ymo;

Non erit in rebus hominum sublime uel altum.

Post : Iudicii.

Iam eqnuntur camp is montes, et cerula ponthi;

Omnia cessabunt, tellus confracta peribit.

Post: Iudicii.

Hie pariter fontes torrentnr flamineq ue igni,

Et tubarnm sonitum tristem dimittet ab alto.

Pos* : Iudicii.

Orbe gemens facinus miserum uariosqne labores

Tartareumqne chaos monstrabit terra deiscens.

Post : Iudicii.

Et coram hie Domino reges sistentnr ad unum:

Reddet e celo ignisqne et sulphuris amnis.

Post: Iudicii signum.

13

64 Iudicii] Iuditii (Ms).

14

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

Lectio Nong^5

Hec de XpisZi natiuitate, passione, et resurrectione, atq ue secundo eius

aduentu iam dicta, siunt ut, si quis in greco capita horum nersuum dis-

cernere uoluerit, inuemet: Ihesits XpisZuc, Yos Theu, Sother; quod in

latinum <translatis> eisdem versibus apparet pret er quod litteranm

grecarum proprietas no n adeo potuit obseruari.

Credo uos, o inimici ludei, tantis testibws obrutos cowfutatosqwe <esse>

ipsa ueritate uZ nichiZ ultra repugware, nichiZ querere debeatis. T<u

autem, Domine, miserere nobis>.®8

The peculiarity of this version lies not so much in the elimination

of the majority of the prophecies from the interior of the dis¬

course, as in the substitution for the usual introduction (Vos,

inquam . . . verum sit ) of the opening words (Int &r press uras

. . . usuris exigerem) of the Contra Judceos, Paganos, et Ari-

anos Sermo de Symbolo ,67

But aside from these differences in content, the sermon Vos

inquam shows variations also in liturgical position.68 We have al¬

ready observed its use as the sixth69 or ninth70 lectio in Matins of

Christmas day. On the same day it sometimes served as the fifth71

or eighth72 lectio. But it is found in Matins of other days as well.

It served as the fourth73 lectio, or as the fourth, fifth, and sixth

65 For the repetition of this rubric I have no explanation.

68 Followed immediately by the responsory Descendit de celis Deus.

67 See above, pp. 2 ff.

68 See Chambers, Vol. II, pp. 52, note 4; 53, note 2.

69 See also Bibl. Nat., Mss. latins 1234, Ordinarium Utinense ssec. xiv, fol. 2v ;

1273, Breviarium Andegavense ssec. xiv, fol. 37r ; 1279, Breviarium Monasterii

Tutelensis ssec. xiv, fol. 27r; 752, Breviarium Arelatense ssec. xiv, fol. 70v— 71r ;

1028, Breviarium Senonense ssec. xiv, fol. 51r. See further U. Chevalier, Insti¬

tutions liturgiques de VCglise de Marseille ( Bibliotheque liturgique, XIV), Paris,

1910, p. 23.

70 See also Bibl. Nat., Ms. 1309, Breviarium Gerundense ssec. xv, fol. 31r-31v.

, 71 That this was the use of Paris is shown by the following breviaries from

churches of that place: Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 1025, ssec. xiv, fol. 126v, 128r— 128?;

Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 746, ssec. xiv, fol. 30v-31r; Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 746 A., ssec. xiv,

fol. 23v ; Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 1293, anni 1471, fol. 34r-34v; Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat.

1294, anni 1472, fol. 37r; Bibl. Mazarine, Ms. 342, ssec. xiv, fol. 109r; Bibl

Mazarine, Ms. 345, ssec. xv, fol. 160v. See also Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 747, Lec-

tionarium Parisiense ssec. xiii-xiv, fol. 9v-10r. A similar use at the Abbey of

St. Victor is seen in Bibl. Mazarine, Ms. 347, ssec. xiv, fol. 89v-90r. See also

Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 12035, ssec. xii, fol. 22v-23r, — a breviary of provenience un¬

known to me.

72 Vatican Ms. 7126, Breviarium Monasticum ssec. xiii, fol. 64r-64v.

73 Munich, Hofbibliothek, Cod. lat. 12635, Breviarium Ranshofenense ssec. xiii,

p. 7.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

15

lectiones74 on the fourth Sunday of Advent; as the fourth lectio

on Christmas eve;75 as all three lectiones in ferial Matins on any

day of the week preceding Christmas ;76 and as the sixth lectio on

the day of the Circumcision.77 I can cite no evidence of its use

outside the season of Christmas.

But with these variations in content and in liturgical position

we are concerned only incidentally, for these matters have no im¬

portant bearing upon the dramatic development under considera¬

tion. Let us, then, return to an examination of the complete and

normal form of the lectio as printed above from the lectionary of

Arles (Ms. 1018). 78

The lectio opens with a direct arraignment of the Jews for their

perverse disbelief in Christ’s Messiahship. Since the Jews stub¬

bornly demand evidence, the preacher grimly proposes to fetch testi¬

mony from their own law. He first summons Isaiah, bidding him

testify concerning Christ. As if receiving a response directly from

Isaiah in person, the preacher reports the prophet’s utterance.

Similarly are summoned the prophets Jeremiah, Daniel, Moses,

David, and Habbakuk. After each summons, the preacher reports

the prophet’s utterance, and adds a few words of elucidation.

With the taunt that he might readily extend this succession of

prophets from the Old Testament, the preacher passes on to the

premonitions regarding Christ in the New Testament, quoting ut¬

terances from Simeon, Zacharias, Elisabeth, and John. With a

74 Breviarium ad usum insignis Ecclesice Sarum, edited by F. Procter and

C. Wordsworth, Cambridge, 1882, pp. cxxxv-cxliii.

76 See E. Mart§ne, Tractatus de Antiqua Ecclesice Disciplina, Lyons, 1706,

p. 78.

76 At Laon. See U. Chevalier, Ordinaires de I’figlise cathedrale de Laon, Paris,

1897, pp. 33-43.

77 Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 16309, Breviarium Santonense saec. xiv, fol. 40v-41v.

In this case the liturgical lectio contains only the following parts of the sermon

Vos inquam: the opening sentences of the introduction, the prophecies of Virgil,

Nebuchadnezzar, and the Sibyl, and the conclusion. The excerpt from the

sermon Vos inquam found in the same manuscript (fol. 31r) for use as the sixth

lectio on Christmas has been printed above.

78 From the present study I omit all investigation of the sources of the Latin

lectio before us. The probability that the sermon Vos, inquam, convenio is in¬

fluenced *by Greek sermons of dramatic content is discussed in the able mono¬

graph of Giorgio La Piana, Le Rappresentazioni Sacre nella Letteratura Bizan-

tina, Grottaferrata, 1912, pp. 283-302, 308-309. Once given the sermon Vos,

inquam, convenio, the Western development of this composition into drama

appears to me to be independent of Byzantine influence. The opposing opinion

of La Piana in the case of the Ordo Prophetarum from Limoges, I consider

below, pp. 86-37.

16 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

tart reminder to the Jews that the testimony already adduced should

be ample, the preacher adds utterances from the Gentiles, Virgil79

and Nebuchadnezzar, and finally80 a prophetic passage in hexa¬

meters from the Erythraean Sibyl.81 After elucidating the Chris¬

tian acrostic of the Sibylline verses, the speaker darts at the hostile

Jews a concluding shaft of scorn.

Viewed as a literary production the lectio is particularly note¬

worthy for its energetic dramatic style. The direct denunciations

of the Jews are presented in effective, though artificial, antitheses;

and the verbal playfulness of some passages, however strained it

may appear, contributes at least a certain vivacity.82 The monot¬

ony immanent in the formula of repeated summonses and responses

is somewhat mitigated through variety in the elucidating narratives

accompanying the responses. The circumstance that the prophets

are not summoned in chronological order does not seriously impair

the organization of the composition.83

79 For information concerning the famous line from Virgil, see J. B. Mayor,

W. W. Fowler, and R. S. Conway, Virgil’s Messianic Eclogue , London, 1907.

80 It will be observed that the last seven witnesses ( Simeon, Zacharias, Eliza¬

beth, John, Virgil, Nebuchadnezzar, and Sibyl) are not summoned after the

formula (Die, Ysaia; Die et tu, Iheremia ; Die, sancte Danihel ; etc.) employed

for the six preceding. The actual presence of Simeon, Zacharias, and Elizabeth,

John, Nebuchadnezzar, and the Sibyl may be understood as suggested in various

utterances of the preacher, such as the following : Symeonem . . . intro -

ducamj Illi etiam parentes Ioannis, Zacharias et Elisabeth, . . . dicant ; O

fidelis testis ; In dubium hoc ueniat, nisi alios ex gentibus idoneos testes pluraque

dicentes in medio introducam. I find in the text nothing that could possibly

imply the actual presence of Virgil.

81 These prophetic verses. are quoted by St. Augustine in his Be Civitate Bei

(Lib. xviii, cap. 23. See Migne, Pat. Ldt., Vol. XLI, col. 579—581). Their ap¬

pearance throughout the middle ages is frequent. See F. Neri, Le Tradizioni

italiene della Sibilla, in Studi Medievali (ed. Novati and Renier), Vol. IV

(1912-13), pp. 220-221; Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits de la Bibliotheque

Nationale, Vol. XXXII, Part II, Paris, 1888, pp. 101-102 ; F. Kampers, Bie

Sibylle von Tibur und Vergil, in Historisches Jahrbuch, Vol. XXIX (1908),

pp. 3, 244; Chevalier, Repertorium Hymnologicum, No. 9876 ; La Piana,

pp. 308-309.

82 See Sepet, p. 9.

83 See Petit de Julleville, Vol. I, p. 35.

Young — Ordo Prophet arum.

17

III

Still more important than the matter of dramatic style and

content, however, is the question of dramatic delivery. There can

be no doubt that the sermon before us, like many other mediaeval

homilies, contains material suitable for dialogue and impersona¬

tion, and hence for drama. We may well ask, therefore, how far

the homily in the form before us actually proceeded in the direc¬

tion of dramatic rendition.

That the lectio as it stands was not delivered as a dialogue seems

perfectly clear from the use of the word inquit in the responses.1

The use of this word seems to prove conclusively that the utter¬

ances of the persons summoned are delivered not by separate

speakers, but by the lector himself.2 The most that can be assumed

is that the lector altered his voice in such a way as to distinguish

between summons and response.3

Although, then, the lectio in use at Arles could not have been re¬

cited as dialogue, there is no reason why there should not exist other

versions in which the several prophecies were spoken by separate

persons. Such a version is courageously conjectured by Sepet as

follows :

J’en conlus de plus qu’on a fini, a un moment donnd, par completer les

flexions de voix en leur donnant pour organes des lecteurs differents, et

qu’alors chaque ton, c’est-a-dire cliaque prophete, a eu son interprete, le

dialogue demeurant cependant toujours enchassd dans le recit. Cette con¬

clusion repose sinon sur des preuves pdremptoires, au moins sur des in¬

ductions raisonnables. C’est une conjecture, mais c’est, je crois, une con¬

jecture vraisemblable.4

Although Sepet could find no text with which to support this

conjecture, and although he constructed it upon feeble data,5 it has

1 For example: Ecce, inquit, uirgo, etc.; Hie est, inquit, Deus noster, etc.

2 Early in his argument Sepet seems to affirm the presence of dialogue in the

lectio (“la reponse suivant immediatement la question et par consequent con-

stituant un dialogue,” p. 9) ; but he subsequently corrects himself (“ce qui nous

indique bien qu’il n’y avait pas de dialogue proprement dit,” p. 23). Chasles

sees clearly (p. 123) that the presence of the word inquit precludes dialogue.

3 See Sepet, pp. 13, 23. The varying of a single lector’s (or cantor’s) voice

in the rendering of the passiones of Holy Week is discussed at length in my

article Observations on the Origin of the Mediaeval Passion-Play, in Publica¬

tions of the Modern Language Association, Vol. XXV (1910), pp. 309-333.

4 Sepet, p. 13. See also Sepet, pp. 42, 96-97.

6 Sepet bases (pp. 10, 13) his conjecture, in the first place, upon the analogy

of the Passiones of Holy Week. He asserts (p. 10) that as early as the thir-

2 — S. A. Li.

18

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

been welcomed by competent critics as conforming to general prob¬

ability.6 I am particularly glad, therefore, to present a version of

the lectio that provides for Sepet ’s conjecture a genuine justifica¬

tion. In a service-book from the church of Salerno we find the

following :7

In Nattvitatis Nocte post primam , Miss am legitur Sermo Sancti Augus-

tini Episcqpi, more Salernitano.

Vos (inquam) conuenio, O Iudsei, qui vsqwe in hodiernum diem negatis

filinm Dei. Nonne vox vestra est ilia, quando eum videbatis miracula

facientem, atq ue tentantes dicebatis: Quousqae animas nostras suspendis?

Si tu es Christus, die nobis palam. Ille autem vos ad eonsiderationem

miraculorum mittebat, dicens: Opera que ego facio, ipsa testimonium

perhibent de me; vt Christo testimonium dicere^t, non verba, sed facta.

Vos autem, non cognoscentes Saluatorem, adijeientes in main dixistis :

Tu de te testimonium dicis; testimonium tuum non est verum. Sed ad

hsec ille quid vobis respondent, aduertere noluistis. Nonne scriptum est

(inquit) in lege vestra quod duorum hominum testimonium verum sit?

Prseuaricatores legis <p. 76> intendite legem. Testimonium quaeritis de

Christo; in lege vestra scriptum est quod duorum hominum < testi¬

monium > verum sit. Procedant de lege non tantum duo sed etiam plures

testes Christi, & conuincant auditores legis, nec factores. Die & tu,

Isaias propheta, testimonium Christo?

teenth century the Passio was sung by three persons, to whom respectively were

assigned the parts of Christ, the Jews, and the Narrator ; and he raises the

question as to whether some such assignment of parts may not have been prac¬

ticed in the delivery of the lesson Vos, inquam, convenio . Such slight force as

this analogy may be supposed to have virtually disappears before the evidence

that this practice of distributing the roles of the Passio among three persons

did not obtain before the fifteenth century. See my Observations on the Origin

of the Mediaeval Passion-Play, already cited, p. 331. Another analogy cited by

Sepet (pp. 11-12) is that of the Gradual of the Mass for Palm Sunday as

rubricated in a certain manuscript of the twelfth century (Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat.

9486, fol. 9r). The several sentences of the Gradual are here distributed with

somewhat unusual dramatic appropriateness between Duo cantores and Chorus,

and this text as a whole, like the pseudo-Augustinian lectio, may be viewed as

a mingling of monologue and dialogue. Although the analogy between this

musical piece and the recited lectio is remote, it may be allowed to stand oy

whatever strength it has. I regard it as negligible. Sepet perceives (p. 13) a

further hint toward a distribution of the r61es of the lectio in the manuscript

itself (Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 1018) : that is, in the paragraph-signs and in the

entry of the names of two prophets at appropriate points in the margin (I have

recorded these rubrications in my foot-notes to the text of the lectio above,

along with the more thorough-going rubrications from Ms. Vatic. Regin. 125

and Ms. Canonici Liturg. 391). I cannot accept Sepet’s eager interpretation of

these rubrications. Although they are undoubtedly significant as indicating

divisions in the content of the lectio, they in no way prove that the several

prophecies were assigned to separate speakers,

6 See Petit de Julleville, Vol. I, p. 35; Chambers, Vol. II, p. 53.

7 Officia Propria Festorum Salernitance Ecclesice, Naples, 1594, pp. 75—79. I

print from the copy in the British Museum.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

19

Isaias:

Ecce virgo concipiet & pariet filium, & vocabitur nomen eius Emanuel,

quod est interpretatum: Nobiscum Deus.

Lector:

Accedat & alius testis. Die & tu, Hieremia, testimonium Christo?

Ieremias :

Hie est Deus noster, & no n sestimabitur alius absque eo qui inuenit

omnem viam scientiae, & dedit earn Iacob puero suo & Israel dilecto

suo. Post haec in terris visus est, & cum hominibus conuersatus est.

Lector:

Ecce duo testes idonei ex lege vestra, ex quorum testimonio non sunt

compuncta corda vestra. Sed alij atqwe alij ex lege Christi testes intro-

ducantur vt frontes durissimi inimicorum conterantur. Veniat & Daniel

sanctus, iuuenis quidem aetate, senior vero scientia ac mansuetudine,

conuincat omnes falsos testes, & sicut conuicit seniores impudicos, ita

suo testimonio Christi conterat inimicos. Die sancte Daniel, die de

Christo quod nosti?

Daniel:

Cum venerit Sanctus Sanctorum, cessabit vnetio vestra.

Lector :

Quare, illo praesente <cui> insultantes dicebatis: Tu de te ipso

testimonium dicis, testimonium tuum non est verum, cessauit vnetio

vestra nisi quia ipse est qui venerat Sanctus Sanctorum? Sed si, ut8 vos

dicitis, non dum venit, sed expectatur, vt veniat Sanctus Sanctorum,

demonstrate vnetionem. Si autem,. quod verum est, cessauit vnetio

vestra, cognoscite venisse Sanctum Sanctorum. Accedat & alius testis.

Die & tu, Moyses, legislator, dux populi Israel, testimonium Christo?

Moyses :

Prophetam vobis excitabit Deus de fratribus vestris; omnis anima

quae non audierit prophetam ilium, exterminabitur de populo suo.

Lector:

Prophetam dictum Christum ipsum Christum audi in Euangelio

<p. 77> dicentem: Non est propheta sine honore, nisi in patria sua.

Accedat enim Dauid sanctus testis fidelis, ex cuius semine processit

ipse cui lex & prophete testomonium dicunt; dicat & ipse de Christo.

Die & tu, Dauid, propheta, testimonium Christo?

Dauid:

Adorabunt eum omnes reges terrae, omnes gentes seruient ei.

Lector:

Cui seruient? Die cui seruient.

si, ut] sicut (Print).

20

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Dauid:

Vis audire cui?

Lector:

Volo.

Dauid:

Dixit Dominus Domino meo: Sede ad dexteram meam, donee ponam

inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum.

Lector:

Et espressius atq ue nominatim: Quare (Quare, inquit) tumultuatse

sunt gentes, & populi meditati sunt inania? Astiterunt reges terrse, &

principes conuenerunt in vnum aduersus Dominum & aduersus Christum

eius. Accedat & alius testis. Die & tu Abachuc, propheta, testimonium

Christo?

Abachuc:

Domine, audiui auditum tuum & timui, consideraui opera tua &

expaui. In medio duorum animalium cognosceris. Opera tua, Dews, &

verbum caro factum est.

Lector :

Ecce quemadmodum comieniunt testes veritatis; ecce quemadmodum

comieniunt testes falsitatis. Sufficiuwt vobis ista, O Iudei? An adhuc

ad vestram cowfusionem & ex lege & ex gente vestra alios introducemus

testes, & illi testimonium praebeant cui perdita mewte insultantes dice-

batis: Tu de te ipso testimonium perhibes; testimonium tuum non est

verum? Accedat & alius testis. Benedicens Dominum Simeon, ex-

clamauit senex ille et dixit. Die & tu, Simeon, propheta, testimonium

Christo?

Simeon:

Nunc dimictis, Domine, seruum tuum secundum verbum tuum in pace,

quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum.

Lector:

Ille etiam parentes Ioannis, Zaccharias & Elizabeth, iuuenes steriles &

in senectute fecundi, dicant etiam ipsi testimonium Christo; dicawt

de Christo quod sentiuwt & testem idoneum Christo nutriant. Aiunt

enim suo paruulo nato. Die & tu, Zacharias, propheta, testimonium

Christo?

Zaccharias :

Tu puer, pro<p. 78>pheta Altissimi vocaberis, prseibis enim ante

faciem domini parare vias eius.

Lector:

Ipsique matri & virgini Elizabeth ait. Die & tu, Elizabeth, testi¬

monium Christo?

Young — Or do Prophetarum.

21

Elizabet:

Vnde hoc mihi vt veniat mater Domini mei ad me? Ecce enim vt

facta est vox salutationis in auribus meis, exultauit in gaudio infans in

vtero meo.

Lector:

Intelligens enim Ioa/mes Matrem Domini sui venisse ad suam matrem,

inter ipsas angustias vteri adhuc positus motu salutauit, quern voce no?i

poterat. Die & tu, Ioannes, testimonium Christo?

Ioannes :

Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi.

Lector:

Et adiecit: Tu ad me venis baptizari; ego a te debeo baptizari.

Agnouit seruus Dominum, cognouit vinculis originalis peccati obligatus

omni nexu peccati liberum. Agnouit peccator iudicem, agnouit creatura

creatorem, cognouit paranymphus sponsum. Nam & hsec vox Ioannis

est: Qui habet sponsam, sponsus est. Nonhe quando ille facundissimus

poeta inter sua carmina dicit. Die & tu, Virgili, testimonium Christo?

Virgilius :

lam noua progenies ccelo dimittitur alto.

Lector:

Dicebat Christo testimonium propheta? In dubium hoc veniat nisi

alios ex gentibus idoneos testes pluraqwe dicentes in medium introducat.

Ilium regem qui vestram superbiam captiuando perdomuit, Nebuch-

donosor regem scilicet Babylonis, non prsetermittam. Die & tu Nabuch-

donosor testimonium Christo?

Nabuchdonosor :

Nonne tres viros misimus in fornacem ligatos?

Lector:

Et aiunt ei.

Famulus Regis:

Vere, Rex.

Nabuchdonosor:

Ecce video quatUor viros solutos deambulantes in medio ignis, & cor¬

rupts nulla est in eis, & aspectus quarti similis est filio Dei.

Lector:

0 alienigena, vnde tibi hoc? Quis tibi annunciauit filium Dei? Non-

dum quidem mundo nascitur, & similitudo nascerctis a te cognoscitur.

Quid Sibilla vaticinando etiam de Christo clamauerit, in medium profer-

amus, vt ex uno la<p. 79>tere vtrorumqwe frontes percutiantur, Iudse-

orum scilicet atq ue Paganorum atqwe suo gladio, sicut Golias, ChristI

omnes percutiantur inimici. Audite quid dixerit. Die & tu, Sybilla,

testimonium Christo?

22

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Sibilla Erytheaea:

Ivdicii signum: tellus sudore madescet;

E ccelo Rex adueniet, per ssecla futurus,

Scilicet in carne9 presens vt iudicet Orbem.

Vnde Deum cernewt incredulus atq ue fidelis

Celsum cum sanctis seui iam termino in ipso.

Sic animse cum carne aderunt, quas iudicet ipse

Cum iacet incultus densis in vepribus Orbis.

Deiiciewt simulacbra viri, cunctam quoqwe gazam.

Exuret terras ignis, pontumq^e polumq^e;

Inquirens tetri portas effringet Auerni.

Sanctorum sed enim cunctae lux libera carni

Tradetur. Sontes seterna flamma cremabit.

Occultos actus retegens tunc quisq^e loquetur

Secreta atqwe Deus reserabit pectora luci.

Tunc erit & luctus, stridebunt dentibus omnes.

Eripitur solis iubar, et chorus interit astris.

Soluetur caelum, lunaris splendor obibit.

Deiiciet colles, valles extoilet ab imo.

Non erit in rebus hominum sublime vel altum.

Iam aequantur campis montes et caerula powti.

Omnia cessabunt, tellus confracta peribit.

Sic pariter fontes torrentur, fluminaqzte igni;

Et tuba tunc sonitum tristem demittet ab alto.

Orbe gemews facinus miserum varTosqwe labores,

Tartareumq^e chaos mowstrabit terra dehiscews,

Et coram hie Domino reges sistewtur ad vnum.

Decidet e ccelo ignis & sulphuris amnis.

Lector:

Haec de Christi Natiuitate, Passione, et Resurrectione, atq ue secundo

eius Aduentu ita dicta sunt vt si quis in graeco capita eorum discere

voluerit, inueniet: IISVS, CHRISTOS YOS THEV, SOTIR. Quod est

in Latino: IESVS, CHRISTVS, FILIVS DEI SALVATOR. Quod & in

Latinum translatis eisdem versibus apparet praeter quod Graecarum lit-

erarum proprietas non adeo potuit obseruari. Tu<autem, Domine, mis-

ere nobis>.10

Although our information concerning the ceremonial connected

with this liturgical piece is slight,* 11 we can infer the essentials from

the text itself. The unusual liturgical position of the lectio is

made clear in the introductory rubric: In Nativifatis Node post

primam Missam. The reading occurs, then, at the conclusion of

9 carne] carnem (Print).

10 Followed immediately by the rubric : De officio Beati Matthaei in Feria

Quinta.

11 1 am not acquainted with any ordinaria from Salerno.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

23

the first of the three Christmas Masses, and this first Mass is sung

immediately after the Te Deum of Christmas Matins. This posi¬

tion may be shown schematically as follows :12

Lectio ix (the last lectio of Matins)

Responsorium13

Te Deum

Missa de Nocte (First Mass)

Sermo Sancti Augustini

Laudes

Missa in Aurora (Second Mass)

Prima

Tertia

Missa in Die (Third Mass)

Clearly, then, the lectio is no longer connected with Matins,14

but is an independent liturgical piece for delivery more Salernitano.

The mos Salernitanus for the delivery of the sermo in its new

position is not difficult to discern. The Lector reads the introduc¬

tory address to the Jews, and then summons, in turn, the thirteen

witnesses. That each testimony is read by a separate person repre¬

senting the appropriate witness, is shown by the rubrics giving

the names of the speakers and by the absence of the word inquit

in the testimonies.15

It will be observed that with the text of the sermo the Lector

takes certain liberties : his own utterances are substantially reduced

in length, and the summonses are given a new uniformity.16 But

most noticeable is the expansion into dialogue of the roles of David

and Nabuchadnezzar.17 The expansion of the latter’s dialogue in¬

cludes the introduction of an additional personage to speak the

12 See, for example, U. Chevalier, Ordinaires de Vfiglise cathedrale de Laon,

Paris, 1897, pp. 47-48.

13 According to the mediaeval use, this last responsory of Christmas Matins

was frequently followed by a reading of the genealogy of Christ (Liber Genera-

tionis) from the Gospel of Matthew (i, 1—16). See Chevalier, Ordinaires de

Vftglise cathedrale de Laon, p. 47 ; and the present writer, in Transactions of

the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters, Vol. XVII, Part I (1912),

pp. 313, 385-386, 391.

14 The closing formula Tu <^autem, Domine, miserere nobis^> may, or may

not, be a survival from the use of the sermo as a regular lectio in Matins.

15 The retention of inquit in connection with testimonies that are read by the

Lector himself is illustrated in the Lector’s utterance immediately after the

last speech of David.

16 Note, for example, Die & tu, Simeon and Die & tu, Ioannes.

17 This expansion of the role of Nebuchadnezzar anticipates the dramatic

elaboration surrounding this personage in the more highly developed versions

of the Ordo Prophetarum. See below, pp. 61-62, 65-66.

24 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

words of Famulus Regis. There is, of course, nothing to show that

any of the personages named in the rubrics are, or are not, actually

impersonated. From the laconic legitur of the introductory rubric

one more naturally infers that there is no impersonation.

It cannot he asserted positively that the text before us represents

a chronological stage between the use of the sermo as an ordinary,

undialogued lectio in Matins and the use of it unmistakable drama.

Since the lectio of Salerno is known to us only in a printed version

of the late sixteenth century, one might contend that it represents

not a pre-dramatie stage of the development, but a later stage in

which the influence of the dramatic Ordo Prophetarum merely

lingers. To me, however, the very presence of a dialogued lectio in

a printed service-book of the year 1594 seems to indicate a long

tradition; and while awaiting further knowledge concerning the

mediaeval usages of the church of Salerno, I shall regard the text

before us as representing a stage between the normal liturgical

lectio and the fully dramatized Ordo Prophetarum.

IV

However dramatic the version from Salerno may seem, it still

retains the essential outline and language of the Augustinian lectio:

the prophecies are still merely incidental in an expository address, —

an address which has, to be sure, been reduced, but which still

forms the backbone of the piece. We pass naturally, then, to a

version from the monastery of St. Martial at Limoges, in which the

prophecies are virtually free from enclosing exposition, are given

a special literary form, and are set to music i1

1 Paris, Bibl. Nat., Ms. latin 1139, Troparium Martialense ssec. xii, fol. 55v-58r.

The manuscript is described by L.-J.-N. Monmerque and P. Michel, Theatre

frangais au Moyen Age, Paris, 1842, pp. 1-3, by E. de Coussemaker, Histoire de

VHarmonie au Moyen Age, Paris, 1852, pp. 126-127, and by the same author in

his Drames liturgiques du Moyen Age, Rennes, 1860, pp. 311-319. See also

W. Meyer, Fragmenta Burana, Berlin, 1901, pp. 50-51. Since this manuscript

contains the famous Sponsus, numerous notes upon it have been written by

students of romantic dialects (See W. Foerster and E. Koschwitz, Altfran-

zosiches Uehungshuch, Leipzig, 1902, col. 91-94). The text printed below has

been previously edited numerous times. I collate the editions of E. DuMeril

(Les Origines latines du Theatre moderne, Caen, 1849, pp. 179-187. — D. ), Mag-

nin (Journal des Savants, 1846, pp. 88—93. — M. ), Coussemaker (Drames

liturgiques du Moyen Age, pp. 16—20. — C. ), and Monmerqug and P. Michel

(Theatre frangais au Moyen Age, pp. 6-9. — N.). Although Sepet does not edit

the text as a whole, I collate the parts that he transcribes (pp. 15-21 passim)

from the manuscript (S). I do not consider the text of T. Wright (Early Mys-

Young — Or do Prophetarum.

25

<ORDO PROPHETARUM* 2>

<Cantor> :3

Omnes gentes

Congaudentes

Dent cantum leticie.

Dens homo

Fit de domo

Dauid4 natus hodie.5 * <fol. 56r>

O Iudei,

Uerbum Dei

Qui negatis hominem,

Vestre legis

Teste<s>® regis

Audite per ordinem.7

Et uos gentes

Non eredentes

Peperisse uirginem

Vestre gentis

Documentis

Pellite caliginem.

teries and Other Latin Poems of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, London,

1838, pp. 60-62), derived from P. Michel (See Wright, p. xiv). I omit from

consideration also the text of E. de Coussemaker in his Histoire de VHarmonie

au Moyen Age, — a text dependent upon Magnin and DuM§ril (See Histoire,

p. 133). A complete, but faulty, facsimile of the part of the manuscript with

which we are concerned is found in Coussemaker’s Histoire, Plates xviii-xxiii.

Contrary to the assumption of some persons, the Ordo Prophetarum from this

manuscript is not found in Raynouard, Choix des Poesies originates des Trouba¬

dours, Vol. II, Paris, 1817, pp. 139-143. The text as printed below is imme¬

diately preceded in the manuscript by the closing rubric of the Sponsus : Modo

accipiant eas demones et precipitentur in infernum, which is written in and

above the last four centimeters of the third line from the bottom of fol. 55v.

The first four words of the Ordo Prophetarum, — Omnes gentes congaudentes

dent, — occupy the first two-thirds of the next line. The last four centimeters

of this line are blank. This blank space appears to have been left for an in¬

troductory rubric that was never written. Except for one brief passage, indi¬

cated in my foot-notes, the entire text is furnished with musical notation.

2 1 supply this heading without reference to the several vernacular inventions

of previous editors.

3<Cantor>.] <Praecentor> (D. C. ) ; <Dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; omitted

(N). I enter the conjecture cantor at appropriate places throughout the text

merely for general intelligibility. Since the text is sung, the word is not

inappropriate ; and its lack of explicitness accords with our ignorance of the

precise facts. I myself should raise no objection to cantores or chorus . Du-

Meril’s Praecentor and Magnin’s Dicat Sacerdos, however, seem to imply undue

editorial certainty.

4 Dauid] Dauit (Ms. N. S.).

5 hodie] After this word D inserts the rubric: <Ad Judaeos>.

®Teste<s>] teste <m>- (D) ; Testem (M. C.) ; Teste (N).

7 ordinem] After this word D inserts the rubric: <Ad Gentes >.

26

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

IsitaeL

<Cantor> :3

Israel, uir lenis,9 inque

De Xpisto <quae>10 nosti firme.

Responsum z* 11

Dux de Iuda non tolletur12

Donee adsit qui mit<t>etur13

Salutare Del uerbum

Expectabunt14 gentes mecum.

Moynes .

<Cantor> :15

Legislator, hue propinqwa

Et de Xpisto prome digna.

Responsum:16

Dabit Deus uobis uatem;

Huic ut17 m ilii aurem date.

Qui non audit hunc dicentem13

Expellitur19 sua gente.

ISAIAS

< Cantor > :20

Isayas, uerum qui scis,

Ueritatem cur <fol. 56v> non dicis?

Responsum:21

Est necesse

Uirga<m>22 Iesse

8 Israel <Cantor>] <Ad Israelem> (D) ; <Accedat> Israel <et dicat

Sacerdos^> (M) ; Israel (C. N. ).

9 lenis] D suggests fortis.

10<quae>] <quid> (D. C.) ; quae (M) ; quid (S) ; omitted (N).

11 Responsum] Israel (D). It will be observed that DuMeril ignores the rubric

Responsum throughout, and consistently misplaces the names of the witnesses.

12 tolletur] tollitur (Ms. M. C. N.).

13 mit<t>etur] notetur (D. C. N. ) ; vocetur (M. Magnin observes, however,

that the Ms. may read notetur) ; mittetur (S).

14 Expectabunt] expecta<b>unt (D).

15 Moyses < Cantor >] <Praecentor ad Moysem> (D) ; <Accedat> Moyses

<et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Moyses (C. N.).

16 Responsum] Moyses (D).

17 ut] et (M).

18dicentem] audientem (Ms. C. N.) ; audientem <loquentem?;> (D. S.).

19 Expellitur] expelletur (D. S. DuM6ril, however, records the Ms. reading

expellitur) .

20 Isaias < Cantor >] <Praecentor ad Isaiam> (D) ; <Accedat> Isaias <^et

dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Isaias (C. N.).

21 Responsum] Isaias (D).

22 Uirga<m>] Virga (M. N.) ; Virgam (C).

Young — Ordo Propketarum.

27

De radice proue<h>i23

Flos deinde

Surge* inde

Qui est spiritus Dei.

Ieremias

< Cantor >

Hue accede, Ieremias;

Die de Xpisto propbetias.

Responsum:23

Sic est,

Hie est

Deus noster,

Sine quo non erit alter.

Daniel

<Cantor>:2S

Daniel, indica

Uoce prophetica

FaCta dominica.

Responsum:™

Sanctus sanctorum ueniet,

Et unctio deficie*.

<Abacuc

Cantor> :28

Abacuc,29 regis celestis

Nunc ostende quod 20 sis testis.

Responsum :31

Et32 expectaui,

Mox expaui

Metu mirabilium

Opus tuum

Inter duum

Corpus animalium.

23proue<h>i] provehi (M) ; provei (N).

24 Ieremias <Cantor>] <Praecentor ad Ieremiam]> (D) ; <Accedat]> Jere-

mias <et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Jeremias (C. N. ).

^Responsum] Jeremias (D).

26 Daniel <Cantor^>] <^Praecentor ad Danielem^> (D) ; <Accedat> Daniel

<et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Daniel (C. N. ).

27 Responsum] Daniel (D) ; preceded by a superfluous scribal capital S (Ms).

28 < Abacuc Cantor >] <;Praecentor ad Habacuc> (D) ; <Accedat Abacuc,

et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Abacuc (C) ; < Abacuc > (N).

29 Abacuc] <H>abacuc (D).

30 quod] quid (M. N).

31 Responsum] Habacuc (D).

32 Et] D observes that this word is superfluous.

28

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

David

< Cantor > :33

Die tu, Dauid,34 de nepote

Causas que35 sunt tibi note.

R esponsumr*5

Vniuersus

Grex conuersus

Adorabat37 Dominurn,

Cui futurum

Seruiturum

Omne genus ho<fol. 57r>minum.

Dixit Dominus Domino meo:

Sede a38 dextris meis.

Simeon

< Cantor > :39

Nunc Symeon adueniat,

Qui responsum acceperat

Qui40 non <Ii>abere£41 terminum

Donee uidere* Dominum,

'Responsum :42

Nunc me dimittas, Domine,

Finire uitam in pace;

Quia mei modo cernunt ocwli

Quern misisti

Hunc mundum43 pro salute popwli.44

83 Dauid <;Cantor>] <Praecentor ad David> (D) ; <;Accedat> David <^et

dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; David (C. N.).

34 Dauid] Dauit (Ms. N.).

35 que] qui (M).

36 Responsum] David (D).

37 Adorabat] adorabit (D. C. DuMeril and Coussemaker, however, record the

Ms. reading adorabat) ; adorabat < adorabit ?> (S).

38 a] ad (Ms. N) ; a<d> (D).

39 Simeon <Cantor>] <Praecentor ad Simeonem> (D) ; <Accedat> Simeon

<|et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Simeon (C. N.).

40 Qui] Quod (D. M. Magnin, however, records the Ms. reading as qui).

41 <h>aberet] haberet (D. M. C.) ; aberet (N).

^Responsum] Simeon (D).

43 Hunc mundum] By printing these words in square brackets D appears to

regard them as superfluous.

44 For the entire part of Simeon (Nunc Symeon . . . salute populi) the

musical notation is omitted.

Young— Or do Prophetarum.

29

Elis abet

<Cantor>:45

Illud,46 Helisabet, in medium

De Domino profer47 eloquium.

R esponsum ;48

Quid est rei

Qttod me mei

Mater <h>eri49 uisitat?

Nam ex eo

TJentre meo

Letus infans palpitat.

< Johannes Baptista

Cantor> : 50

Die,51 Babtista,

Uentris cista clausus

Qua52 dedisti causa

Xpisto <fol. 57v> plausus.

Cui dedisti gaudium

Profer53 et testimonium.

R esponsum:5*

Venit talis

Sotularis85

Cuius non sum etiam

Tam benignus

Ut sim ausus™

iSoluere corrigiam.

46 Elisabet <Cantor>] <]Praecentor ad Elisabeth > (D) ; <Accedat> Elisa¬

beth <et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Elisabeth (C. N.).

40 Illud] Illuc (M. Magnin, however, records the Ms. reading as Illud).

47 profer] profert (Ms. N.) ; profer <t> (D).

48 Responsum] Elisabeth (D).

49 <h>eri] heri (D. M. C.) ; Eri (S. N.).

50 Johannes Baptista Cantor^] <Praecentor ad Johannem Baptistam>

(D) ; <[Accedat Johannes Baptista et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; <Joannes Bap-

tista> (C. N.).

51 Die] De (Ms. N‘.).

52 Qua] Quod (Ms. N.).

63 Profer] Profert (Ms. N.) ; profer <t> (D).

54 Responsura] Johannes Baptista (D).

55 Sotularis] Solea nobis (M. Magnin, however, records the Ms. reading sotu¬

laris) ; salutaris (C).

50 ausus] dignus (D. DuMeril, however, records the Ms. reading ausus) ; ausus

<dignus?> (S).

30

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

VlRGILI us

<Cantor>0T

Vates, Maro,68 gentilium

Da50 Xpisto testimonium.

R esponsum:™

Ecce polo demissa solo noua progenies est.

Nabucodo < no > SOR

<Cantor> :61

Age, fare, os laguene,63

Que de Xpisto nosti uere.63

Nabucodonosor, propheti<z>a,64

Auctorem omnium auctoriza.

Responsum .,65

Cum reuisi

Tres quo<s>66 misi

Uiros in incendium

Vidi iustis

Inconbustis

Mixtum Dei filium,

Viros tres in ignem misi

Quartum cerno67 prolem Dei.

Sibilla <fol. 58r>

<Cantor> :68

Vera pande iam, Sibilla,

Que de Xpisto pre<s>cis69 signa.

67Uirgilius <Cantor>] <Praecentor ad Virgilium> (D) ; <Accedat> Vir-

gilius <et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Virgilius (C. N. ).

58 Maro] Moro (Ms. N. ).

59 Da] dea (Ms. N.).

60 Responsum] Virgilius (D).

61 Nabucodo < no >sor <Cantor>] <Praecentor ad Nabuchodonosor ;> (D) ;

<Accedat> Nabucodonosor <^et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Nabuchodonosor

(C. N.).

63 os laguene] os laguene <nos loquere?> (D) ; os lagenae (M. Magnin, how¬

ever, records the Ms. reading laguene) ; os lagene (C).

63 uere] uere Responsum (Ms. N.) ; uere <; Alias > (M). Upon the scribal

insertion of the rubric Responsum, Magnin comments plausibly as follows :

“Codex : responsum. C’est une erreur du copiste. Ces deux vers ne peuvent

etre qu’une variante du distique precedent qui aura paru trop grossier.” See

Sepet, p. 33.

64 propheti< z> a] prophetia (M. N.) ; prophetiza (C).

65 Responsum] Nabuchodonosor (D).

66quo<s>] quos (C) ; quo (N).

67 cerno] cerna (Ms. N. ).

68 Sibilla < Cantor >] <Praecentor ad Sibyllam> (D) ; <Accedat> Sibylla

<et dicat Sacerdos> (M) ; Sibilla (C. N.).

69Pre<s>cis] Praescis (M. C.) ; precis (N).

Young — Or do Propbetarum.

31

R esponsum :70

Iudicii71 signum: Tellus sudore madescet;

E celo rex adueniet per secla futurus,

Scilicet in carne presens ut iudicet orbem.

<Cantor>:72

ludea incredula,

Cur manes73 adbuc inuerecunda?

<H>IC INCOANT BeNEDICAMWS.74

A mere glance suggests that this dramatic Ordo Prophetarum is

developed from the pseudo- Augustinian lectio. The two are identi-

70 Responsum] Sibylla (D).

71Iudicii] Iuditii (Ms. N. ).

72 <Cantor>] <Praecentor ad Judaeos> (D) ; omitted (M. C. N.).

73 manes] manens (Ms. D. N. )

74 <H>ic incoant Benedicamus] omitted (D. C.) ; Incoant Benedicamus (M) ;

Incohant benedicamus (N). Immediately after the rubric <^H^>ic incoant

Benedicamus is found the following metrical composition (printed without sub¬

stantial difference by Sepet, p. 26) :

Letabundi iubilemus,

Accurate celebremus

Xpisti natalicia

Summa leticia ;

Cum gratia

Produxit,

Gratanter mentibus

Fidelibus

Inluxit.

Eructauit Pater Uerbum,

Perdit hostis ius acerbum.

Quod in nobis habuit,

Quod diu latuit,

Tunc patuit <fol. 58v>

Arcanum.

Qui contra gariunt

Insaniunt

In uanum.

O re <s>- digna predicari.

Cui non ualent conparari

Quantauis miracula.

Ferit uirguncula

Per secula

Rectorem

Conceptum edidit

Nec perdidit

Pudorem.

Now follows the rubric Alium Benedicamus, and a fresh trope beginning:

Prima mundi seducta sobole, printed by Sepet, p. 84.

32 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

cal in general subject, — the refutation of the Jews; and the similar¬

ity between the two lists of witnesses appears in the following :75

The list of the Limoges version differs only slightly from that of

the lectio. Israel has been added, and Zacharias has been dropped.

These changes are not weighty, however, since Israel is mentioned

in the original lectio,76 and Zacharias is sufficiently represented by

his wife Elisabeth.77 Although neither list is thoroughly chrono¬

logical, the Limoges version shows certain improvements in this

respect.78 The first six names are in approximately chronological

order, with Israel appropriately at the head. David, as progenitor,

appears appropriately enough after the first six witnesses and imme¬

diately before the contemporaries of Christ. The pagan witnesses

are left in their original position, and in chronological disorder

among themselves.

The detailed resemblances between the testimonies in the lectio

and those in the dramatic text of Limoges may be conveniently seen

in the following comparison:

75 In each column I present the names in the order of their appearance in the

text itself.

76 In the prophecy of Jeremiah. See above, p. 5.

77 See Sepet, p. 16.

78 The chronological disorder still remaining in the Limoges version is ob¬

served by Sepet, pp. 84-85.

Young— Or do Prophet arum.

33

Lectio

Isaiah

Ecce virgo in utero concipiet et

pariet filium, et vocabitur nomen

ejus Hemanuhel, quod est interpre-

tatum: Nobiscum Deus.79

Jeremiah

Hie est Deus noster et non sesti-

mabitur alius absque illo qui in-

venit omnem viam scientise, et dedit

earn Jacob puero suo et Israel di-

lecto suo. Post hsec in terris visus

est et cum hominibus conversatus

est.81

Daniel

Cum venerit Sanctus Sanctorum,

cessabit unctio.82

Moses

Prophetam vobis suscitabit Deus

de fratribus vestris; omnis anima

quas non audierit prophetam ilium

exterminabitur de populo suo.83

Ordo of Limoges

Isaiah

Est necesse

Virga<m> Jesse

De radice prove <h>i

Flos deinde

Surget inde

Qui est spiritus Dei.80

Jeremiah

Sic est

Hie est

Deus noster

Sine quo non erit alter.

Daniel

Sanctus sanctorum veniet,

Et unctio deficiet.

Moses

Dabit Deus vobis vatem

Huic ut mihi aurem date

Qui non audit hunc dicentem

Expellitur sua gente.

79 Ecce virgo concipiet, et pariet filium, et vocabitur nomen ejus Emmanuel

(Isa. vii, 14).

80 Et egredietur virga de radice Jesse, et flos de radice ejus ascendet. Et

requiescet super eum spiritus Domini (Isa. xi, 1-2). Cf. Isa. xi, 10 ; Rom. xv,

12-13 ; Num. xvii, 5-6.

81 Hie est Deus noster, et non sestimabitur alius adversus eum. Hie adinvenit

omnem viam disciplinae, et tradidit illam Jacob, puero suo, et Israel, dilecto suo.

Post hsec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est. (Bar, iii, 36—38).

82 Septuaginta hebdomades abreviatse sunt super populum tuum et super urbem

sanctam tuam, ut consummetur praevaricatio, et finem accipiat peccatum, et

deleatur iniquitas, et adducatur justitia sempiterna, et impleatur visio, et pro-

phetia, et ungatur sanctus sanctorum (Dan. ix, 24).

83 Prophetam de gente tua et de fratribus tuis sicut me, suscitabit tibi Dominus

Deus tuus ; ipsum audies . . . Prophetam suscitabo eis de medio fratrum

suorum similem tui, et ponam verba mea in ore ejus, loqueturque ad eos omnia

quae praecepero illi. Qui autem verba ejus, quae loquetur in nomine meo, audire

noluerit, ego ultor existam (Deut. xviii, 15, 18-19).

3— S. A. L.

34

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

David

Adorabunt eum omnes reges ter-

rae; omnes gentes servient illi.

Dixit Dominus Domino meo: Sede

ad dexteram meam donee ponam

inimicos tuos scabellum pedum

tuorum.84

Habakkuk

Domine, audivi auditum tuum et

timui; consideravi opera tua et ex-

pavi. In medio duum animalium

cognosceris.85

Simeon

Nunc dimittis, Domine, servum

tuum in pace, quia viderunt oculi

mei sa^utare tuum.86

David

Universus

Grex conversus

Adorabat Dominum

Cui futurum

Serviturum

Omne genus bominum.

Dixit Dominus Domino meo:

Sede a dextris meis.

Habakkuk

Et expectavi

Mox expavi

Metu mirabilium

Opus tuum

Inter duum

Corpus animalium.

Simeon

Nunc me dimittas, Domine,

Finire vitam in pace;

Quia mei modo cernunt oculi

Quern misisti

Hunc mundum pro salute populi.

Zacharias Zacharias

Tu, puer, propheta Altissimi vo-

caberis, preibis enim ante faciem (Wanting)

Domini parare viam ejus.87

84 Reminiscentur et convertentur ad Dominum universi fines terrae ; et adorabunt

in conspectu ejus universse familiae gentium ; quoniam Domini est regnum, et

ipse dominabitur gentium et semen meum serviet ipsi (Ps. xxi, 28-29,

31); Dixit Dominus Domino meo: Sede a dextris meis, donee ponam inimico3

tuos scabellum pedum tuorum (Ps. cix, 1). Cf. Matt, xxii, 44.

85 Domine, audivi auditionem tuam, et timui. Domine, opus tuum, in medio

annorum vivifica illud ; in medio annorum notum facies ; cum iratus fueris,

misericordise recordaberis (Hab. iii, 2).

86 Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine, secundum verbum tuum in pace ; quia

viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum, quod parasti ante faciem omnium populorum

(Luc. ii, 29-31).

87 Et tu, puer, propheta Altissimi vocaberis ; praeibis enim ante faciem

Domini parare vias ejus (Luc. i, 76).

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

35

Elisabeth

Unde mihi hoc ut veniat mater

Domini mei ad me? Ecce enim ut

facta est vox salutationis tuae in

auribus meis, exultavit in gaudio in¬

fans in utero meo.88

Johannes Baptista

Quern me suspicamini esse, non

sum ego. Sed ecce venit post me

cujus pedum non sum dignus solvere

corrigiam calciamenti.89

Virgilius

Jam nova progenies coelo demit-

titur alto.90

Nebuchadnezzar

Nonne tres viros misimus in for-

nace ligatos? Ecce ego video qua-

tuor viros solutos deambulantes in

medio ignis et corruptio nulla est in

eis, et aspectus quart! similis est

Filio Dei.91

Sibilla

Judicii signum: tellus sudore

madescet;

E coelo rex, etc.

Elisabeth

Quid est rei

Quod me mei

Mater <h>eri visitat?

Nam ex eo

Yqntre meo

Letus infans palpitat.

Johannes Baptista

Venit tails

Sotularis

Cuius non sum etiam

Tam benignus

Ut sim ausus

Solvere corrigiam.

'Virgilius

Ecce polo demissa solo nova pro¬

genies est.

Nebuchadnezzar

Cum revisi

Tres quo<s> misi

Viros in incendium

Vidi justis

Incombustis

Mixtum Dei filium.

Viros tres in ignem misi

Quartern cerno prolem Dei.

Sibilla

Judicii signum: tellus sudore

madescet;

E coelo, etc.

88 Et unde hoc mihi ut veniat mater Domini mei ad me? Ecce enim ut facta

est vox salutationis tuae in auribus meis, exsultavit in gaudio infans in utero

meo (Luc. i, 43-44).

89 Respondit Joannes dicens omnibus : Ego quidem aqua baptizo vos ; veniet

autem fortior me, cujus non sum dignus solvere corrigiam calceamentorum ejus

(Luc. iii, 16) ; Respondit eis Joannes dicens: Ego baptizo in aqua; medius autem

vestrum stetit, quern vos nescitis. Ipse est, qui post me venturus est, qui ante

me factus est ; cujus ego non sum dignus ut solvam ejus corrigiam calceamenti

(Jo. i, 26-27 >. Cf. Marc, i, 7.

"Iam nova progenies caelo demittitur alto (Virgil, Eel. iv, 6).

91 Tunc Nabuchodonosor rex obstupuit ; et surrexit propere, et ait optimatibus

suis: Nonne tres viros misimus in medium ignis compeditos? Qui respondentes

regi dixerunt : Vere, rex. Respondit et ait : Ecce ego video quatuor viros

solutos, et ambulantes in medio ignis, et nihil corruptionis in eis est, et species

quarti similis Fillio Dei (Dan. iii, 91-92).

36

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

Israel Israel

Dux de Juda non tolletur

Donee adsit qui mit<t>etur

(Wanting) Salutare Dei verbum

Expectabunt gentes mecum.92

Aside from the presence of Israel in the Limoges version, and

the absence of Zacharias, the most conspicuous divergence from the

lectio is seen in the prophecy of Isaiah. For this prophecy the

Limoges author offers a stanza clearly based upon a prophetic

passage from the book of Isaiah unconnected with that quoted in

the lectio.93 In general, however, the testimonies in the Limoges

text may be characterized as versifications of the parallel utter¬

ances in the lectio.94: Particularly noticeable is the prophecy of

Daniel in the two versions, in that the Limoges text manifestly de¬

rives from the lectio rather than from the Vulgate.95

If one wished to add further details to the demonstration one

might cite such resemblances as the following, in the summonses:96

(1) Lectio: Die, et Moyses, legislator . . .

Limoges: Legislator , hue propinqua . . .

(2) Lectio: Symeonem sanctum in medio introducor . . . Cum

iste senex admonitus esset a Spiritu Sancto quod non

ante moreretur quam videret Christum Dei natum

Limoges: Nunc Symeon adveniat

Qui responsum acceperat

Qui non haberet terminum

Donee videret Dominum.

Assuming, then, that the lineage of the Limoges version is es¬

tablished,97 we may examine it in detail as an example of the

92 Non auferetur sceptrum de Juda, et dux de femore ejus, donee veniat qui

mittendus est ; et ipse erit expectatio gentium . . . Salutare tuum expectabo,

Domine (Gen. xlix, 10, 18).

93 This stanza is found also in the cantio (or trope) Gloriosi et famosi, dis¬

cussed below, pp. 77-80.

94 See Sepet, pp. 16-21.

95 One should observe also that in the prophecy of David both the lectio and

the Limoges version unite unconnected verses from separate Psalms.

9(5 Concerning these resemblances, and others, see Sepet, pp. 21-24.

97 La Piana (op. cit., pp. 302-308) undertakes to show that the Limoges ver¬

sion borrows somewhat from a Greek homily of Hesy chius of Jerusalem

(printed by Migne, Patrologia Graeca, xciii, 1453-1460). That the Limoges

author is chiefly indebted to the pseudo -Augustinian lectio rather than to the

Greek homily is obvious, for example, from the fact that seven of the prophets

common to the lectio and the Limoges text are wanting to the Greek homily.

Young — Ordo Prophetarum .

37

dramatic Ordo Prophetarum. In the absence of adequate rubrics,

we are left in considerable uncertainty as to the manner in which

it was produced. We are at least sure that the piece was delivered

as a dialogue, or as a succession of dialogues. This is clear both

from the nature of the utterances themselves and from the use of

the rubric responsum. One may reasonably suppose that the in¬

troductory exhortations and the summonses are all sung by the

same cleric, or group of clerics, — we cannot be more specific.98

We may infer also that at each summons one of the prophets ap¬

peared in person and responded with his prophecy. Of impersona¬

tion, upon the part either of the summoner or of the prophets, we

cannot be sure. The fact that the name of each prophet is written

as a rubric immediately before the summons seems to indicate that

a separate speaker appeared at this point, and it suggests that he

impersonated the prophet concerned.99 As to the part of the church

in which the performance occurred, and as to mise en scene , we

have no knowledge.

In the absence of more precise information we may accept some

such conjectural description of the performance as the following

from Magnin:100

Moreover the lectio and the Limoges version agree in differing from the Greek

in the prophecy of Daniel. La Piana acknowledges these facts. The one sub¬

stantial suggestion of the Limoges author’s borrowing from the Greek is the

summons and prophecy of Israel (Jacob), which is wanting in the Latin lectio,

but which is found in the other two texts in the following forms :

Ordo of Limoges

Israel, vir lenis, inque

De Xpisto <qu8e> nosti firme.

Responsum :

Dux de Iuda non tolletur

Donee adsit qui mittetur

Salutare Dei verbum

Expectabunt gentes mecum.

Hesychius

II apdffTTjdL tw ’Ia/ccu/3 /cat rl Xeyei

/jLera^i) t&v evXoyi&v Kar&fiaOe.

Ovk etcXeixf/et apxwv tt- ’lovda, /cat

riyovfievos £k tCov /xrjpcov avrov, ecus ov

eX07f os diroKeiTai /cat avros TrposdoKia

ktiv&v.

(Migne, Pat. Or., xciii, 1460)

This parallel may, or may not, show that for the prophecy of Israel the

Limoges author resorted to Hesychius. If he borrowed at all, he borrowed little.

98 As I have said above (p. 25), DuMeril’s (and Coussemaker’s) con¬

jectured Praecentor and Magnin’s conjectured Sacerdos imply undue certainty

upon the part of these editors. Petit de Julie ville (Les Mysteres, Vol. I, p. 36)

adopts Magnin’s conjecture, and Chasles (p. 123), that of DuM§ril and Cousse-

maker. The term Appellatores of the Laon version (See below, pp. 41-45) and'

the words Chorus and Vocatores of the Rouen Festum Asinorum (See below,

pp. 50-63) suggest that the introductory verses and the summonses of the-

Limoges verses were not sung by a single person.

99 Sepet (p. 25) considers impersonation not improbable.

100 Journal des Savants, 1846, p. 88. A somewhat less venturesome conjecture-

is advanced by Sepet, pp. 25-26. See also Sepet, pp. 40-41. Both Magnin and;

Sepet acknowledge the conjectural nature of their descriptions.

38

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

D’abord, les trois premieres strophes, qui sont comme le prologue ou

1’exposition du mystere, devaient etre dites ou chantees par un eccldsi-

astique elevd en dignite. Ensuite ce personnage appelait a haute voix

chacun des acteurs du drame, lesquels s’avangaient et prenaient succes-

sivement la parole. Ce principal interlocuteur etait, comme nous dirions

pour un spectacle profane, le meneur ou le directeur du jeu. II se tenait

probablement debout sur les degres de 1’ambon ou au milieu du jub£,

entoure des musiciens. Les autres personnages, pretres ou moines, vetus

du costume de leurs roles, etaient assis dans les stalles, attendant le

moment de se lever et de venir au milieu du choeur psalmodier ou chanter

leur verset.

We are left in uncertainty also as to the day on which the

Limoges Ordo was performed and as to its position in the liturgy.

One might infer that the words natus hodie of the opening verses

were sufficient for identifying the Ordo with Christmas day;101

but the same verses are found also in the Rouen Festum Asinorum ,

which was undeniably presented on the day of the Circumcision.102

As to the precise liturgical attachment of the Limoges Ordo our

only possible shred of information is the rubric at the end : <H>fc

incoant Benedicamus. If this rubric is to be regarded as belong¬

ing to the preceding dramatic text, it must, of course, be inter¬

preted as meaning, “Here let them begin the Benedicamus.” Since

the Benedicamus was sung at the end of each of the canonical

“ horse ”, this interpretation, upheld by Sepet,103 would locate the

dramatic performance at the end of one of these services. But the

rubric may be interpreted also as meaning, “Here begin the Bene-

dicamuses.” Since the rubric is followed by a series of metrical

pieces evidently composed as tropes of the Benedicamus , this second

interpretation, advanced by Magnin,104 is by no means inept. Be¬

tween the two interpretations I am unable to decide positively. It

may fairly be said that the plain facts of the manuscript, in which

tropes of the Benedicamus follow the rubric, give some support

101DuMeril (p. 180) chooses to assign the Limoges Ordo to the day before

Christmas; Sepet (pp. 14-15) is unconditionally for Christmas day.

102 See below, pp. 66—68.

103 Sepet (pp. 25-26, 84) regards as part of the dramatic text not only the

rubric under discussion but also some score or more of verses of text following

it. Petit de Julleville (Vol. I, p. 36) appears to accept Sepet’s view, as, ac¬

cording to Monmerque and Michel (p. 1), does Lebeuf. Monmerque and Michel

themselves do not (p. 3) regard the Benedicamus trope as part of the dramatic

text.

104 Magnin (p. 92) prints the rubric Inchoant Benedicamus, and translates it

as follows : “Ici commencent les Benedicamus.” Monmerque and Michel give

(p. 9) precisely the same translation.

Young— Ordo Prophet arum.

39

to the view of Magnin. On the other hand it may be said that a

liturgical play may normally be expected to end with a rubric of

some kind. For the present one may well withhold judgment.105

It is clear, in summary, that however uncertain we may be as to

external matters of production and liturgical relationship, we must

certainly recognize in the Limoges version a notable advance in the

literary treatment of the Ordo Prophetarum. Most noteworthy

are the elimination of the narrative and expository element of the

lectio, and the versifying of both summonses and responses. In

addition one must commend the force and aptness of the opening

stanzas, seen here for the first time.106

V

Although the advance shown by the Limoges version in literary

form is marked, the approach of this production toward acted

drama is, as we have seen, a matter of uncertainty, because of the

absence of rubrics indicating impersonation. We may proceed,

then, to a play of the thirteenth century from the Cathedral of

Laon, in which impersonation and specific dramatic action are un¬

mistakable i1

105 Sepet (pp. 24-26, 84) undoubtedly exaggerates the significance of the

rubric Hie incoant Benedicamus. He not only considers this rubric and the

subsequent lines as organically related to the preceding dramatic text, but he

also regards the dramatic text itself as a trope of the Benedicamus. As a

matter of fact, we cannot be sure that the dramatic text is to be connected

with the Benedicamus; and even if the dramatic text was performed imme¬

diately before the Benedicamus , only by exaggeration can it be called "un

trope du Benedicamus” (p. 25). L». Gautier (Les Tropes, Paris, 1886, p. 2) has

ably defined a trope as an extra-liturgical addition to a traditional liturgical

piece, by way of preface, interpolation, or conclusion. By an exaggerated

application of this definition every liturgical play may, of course, be regarded

as a trope, since every such play must take a place before or after some

liturgical element. But the exaggeration in calling Hilarius’ Daniel, for ex¬

ample, a trope of the Te Deum or of the Magnificat is obvious (See DuMeril,

pp. 241-254). When a dramatic piece has sufficient complexity and complete¬

ness for maintaining itself as an independent production, one may safely cease

regarding it as a trope of the liturgical element that happens to precede or

follow it.

108 The opening stanzas ( Omnes gentes congaudentes . . . pellite cal-

liginem) are found also as part of a longer composition Gloriosi et famosi to be

considered below, pp. 41, 78.

1 Laon, BibliothSque de la Ville, Ms. 263, Troparium-Hymnarium Laudunense

ssec. xiii, fol. 147v-149r. The manuscript is briefly described in Catalogue

40

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

ORDO PROPHETARUM

YSAIAS, BARBATUS, DALMATICA INDUTUS, STOLA RUBEA per MEDIUm uerticis

ANTE et RETRO DEPENDENTE.2

IHEREMIAS SIMILITer, ABSQtte STOLA.

Daniel adolescens, ueste splendida indutus.

MOYSES, CUM DALMATICA, BARBATUS, TABULAS LEGIS FERENS.

Dauid, REGIO HABITU.

AbACUC BARBATUS, CURUUS, GIBOSUS.

Elisabeth, femineo habitu, pregnans.

lOHANNES BAPTISTA, PILOSA UESTE et LONGIS CAPILLIS, BARBATUS, PALMAM

TENENS.

VlRGILIUS, CUM CORNU et C ALAMO, EDERA CORONATUS, SCRIPTORIUm TENENS.

NABUGODONOSOR, REGIO HABITU, SUPerBO INCESSU.

SlBILLA, UESTE FEMINEA, DECAPILLATA, EDERA CORONATA, INSANIENTI SIMIL-

LIMA.

SYMEON, BARBATUS, CAPA SERICA IN <fol. 148r> DUTUS, PALMAM TENENS.

Balaam, super ASiNAm, curuus, barbatus, palmam tenens, calcaribrs

IJRGENS.

Gloriosi

Et famosi

Regis festum

Celebrantes

Gaudeamus.

Cuius ortum,

Uite portum,

Nobis datum,

Predicantes

Habeamus.

Ecce regem

Nouam legem

Dantem orbis

Circuitu

Predicamus.

general des Manuscrits des Bibliotheques publiques des Departements, Vol. I,

Paris, 1849, p. 155. The Ordo Prophetarum from this manuscript has been pre¬

viously published by U. Chevalier, Ordinaires de Vfiglise cathedrale de Laon

( Bibliotheque Liturgique, Vol. VI), Paris, 1897, pp. 385-389; and Chevalier’s

text is reprinted by Chasles in La Vie et les Arts liturgiques , Jan., 1917, pp. 129-

134. My own edition of the text from the manuscript differs in no essential

way from that of Chevalier. The opening- rubric Ordo Prophetarum is imme¬

diately preceded by the following unrelated incipit : De Sancto Nicholao : Con-

gaudentes. For the text of the Ordo Prophetarum no music is provided.

2 dependente] dependens (Ms).

Young— -Or do Prophet arum.

41

Duo Cantores:

Oirmes gentes

Congaudentes

Dent cantus letitie;

Deus homo

Fit de domo

Dauid, natus hodie.

Ad Iudeos :

O Iudei,

Uerbum Dei

Qui negastis hominem,

Vestre3 legis

Testes regis

Audite per ordinem.

Ad Paganos:

Et uos gentes

Non credentes

Peperisse uirginem

Vestre legis

Documentis

Pellite caliginem.

Appellatoees :

Isaias, uerum qui scis,

Ueritatem cur non dicis?

Isaias:

Est necesse

Uirgam Iesse

De radice prouehi

Flos deinde

Surget inde

Qui est filius Dei.

Appellatoees :

Iste cetus

Psallat letus;

Error uetus

Condempnetwr.

Omnis Chorus:

Quod Iudea

Perit rea

Hec chorea

Gratulatwr.

Appellatoees :

Hue accede, Iheremias;

Die de Xpis£o prophetias.

3 Vestre] Veste (Ms), — with an r faintly inserted by a later hand.

42

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

Hieremias :

Sic est

Iste cetus.

iTErn chokws:

Qwod Iudea.

Qwod Iudea.

Ap<p>Eixa£ ores :

Die tu, Moyses, legislator,

Qwod Iudea.

Ap<p>ELLa fores ;

Die tu, Dauid, de nepote

Qwod Iudea.

AppEixafores :

Abacuc, regis celestis

Nunc ostende quod sis testis.

4 deficiet] defitiet (Ms. Chevalier).

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

43

Quod Iudea.

Ap<p>ell atores :

Illud, Elisabeth, in medium

De Domino profer eloquimn,.

Elisabeth :

44

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Mako:

Ecce polo dimissa sola noua progenies est.

Duo:

QttOd Iudea.

APPEULA TORES REDUCUNT DANIELEM, et DICIWT AD REGEm .*

Fuerum cum pueris,

Nabugodonosor,

Cum in igne uideris,

Quid dixisti?

Nabugodonosor :

Tres in igne positi pueri

Qttod Iudea.

Ap<p>ELLa£ores :

Tu, Sibilla,

Qwod Iudea.

Appellators :

Symeon, inter propbetas

Symeon accipiens PuERum dicit:

Tuum sub pacis tegmine

Seruum dimittis, Domine.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

45

Ap<p>ELLGtfores :

Die, Balaam, ex Iudaica

Oriturum Dominion prosapia.

Balaam :

Exibit de Iacob rutilans noua stella

Et confringet ducum agmina

Regionis Moab maxima potentia.

Hie UENIAT ANGeL^S CUM GLADIO. BALAAm TANGIT ASINAM,

et ILLA Non PrOCEDENTE, DICIT IRATUS I

Quid moraris, asina,

Obstinata bestia?

Iam seindent calcaria

Costas et precordia.

PUER SUB ASINA RESPONDED

Angelas cum gladio,

Quern adstare uideo,

Probibet ne transeam;

Timeo ne peream.5

Here, for the first time, impersonation is manifest. In suggestive

details of costume and property the text leaves little to be desired.

Daniel’s youthful appearance, Moses’ tables of the Law, Elizabeth’s

pregnancy, John the Baptist’s hairy shirt and branch of palm,

Virgil’s writing materials and crown of ivy, the Sibyl’s expression

of mad inspiration, Balaam’s ass, — these are some of the details ex¬

plicitly provided for.

The performance itself begins with the singing of the Gloriosi et

famosi, presumably by the Prophetce themselves.6 Two cantors

now deliver three stanzas, the second and third of which are ad¬

dressed specifically to the Jews an Gentiles respectively, calling

upon them to prepare for enlightenment. Two7 special summoners

( Appellator es) now call forth the prophets, one by one, and after

each prophecy deliver the stanza I site ccetus, to which the chorus re¬

sponds with the stanza Quod Judcea.8

The close kinship of the Laon play to the Limoges version and to

the original lectio is obvious. Each of these three versions pre¬

sents thirteen witnesses, and twelve of these witnesses are common

5 Followed immediately by the rubric Or do Stelle, introducing a version of

the Epiphany play.

6 This presumption finds justification in the usage recorded in the Einsiedeln

fragment printed below, pp. 72-74.

7 Several of the later rubrics specify duo.

8 1 have not found these two stanzas apart from the prophet-plays of Eaon

and Rouen.

46 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

to all three : namely, Isaiah, J eremiah, Daniel, Moses, David, Habak-

knk, Elisabeth, John the Baptist, Virgil, Nebuchadnezzar, Sibyl,

and Simeon. Balaam is peculiar to the Laon version, as Israel and

Zacharias are to the Limoges version and the lectio respectively.

The similarity of the three versions is further apparent in the

textual content of the prophecies. In eight of these prophecies9

the Limoges and Laon versions agree in presenting metrical ver¬

sions of the utterances provided by the lectio. In the utterance of

Isaiah the Limoges and Laon versions agree as against the lectio.

In the prophecies of Moses and Nebuchadnezzar the two dramatic

versions differ from each other in expression, but both derive from

the lectio. The utterance of Simeon in the Laon play is developed

somewhat beyond what is found either in the Limoges text or in the

lectio.

In general arrangement the Laon play differs considerably from

the two preceding versions. The non-chronological order in which

the first six prophets appear reproduces what we have observed in

the lectio. The presence of Simeon and Balaam at the end, after

Sibyl, suggests that those two prophets were attached to the series

in a relatively mechanical way. Possibly the copy from which

the present text was made was in disorder. This impression is in¬

deed strengthened by the inconclusiveness with which the play

ends.10

In considering the delivery of the prophecies from the dramatic

point of view, our attention centers in three : those of Nebuchadnez¬

zar, Simeon, and Balaam. The first of these may be dismissed

briefly, for although the rubric Appelatores reducent Danielem

suggests special dramatic action of some sort, the nature of this

action is not specified. The dramatic action accompanying the

role of Simeon can be visualized somewhat more clearly. It ap¬

pears that Simeon barbatus is represented as standing in the temple

in the presence of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus, and that after Simeon’s

first utterance has been heralded by the cantores and choir, he

takes the Child in his arms and speaks again, in the manner of a

Nunc dimittis.* 11

9 Jeremiah, Daniel, David, Habakkuk, Elisabeth, John the Baptist, Virgil, and

Sibyl.

10 Concerning the mechanical attachment of the part of Balaam to the end

of the play see Chambers, Vol. II, pp. 54, 56-57 ; Chasles, p. 127, note 2.

11 See Luc. ii, 22-32.

Young — Ordo Prophetarum.

47

The part of Balaam deserves special comment for its dramatic

liveliness. Balaam makes his appearance mounted upon an ass.* 1 2 3 * * * * * * * * 12

After he has uttered his prophecy an angel appears in his path, so

halting the progress of the animal that Balaam impatiently strikes

her and demands the reason of the delay. In defense, the puer sub

asina explains that an angel stands threateningly in the path ; and

thus the play abruptly ends. The action of this little dramatic

episode centering in Balaam is, of course, derived from the Biblical

narrative (Num. xxi, 21-31) ; but the speeches show no dependence

upon the Vulgate text. The speech of the Appellator es seems

clearly to be adapted from the following passage in a well-known

sequence of Epiphany : Quam Balaam ex Iudaica orituram dixerat

prosapia;13 and the response of Balaam consists in a passage from

another Epiphany sequence; Exibit ex Jacob rutilans, inquit ,

Stella , Quce confringet ducum agmina regionis Moab maxima po¬

tential The second speech of Balaam and the response of the

asina seem to be original compositions for the purpose at hand.15

It is clear that the parts of Simeon and of Balaam stand apart

from the rest of the performance as small dramatic units. In ac¬

tion and wise en scene they show an advance beyond the general

uniformity of the elements examined hitherto. These two bits of

composition seem to have been ambitiously added at the end. The

question as to whether Balaam ’s ass is introduced through a comic

13 See the following rubric in the list of dramatis persona? : Balaam, super

asinam, curvus, barbatus, palmam tenens, calcaribus urgens.

13 See the sequence Quem non prevalent, printed by J. Kehrein, Lateinische

Sequenzen des Mittelatters, Mainz, 1873, pp. 41-42. See Meyer, p. 52.

14 See the sequence Epiphaniam Domini canamus , printed by Kehrein, pp. 40-

41. See Meyer, p. 52.

15 In connection with the dramatic development of the episode of Balaam and

his ass, Sepet (p. 35) suggests three stages of the Ordo Prophetarum:

(1) Le drame primitif, immediatement sorti du sermon, et d’oti Balaam est

absent.

( 2 ) Le drame de seconde formation, oil Balaam apparait et se borne

reciter sa prophetie.

( 3 ) Le drame de troisieme formation, oh la prophetie de Balaam est devenue

un petit drame dans le grand.

Sepet’s “drame primitif” is exemplified, presumably, in the ordo of Limoges,

and his “drame de troisiSme formation,” in the Festum Asinorum of Bouen, to

be considered below. In so far as Sepet’s own evidence is concerned, the

“drame de seconde formation” must be considered a conjecture. Chasles now

suggests (p. 127) that the Ordo of Laon, — unknown to Sepet,— exemplifies the

drame de seconde formation.” I cannot accept Chasles’ suggestion, for the

Balaam of the Laon Ordo does not “confine himself to the reciting of his

prophecy.” The Balaam episode of Laon is not essentially different from that

of Rouen. The Rouen episode is merely longer.

48 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

impulse, I do not undertake to answer. The evidence is not posi¬

tive.16

Since the text of the Laon play, like that from Limoges, provides

no evidence as to its position in the liturgy, we may seek indirect

evidence elsewhere. With the Laon text we may conveniently as¬

sociate the following description of the Ordo Prophetarum at

Tours :17

Ordo Prophetarum

Ad Matutinas cantant duo & duo versus Invitatorii & antiphonas

similiter, & Hymnos sicut ad Vesperas. Antequam legatur prima Lectio

accenditur primus circulus turris David, & duo corruptores cantant: Sal-

vetur noster circulus. Post dicuntur versiculi & prosse resp. in medio

chori in rota, & cantant responsoria duo et duo, cum Gloria in choro, ex-

ceptis tertio, sexto, & nono, quos cantent juvenes in pulpito candelis ac-

censis, & omnes a capite repetuntur. Dicto versiculo tertii Nocturni, ac¬

cenditur totum luminare, & veniunt Prophetse in capitulo revestiti, & post

cantant insimul Lumen Patris, & clericus solus dicit In g audio; & post

legitur septima Lectio. Post nonam Lectionem ducunt Prophetas de

Capitulo ad portam Thesaurarii cantilenas cantando, et post in chorum,

ubi dicunt cantori prophetias, et duo clericuli in pulpito cantando eos ap¬

pellant. Post dicitur nonum18 in pulpito.

In Laudibus incipiunt antiphonas duo & duo . . .

Ad ,Missam sunt in cappis sericis, & cantant juvenes duo & duo, &

Epistolam in pulpito, & alia dicunt sicut in liibro reperies.

Post prandium debent chores ducere in claustro in supelliciis donee

Ecclesia aperiatur, & totum luminare accendatur. Quo facto, incipiunt

Nonam & Vesperas; faciunt totum sicut ad primas,19 & dictis psalmis &

antiphonis, ducunt ad portam Thesaurarii Prophetas sicut ad Matutinum

& reducunt in chorum similiter, & habent clerici virgas plenas candelis

ardentibus. Vocant eos clerici duo sicut ad Vesperas. Post dicitur

Stirps Jesse, & cantant juvenes versum in pulpito cum Gloria , & post in

choro repetitur, & hunt pneumse. Post dicitur Regens gubernansque, &

hunt pneumse. Post levat se cantor super formam, cappam habens super

humeros, & incipit antiphonam, & dicit ter Deposuit, baculum tenens, &

si baculus capitur, Te Deum laudamus incipietur, & post versus p salmi

Esurientes cum antiphona & oratione. Post vadunt ad pedes cantando

r<esponsorium> Videbant, & antiphonam Tu principatum, post de B. Mar¬

tino antiphonam Confessor Domini cum Magnificat & oratione; & redeundo

Jubilemus sicut ad primas Vesperas.

16 Meyer (pp. 52-53) declares unhesitatingly for a comic intention.

17 E. Martene, Tractatus de Antiqua Ecclesice Disciplina , Lyons, 1706, pp. 106-

107. Mart&ne describes the manuscript as follows: “Turonensis S. Martini

ecclesias Rituale vetus ante annos 400 scriptum. Ex ms. ejusdem ecclesise.”

18 1, e. nonum < responsorium > .

19 1, e. ad primas <Vesperas)>.

Young— -Or do Prophet arum.

49

At Tours the Ordo took place in Matins of the Circumcision

(Jan. 1), after the reading of the ninth lectio and before the sing¬

ing of the ninth responsory.20 The prophetce entered the choir dur¬

ing the singing of certain cantilence. The summonses to the indi¬

vidual prophetce were delivered by duo clerici in pulpito, and the

several prophecies seem to have been addressed to a sort of presid¬

ing cantor. The repetition of the ordo at Vespers is mentioned,

but not described in detail. Although the actual utterances of the

participants are not known, the nature of the performance must

have been similar that of the Laon play. We may safely infer that

the prophetce were specifically impersonated, and that they spoke in

the formal sequence already familiar to us. It may be that at

Matins one or more of the preceding lectiones were supplied by the

pseudo-Augustinian sermon, and that the prophetce were introduced

after the final lectio by way of didactic illustration. But this is the

merest conjecture.

If, then, the Ordo Prophetarum at Tours resembles the Laon ver¬

sion in general procedure, one may reasonably conjecture a similar¬

ity in liturgical association. It may well be that the Laon Ordo

Prophetarum , — and the Limoges version also, — is to be associated

with the liturgy of the Circumcision. This conjecture, indeed,

receives further support from the circumstances of the Ordo

Prophetarum which we are to consider next.

VI

The two versions of the Ordo Propheta)rum already examined

closely resemble the pseudo-Augustinian lectio in the number and

names of the prophets presented. To the list of the lectio the

Limoges version adds only Israel, and the Laon version, only

Balaam. The possibilities in the way of addition are fully recog¬

nized only in such a play as the following, from the cathedral of

Rouen d

20 See the liturgical arrangement outlined above, p. 23.

XI base my text upon Rouen, Bibliotheque de la Ville, Ms. 384 (olirn Y. 110),

Ordinarium Rothomagense ssec. xiv, fol. 33r-35r, with variants from ibid.,

Ms. 382 (olim Y. 108), Ordinarium Rothomagense ssec. xv, fol. 31v-33r, and

from Paris, Bibl. Nat., Ms. lat. 1232, fol. 26r— 27r (manu saec. xvii). These are

the only manuscript sources known to me. I know of no previous edition in

which all three manuscripts are used. Sepet (p. 28) and Petit de Julleville

(Les My stores, I, 37) erroneously report that we possess no extant manuscript

sources at all. DuMeril mentions (p. 181, note) all three manuscripts as con-

4— S. A. L.

50

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

<ORDO PROPHET ARUM >

Nqta, Cantor: Si Festum AsiNORim fiat, processio2 ordinetur post

Terciam; si non fiat Festum, tutic fiat procEssto ut prenotatur.3

Ordo PROCESsionis AsiNOR^m secunmiM RoTHOMAGensem Vsum.4

Tercia cantata, paratis ProPHeiis iu xta suum ordiwem, fornace in

MEDIO NAUIS ECCLesIE LINTHEO et STUPIS CONSTITUTA, PROCESSIO MOUEAT DE

CLAUSTRO, et DUO CuemCI DE iia SEDE IN CAPPIS PROCESSIONEm RECANT, HOS

versus canentes:5

Gloriosi

Et famosi

< Regis festum

Celebrantes

Gaudeamus>.

Chorus :

Gloriosi

<Et famosi

Regis festum

Celebrantes

Gaudeamus>.

'Versus:

Cuius ortum

<Vite portum

Nobis datum

Predicantes

Habeamus>.

taining the Ordo Prophetarum, but he does not edit the text. Meyer speaks

(p. 51) of the l;ext as found “in mehreren Handschriften des 14. und 15. Jahr-

hunderts in Rouen.” A general bibliography of the manuscripts and prints

bearing upon the liturgical plays of Rouen is given by the present writer in

Modern Philology, Vol. VI (1908), pp. 224-227. There can be little doubt that

Ms. 1232 is a copy of Ms. 384 ; and the copy seems to be surprisingly accurate

(See my variants). If, as Gast§ supposes (p. 2), Ms. 382 is a copy of Ms. 384,

the copyist departed freely from his model (See my variants, and Modern Philol¬

ogy, Vol. VI, pp. 224-225). Gaste provides (pp. 1-4) important notes on Mss.

384 and 382. None of the three manuscripts mentioned above provides music.

The Rouen Ordo Prophetarum (“Festum Asinorum”) has been previously

edited twice: (1) by Du Cange, Glossarium Medics et Infimce Latinitatis, Vol.

Ill, Niort, 1884, pp. 460-461 (and in earlier editions of this work), from an

unidentified “Ordinarius MS” of Rouen (See Modern Philology, Vol. VI, p. 226) ;

and (2) by A. Gaste, Les Drames liturgiques de la Cathedrale de Rouen, Evreux,

1893, pp. 4-20 (Concerning earlier forms of Gaste’s monograph see Modern

Philology, VI, 201), from Rouen Ms. 384, with some of the variants from Rouen

Ms. 382. I collate Gaste’s text throughout (G), taking into account his “Er¬

rata et emendanda” (p. 81).

2 processio] processio et (Ms. 382).

3 prenotatur] nunc prenotatur (G). As to the reference in the words ut

prenotatur see below, pp. 66—68.

4 Rothomagensem usum] usum Rothomagensem (Ms. 382).

5 hos versus canentes] cantantes hos versus (Ms. 382).

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

Chorus:

Versus :

Chorws :

Gloriosi.

Quem futurum

<Regnaturum

Prophetico

Admonitu

Nuntiamus>.

Gloriosi.

Versus:

Impior um

Iudeorum

<Corda negant

Regnaturo

Sua lege>.

Chorus :

Gloriosi

Versus:

Et gentiles

<Prius viles

Convertuntur

Majestate

^Etherea>.

Chorus :

Gloriosi.

Versus:

Sed Iudei

<Facti rei

Condemnantes

Sacrum regem

Damnabuntur>.

Chords :

Gloriosi.

Versus:

Israeli6

Infideli7

<Jam Maria

Natus scitur

Hie adesse>.

Chorus :

Gloriosi.

Israeli] Israel (G).

Infideli] Infideles (Ms. 382).

52 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

Versus:

Gentes unde.8

Tunc processio in medio ecclcsie stet. Et vi Iudei sint ibi

PARATI, ET EX ALTerA <fOl. 33v> PARTE SEX GENTILES, ET

OMnes Gentes uocent ita Uocatores:

Onmesi gentes

<Congaudentes

Dent cantus laetitise>;

Deus homo

Fit9 <de domo

David natus hodie>.

HlC UERTANT SE UOCATORES AD lUDEOS DICENTES :

O Iudei

Uerbum Dei

<Qui negastis hominem>.

Versus:10

Vestre legis

Testes* 11 <regis

Audite per ordinem>.

Iudei respondeant:

Nos mandatum uobis.

Vocatores ad Gentiles dicant:

Et uos, gentes,

Non credentes

<Peperisse Virginem,

Versus:12

Vestrse legis13

Documentis

Pellite caliginem>.

Gentiles respondeant:

Deum uerum

Regem rerum.14

Vocatores prius Moysen,15 ita dicentes:

Tu, Moyses,

Legislator,

<Huc propinqua

Et de Christo

Prome digna>.

8 unde] Iudae (Ms. 1232). I can make no suggestion for the completion of

this stanza. The expansions suggested for various other initia, above and be¬

low, are made from the several versions of the Ordo Prophetarum printed in

the present study.

9 Deus homo fit] Dominus homo sit (Mss. 384, 382, and 1232).

10 Versus] omitted (G).

11 testes] testem (G). Through a typographical error Gast6 gives the im¬

pression that the words Vestre legis testes are not in Ms. 384.

12 Versus] omitted from the restoration (G).

13 legis] gentis (G).

14 Deum uerum regem rerum] Deum regem verum (Ms. 382).

15 Moysen] omitted (Ms. 382).

Young — Or do Prophet arum,

53

Tunc Moyses, tenews tabulas legis APerrAS, indutms alba et

CAPPA, et CORNUTA FACIE, BARBATUS, TENENS UIRGAM IN

manu, dicat:

Vir post me veniet exortus.

Hoc DICTO VOCATORES EUm DUCANT ULTRA FORNACEWl DICENTES :

Iste cetus

Psallat letus

<Error vetus

Condemnetur>.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea

<Perit rea

Hec chorea

Gratulatur>.

VOCATORES DICANT AD AMOS :

Amos mentis.

Tunc Amos, senex barbatus, spicam tenens, dicat:

Ecce dies uenient.16

Vocatores :

<Iste cetus>.

Chorus :

Qwod Iudea.

Vocatores dicant Ysaye:

Ysaias, verbum qui scis,17

<Veritatem cur non dicis>?

Ysaias, barbatus, alba indutus, per MEDiAm18 frontem rubea

STOLA10 DISTINCTWS,20 DICAT:

Est necesse

Uirga<m> Yesse

<De radice provehi:

Flos deinde

Surget inde

Qui est Filius Dei>.

Vocatores :

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea.

Vocatores ad Aaron:

Aaron, doce populum.

16 See Amos, viii, 11 : Ecce dies veniunt, dicit Dominus, et mittam famem in

terram ; non famem panis, neque sitim aquae, sed audiendi verbum Domini.

17 scis] scit (Mss. 384, 382, and 1232, G).

18 mediam] medium (Ms. 382). 1

19 Stola] Stolla (Ms. 382).

20 distinctus] discrinitus (Mss. 384, 382, and 1232, G).

54

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Aaron, ornatus pontificalibws indumentis et mitra,21 bar-

BATUS, TENENS FLOREM DICAT *.

Virga Iesse florida.22

Vocatores:

Iste cetus.

Chorus:

Quod Iudea.

Vocacio IfterEMiE*.

Qui vocaris, Ifteremias,23

<Dic de Christo prophetias>.

I7ierEMiAS SAcerDOTALi ho-Situ ornatus et barbatus24 tenens

ROTULUM DICAT:

Sic est,

Hie est,

Dews noster;

<Sine quo non erit alter>.

VocATores:

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Qwod Iudea.

VocAcio Danielis:

Daniel, indica

Uoce prophetica

<F'acta dominica>.

Daniel, indutus uiridi tunica, iuuenilem uultum Ha&eNS,

tenens spiCAm, dicat:

Sanctus sanctorum ueniet,

<Et unctio deficiet.>

VocATores ;

Iste cetus.

Chorus:

Quod Iudea.

Vocacio Abacuc : 25

Abacuc,25 regis celestis

<Nunc ostende quod sis testis>.

21 mitra] mittra (Ms. 384).

22 See Num. xviii, 5-8 : Quern ex his elegero, germinabit virga ejus . . .

fueruntque virgse duodecim absque virga Aaron . . . Sequenti die regressus

invenit germinasse virgam Aaron in domo Levi ; et turgentibus gemmis eruperant

(lores, qui, foliis dilatais, in amygdalas deformati sunt.

23 Iheremias] Omitted (Ms. 382).

24 ornatus et barbatus] indutus et ornatus barbatus (Ms. 382).

25 Abacuc] Abacuth (Ms. 382); Habacuc (Ms. 1232).

Young— Or do Prophet arum.

55

AbACUC,25 SENEX CLAUDUS, DALMATICA INDUTUS,26 HafteNS IN

PERAM RADICES, et LONGAS PALMAS HG&CNS UNDE GENTES

per<fol. 34r>cuciAT, comedews, dicat:

Opus tuum

Inter duum27

<Latus animalium

Ut cognovi

Mox expavi

Metu mirabilium>.

Vocatores :

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea.

Duo missi a rege Balac28 dicant:

Balaam,29 veni et fac.

Tunc Balaam,29 ornatus, seders super asinam, uabeNs cajl-

CARIA RETINEAT LORA et CALCARIBWS PerCUCIAT ASINAM. ET

QUIDAm IUUENIS HafteNS alas,30 tenens gladium, obstet

ASINE. QuiDAm SUB ASINA DICAT:

Cur me cum calcaribws miseram sic leditis?

Hoc DICTO, ANGeLWS EI dicat :

Desine regis Balac preceptum perficere.

VocAcio Balaam:31

Balaam,31 esto uaticinans.

Tunc Balaam31 respondeat:

Exibit ex Jacob rutilans32 <nova stella,

Et confringet ducum agmina

Regionis Moab maxima potentia>.

VocATores :33

Iste cet us.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea.

VocAcio Samuelis:

Accede, Samuel.

Samuel, religiose indutws, dicat : 34

In Israel faciet rex verbum.35

26 indutus] Omitted (Ms. 382).

27 Inter duum] in triduum (Ms. 382). The whole speech of Habakkuk Gaste

prints as follows : <Expectavi, mox expavi, metu mirabilium^> Opus tuum

inter duum corpus animalium.

28 Balac] ballat (Ms. 382).

29 Balaam] Ballaam (Ms. 382).

30 alas] alias (Ms. 382).

31 Balaam] Ballaam (Ms. 382).

32 rutilans] rutillans (Ms. 382). Gaste does not expand this initium.

33 Vocatores] Vocant (Ms. 382).

34 dicat] doceat (Ms. 382).

35 See 1 Reg. iii, 11 : Et dixit Dominus ad Samuelem : Ecce ego facio verbum

in Israel, quod quicumque audierit, tinnient ambse aures ejus.

56

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

Vocat ores :36

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea.

VocACio Danin:

Die tu, Dauid, de nepote

Causas <que sunt tibi note>.

Dauid, ornatus reg alibis oreamewtis, dicat :

XJniuersus

Grex cowuersus

Adorabit Dominion,

<Cui futurum

Serviturum

Omne genus hominum>.

Vocat ores :

Iste cetus.

Chords :

Quod Iudea.

Vocacio Osee37

Auffer,38 Osee,37

Plebi Hebree

Cecitatem.

Osee,37 barbatus, dicat:

Deus nuweiauit de filio Dauid in presenti.39

Yocatores : 40

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea.

VocACio Iohelis:41

Iobel,42 leua uocem cum ceteris.

lOHEL,42 DIuerSUM HUbeNS CULTUM, et BARBATUS DICAT I

Effur-dam de spiriZu meo, dicit dominus.43

Vocatores : 44

Iste cetus.

Chords :

Quod Iudea.

36 Vocatores] Vocant (Ms. 382).

37 Osee] Ozee (Ms. 382).

38 Auffer] aufer (Ms. 382).

39 See Os. iii, 5 : Et post hsec revertentur fllii Israel, et quserent Dominum

Deum suum, et David regem suum ; et pavebunt ad Dominum, et ad bonum

ejus, in novissimo dierum.

^Vocatores] Vocant (Ms. 382).

41 Iohelis] Ioelis (Ms. 382).

42 Iohel] Ioel (Ms. 382).

43 See Joel ii, 28: Et erit post hsec: Effundam spiritum meum super omnem

carnem ; et prophetabunt filii vestri et filise vestrae ; senes vestri somnia som-

niabunt, et juvenes vestri visiones videbunt.

44 Vocatores] Vocant (Ms. 382).

Young— Or do Prophet arum.

57

Vocacio Abdie:

Fac, Abdia, preconia uenturi iSaluatoris.

Abdias, DiuersuM Habeas cultum, barbatus, dicat:

Et in monte Syon saluacio erit.45

YocATores:46

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Quod Iudea.

VocAcio Ione:

De persona

Xp£s£i, Iona,47

Que sunt in te mistica?

IONAS, CALUUS, AEBA INDUTUS, DICAT:

O Iudei,

Huius rei

Signum, genus fatuum.48

VocATores :

Iste cetus.

Chords:

Qwod Iudea.

Vocacio Michee:

Effice, Michea, qwod credat plebs.

Micheas, Diuersum cui/rum Ha&eNs, barbatus, dicat:

Descendet Domimts

Cui no n est terminus.49

VocATores ;

Iste cetus.

Chords :

Qwod Iudea.

VocAcio Naum:50

Naum,51 plebi Iudaice die.

45 See Abdias, 17 : Et in monte Sion erit salvatio, et erit sanctus ; et possidebit

domus Jacob eos qui se possederant.

^Vocatores] Vocant (Ms. 382).

47 Iona] Omitted (Ms. 382).

48 See Matt, xii, 39-40: Qui respondens ait illis : Generatio mala et adultera

signum quserit et signum non dabitur ei, nisi signum Jonae prophetae. Sicut

enim fuit Jonas in ventre ceti tribus diebus et tribus noctibus, sic erit Filius

hominis in corde terrae tribus diebus et tribus noctibus.

49 See Michceus i, 3 : Quia ecce Dominus, egredietur de loco suo ; et de¬

scendet, et cal cab it super excelsa terrae ; Mich, v, 2 : Et tu, Bethlehem Ephrata,

parvulus es in millibus Juda ; ex te mihi egredietur qui sit dominator in Israel,

et egressus ejus ab initio, a diebus aeternitatis ; Mich, v, 4 : Et convertentur,

quia nunc magnificabitur usque ad terminos terrae.

50 Naum] Nain (Ms. 382) ; Nahum (Ms. 1232).

61 Naum] Omitted (Ms. 382); Nahum (Ms. 1232).

58

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Nau m50 <fol. 34v>_senex RESjPONDeat:

Super montes62 euucmgelizantis.63

Vocatoees:

Iste cetus.

Chorus:

Quod Iudea.

VocAcio Sophonie:

Esto nobis, Sophonia.

SOPHONIAS,54 BABBATUS, DICAT I

In medio tui Syon55 rex regnabit.05

VocATores :

Iste cetus.

Choeus :

Qwod Iudea.

Vocacio Aggei:

Audiamus os Aggei ut exponat.

Aggeus, senilem57 uultum gebens, dicat:

Veniet cunctis gentibws rex desideratissimus.68

VocATores ;

Iste cetus.

Chorus:

Quod Iudea.

VocAcio Zachaeie:

Veni, Zacbaria,59 fili Barachie.

ZACHARIAS, BARBATUS, DICATI

En rex tuus uenit tibi60 iustus, filia Syon.61

VocATOres;

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Qwod Iudea.

Vocacio Ezechielis:

Profer nobis, Ezechiel, aduentttm.

52 montes] montem (G).

63 euuangelizantis] euuangelisantis (Ms. 382). See Nahum i, 15: Eqce super

montes pedes evangelizantis, et annuntiantis pacem.

54 Sophonias] Sophonia (G).

53 Syon] Sion (Ms. 382).

56 See Sophon. iii, 14 : Lauda, filia Sion ; jubila, Israel ; lsetare, et exsulta in

omni corde, filia Jerusalem.

57 senilem] senillem (Ms. 382).

58 See Agg: ii, 8 : Et movebo omnes gentes, et veniet desideratus cunctis

gentibus ; et implebo domum istam gloria, dicit Dominus exercituum.

59 Zacharia] Zdcharie (G).

60 tibi] omitted (G).

61 See Zach. ix, 9 : Exsulta satis, filia Sion ; jubila, filia Jerusalem ; ecce rex

tuus veniet tibi justus, et salvator ; ipse pauper, et ascendens super asinam

et super pullum filium asinse.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

59

RespONSIO EIUSDEM I

Per clausam ianuam rex intrabit solus.62

VocATores ;

Iste cetus.

Chorus:

Qt^od ludea.

VocAoio Malachie:

Palam nobis refer, Malachia.63

RespoNSio EiwsDem :

Scimus bee04 dieentem Deum.65

VocATores ;

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Quod ludea.

VocAcio Zacharie patais S ancti IoHUfmis:

Zacbaria, os aperi.

Ipse, ornatus quasi Iudeus, dicat:

Per uiscera dulcifflue66

Dei mi sericordie.61

Vocat ores :

Iste cetus.

Chorws:

Qwod ludea.

VocAoio Elyzabeth:68

Illud,69 Elyzabeth,68 in medium

<De Domino profer eloquium>.

In persoNA alba, quasi pregnans, dicat:

Quid est rei

Q%od me70 mei

62 See Ezech. xliv, 1—3 : Et convertit me ad viam portae sanctuarii exterioris,

quae respiciebat ad orientem ; et erat clausa. Et dixit Dominus ad me : Porta

haec clausa erit ; non aperietur, et vir non transibit per earn, quoniam Dominus,

Deus Israel, ingressus est per earn ; eritque clausa principi.

63 nobis refer Malachia] refer nobis Mathia (Ms. 382).

64 hec] hoc (G).

65 See Malach. iii, 1 : Ecce ego m'itto angelum meum, et praeparabit viam ante

faciem meam ; et statim veniet ad templum suum Dominator quern vos quaeritis,

et angelus testamenti quern vos vultis. Ecce venit, dicit Dominus exercituum.

66 dulcifflue] dulciflue (Ms. 382) ; dulcifluae (Ms. 1232).

67 See Luc. i, 7 8 : Per viscera misericordiae Dei nostri, in quibus visitavit nos,

oriens ex alto. It will be observed that the prophecy assigned to Zacharias in

the Rouen version is not the same as that (Luc. i, 76) assigned to him in the

pseudo-Augustinian lectio. See above, p. 8.

68 Elyzabeth] Helizabeth (Ms. 382) ; Elisabeth (Ms. 1232).

69 Illud] Illud et (Ms. 1232).

70 me] Omitted (Ms. 382).

60

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

< Mater heri visitat?71

Nam ex eo

Ventre meo

Laetus infans palpitat>.

VocATores :

Iste cetns.

Chords :

Quod Iudea.

VocAcio S ancti lonanms Bapt iste;

Da, Baptista,

Uentris72 cista

Clausus.

<Quos73 dedisti

Causa Christi

Plausus.

Cui dedisti gaudium,

Profer et testimonium >.

Ipse, nudus pedes, tenens textuw, dicat:

Venit talis

Sotularis

Cuius non sum <etiam74

Tam benignus

Ut sim dignus

Solvere corrigiam>.

Vocatores:

Iste cet us.

Chords :

Qwod Iudea.

VocACio Symeonis :

Quid dixisti, Symeon, cum in tua?

Symeon, senex, respondeat:

Dei nostri, Saluatoris, conspexerunt75 ocwli.

Vocat ores:

Iste cetus.

Chorus:

Qnod Iudea.

VocAcio Uirgilii :

Maro, Maro,7S uates gentilium,

Da Xpisfo < testimonium >.

71 Mater heri visitat] Gaste prints these words as if they were present in

Ms. 384.

72 Uentris] Ventrix (Ms. 382).

73 Quos] Quod (G).

74 etiam] Printed as if present in Ms. 384 (G).

75 conspexerunt] surrexerunt (Ms. 382). The entire speech of Simeon Gast§

prints as follows : <Nunc me dimittas, Domine, finire vitam in pace, quia>

Dei nostri salvatoris conspexerunt oculi Quern misisti (in hunc mundum) pro

salute populi>.

76 Maro Maro] Mars Mars (Ms. 382) ; Maro (G).

Young — Ordo Propketarum.

61

VlRGIUUS, IN IUUENILI Ha&ITU R6N6 ORNATWS, RESPOND eat:

Ecce polo demissa solo <nova progenies est>.

VocATores :

Iste cetws.

Chorws:

Qwod Iudea.

Interim Najbugodonosor,77 quasi Rex paratws, <fol. 35r> os-

iCNDENS YMAGINEW, DUOBWS ArMATIS DICAT :

Hue venite, uos Armati.

Tunc Armati ostendant ymaginew prius78 dicentes:

Regi gratum

Famulatum.

Interim ostendant79 ymaginem tribes Pueros dicentes:

Huic sacro simulacro.

Tunc Pueri ymaginem respuentes dicant:

Deo soli

Digno coli.

Hoc audito Armati Pueros Regi ducant,80 dicentes :

Quia ritum

Stabilitum

Non timetis?

Tunc ostendantS1 Regi Pueros,82 dicentes:

“Rex, tua saluentur.

Tunc Rex iratus dicat:

Ergo tales assumawtwr.

Tunc Armati ducentes Pueros ad fornacem dicentes:83

Reos digne84

lam in igne.

Tunc mittantur Pueri in fornace<m>, et accendatur. At

illi, Facti liberi, dicant:

Benedictus es, Domine Dews, et cetera.

Rex, hoc audiens, admirans dicat:85

En quid cantant86 illi tres?

Armati87 dicant:

Deum laudant.88

77 Nabugodonosor] Nabugodenosor (Ms. 382); Nabuchodonosor (Ms. 1232).

78 prius] pueris (Mss. 384 and 382, G). The reading prius (adopted from

Ms. 1232) results in the avoiding of a repetition of the summons to the Pueri , —

a repetition which may, or may not, be objectionable. See Gaste, p. 17, note.

79 ostendant] ostendat (Ms. 382).

80 regi ducant] ducant regi (G).

81 ostendant] respondeant (Ms. 382).

82 Regi Pueros] Pueros Regi (G).

83.83 omitted from Ms. 382.

84 Reos digne] Digne reos (Ms. 382).

85 dicat] hoc dicat (G).

85 cantant] cantent (Ms. 382).

87 tres Armati] Tunc Armati (Ms. 1232).

88 laudant] laudent (Ms. 382).

62

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

Tunc Uocatores dicant Regi:

Puerum cum pueris,

Nabugodonosor,89

<Cum in igne videris,

Quid dixisti>?

Rex FORNACEm ostendens90 dicat:

Tres in igne positi pueri89

< Quarto gaudent comite liberi>.

Vocat ores :91

Iste cetus.99

Chords :

Quod Iudea.

Vocacio Sibille:

Tu, Sibilla,93

Uates ilia,89

<Dic adventum judicis.

Die signum judicii>.

Sibilla,94 coronata et muliebri hcj&itu ornata, dicat:

Iudicii signum: Tellus sudore <madescet>.95

VocATores :91

Iste cetus.

Chorus :

Qitod Iudea.

Quo finito omms ProPHetE et Ministri in pulpito cantent98

hos versus:

Ortum97 predestinacio

Poruo Sabbaii spacio.

Hoc finito Cantor incipiat ad introitum chori r esponsorium:

Confirmatum est cor Uirgims.98

Prophete et iMinistri regentes cHORum secunouM. suum ordi-

?IEM INCIPIANT AD MlSSAM OFFidUM

Puer natus" <est nobis >. 100

89 Gaste does not expand these initia.

90 fornacem ostendens] ostendens fornacem (Ms. 382).

91Vocatores] Vocant (Ms. 382).

92 cetus] Omitted (Ms. 382).

93 Vocacio Sibille Tu Sibilla] Vocatis Sibila En Sibila (Ms. 382).

94 Sibilla] Sibila (Ms. 382).

95 The entire speech of Sibilla Gaste prints as follows : Judicii signum : tellus

sudore madescet <E coelo rex adveniet per secla futura, Scilicet in carne

praesens ut judicet orbem>.

"cantent] cantant (Ms. 382).

97 Ortum] (H)ortum (G).

98 cor Uirginis] Omitted, (Ms. 382).

"natus] natus est et cetera (Ms. 382) ; natus est (G).

100 Puer natus est nobis are the opening words of the Introit for the Mass of

the Circumcision (Jan. 1), as well as for the third Mass of Christmas.

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

63

Kyrie et GLoriA festiue.101

Onatio: Deus, qui nobis nati salua<toris>.102

Nulla MEMoria fiat.103

Epistona: Multipharie.

Tees de secunvA sede r esponsum: Viderunt omwes

fi<nes>.104

Tees de maioribws : Alleluia,.

Versus: Multipharie.

SvQueistia: Letabuwdus.

EuaNGmwM: Postquam consummati sunt.

Credo in vNum.105

Off ertorium: Tui sunt celi.106

Secreta: Presta, quesumus, Domine.

Pref atio: Quia <fol. 35^> per incarnati.107

Sanctus et Agnus festiue.108

Com munio: Viderunt onmes.

Postcom munio: Presta,, quesumus, Domine, ut q%od109 sal-

uatom.110

The action of the Rouen Festum Asinorum runs, then, as follows :

Immediately after Terce the procession of prophetce, led by two

clerics, leaves the cloister and advances toward the nave, two

clerics singing antiphonally with the choir the Gloriosi et famosi.

In the middle of the church, — presumably at the junction of nave

and transepts, — the procession makes a station between six Jews

on one side and six Gentiles on the other. After exhorting both

groups to rejoice in Christ’s birth (Omnes gentes), the Vocatores 111

address in turn the recalcitrant Jews (0 Judcei) and the unbeliev¬

ing Gentiles (Et vos, Gentes), receiving a response from each.112

101 Gaste’s text and the text in Ms. 1232 end here. Ms. 1232 adds the follow¬

ing note : Haec supra scripta deprompta fuerunt ex antiquo codice Rituali

S. Rotom. Ecclesise in Festo Circumcisionis Domini. There can be little doubt

that the manuscript referred to is Rouen Ms. 384.

102 nobis nati salua<toris> ] nobi nati (Ms. 382).

103 fiat] Omitted (Ms. 382).

104 responsum : Viderunt omnes fi<nes>] Graduale : Viderunt. Versus:

Notum fecit (Ms. 382).

105 in vnum] Omitted (Ms. 382).

108 celi] Omitted (Ms. 382).

107 Quia per incarnati] Et communicantes, de Natiuitate (Ms. 382).

108 Sanctus et Agnus festiue] Omitted (Ms. 382).

109 quod] qui (Ms. 382).

110 Followed immediately by the rubric : Ad vi.

111 The number of Vocatores is uncertain.

112 I am unable to complete the initia of these responses.

64 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

The Vocatores now call upon Moses to testify concerning Christ,

and after he has delivered his testimony, they conduct him to a

position beyond the furnace that has been constructed in the middle

of the nave. As they escort Moses to his new position they sing

Is'te coetus, to which the choir responds Quod Judcea. Next in order

Amos is appropriately summoned, utters his prophecy, and is con¬

ducted to a position beside Moses. Similarly are treated Isaiah,

Aaron, Jeremiah, Daniel, Habakkuk, Balaam, Samuel, David,

Hosea, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, Haggai,

Zechariah, Ezekiel, Malachi, Zacharias, Elizabeth, Saint John the

Baptist, Simeon, Virgil, Nebuchadnezzar, and the Sibyl. After the

Sibyl has been escorted to her place among the prophets, the whole

company of prophets and ministers113 unite in singing in pulpito 114

the prose Hortum prmdestinatio . The procession now advances

into the choir for Mass, the prophets and ministers beginning the

Introit ( Officium ) and ruling the choir.

The most obvious difference between the Rouen play and the

versions previously considered is, of course, the notable increase in

the number of the prophets.115 Against the thirteen personages

summoned in the lectio, and in the Limoges and Laon versions, the

Rouen text provides twenty-eight, in non-chronological order, in¬

cluding all of the major and minor prophets of the Vulgate. Of

these twenty-eight, fourteen116 appear in none of the versions al¬

ready considered, whereas, excepting Israel,117 all the prophets of

the shorter versions are present in the Rouen play. This increase

in the number of prophets need occasion no surprise, for such an

accretion is natural to any literary development, the names of the

added personages lay ready to hand in the Vulgate, and the sermon-

izer of the pseudo-Augustinian lectio himself suggests the process:

Quod si velim ex lege et ex prophetis omnia quse de Christo dicta sunt

colligere, facilius me tempus quam copia deseret.118

113 1 infer that these ministri are the persons who assist the prophetce in

performing the play.

114 Pulpitum may mean the rood-loft over the choir-screen. See Gast§,

pp. 19-20.

115 Sepet (pp. 29-83), having no knowledge of the Laon play, compares the

text of Rouen only with that of Limoges.

118 Amos, Aaron, Samuel, Hosea, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum,

Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Ezekiel, and Malachi.

117 Israel is present only in the Limoges version. See above, pp. 26, 32.

118 See above, p. 7.

Young — Or do Prophetarum.

65

Of the fourteen prophets that the Rouen version has in common

with the shorter versions, some nine119 use utterances that we have

already seen in both the Limoges and the Laon texts. The other

five present special cases. Balaam, found only in Laon and Rouen,

uses the same prophecies in the two versions. The Moses and

Simeon of Rouen, — if we may judge from their brief initia, — de¬

liver speeches unlike those of Limoges and Laon in text, but like

them in ultimate derivation from the lectio. Zacharias appears

only in. the lectio and in the Rouen play, and in the two versions

his utterances are not the same. The Rouen Nebuchadnezzar utters

the prophecy that we have already seen in the Laon version.

The peculiar dramatic interest of the Rouen play lies, however,

not in such details as these, but in two special episodes, centering

respectively in Balaam and Nebuchadnezzar.120

The dramatization of the story of Balaam is brief, but notably

more comprehensive than what we have seen in the Laon play.

Tn the spoken text of the Rouen play, to be sure, less attention is

given to the asina; but on the other hand specific notice is taken

of the relation of Balaam to King Balak. It is, indeed, two emis¬

saries of this king, rather than the official Vocato'res, who first sum¬

mon Balaam forth, and bid him come to Balak ’s court.121 Balaam

now rides forth upon an ass, vigorously plying his spurs, until the

person concealed under the animal cries out in protest (Cur me

. . . leditis ?).122 Meanwhile a youth costumed as an angel,

with wings and sword, stands in the path and commands Balaam to

cease serving Balak.123 The official Vocatores now call upon

Balaam for his prophecy, and he delivers the utterance that we

have already observed in the Laon play.124

For vivifying the prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar a still more

elaborate action is devised. The mise en scene consists in a furnace

119 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Habakkuk, David, Elizabeth, John the Baptist,

Virgil, and Sibyl. See Sepet, pp. 30-32. Sepet (pp. 29-38) makes a detailed

comparison of the Limoges and Rouen versions, coming to the conclusion the

Rouen text is based upon that of Limoges, or upon something similar. It should

be remembered that Sepet did not know the Laon version.

120 See Sepet, pp. 33-36.

121 This summons, of which we have only the opening words (Balaam, veni et

fac), probably included a command that Balaam curse the Israelites. See Num.

xxii, 5-21.

122 Cur percutis me? (Num. xxii, 28).

123 See Num. xxii, 31-33.

124 For the source of the whole action see Num. xxii, 1-35. It will be ob¬

served that the dramatist does not use the Vulgate phraseology.

5 — S. A. L».

66

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

constructed of cloth and oakum in the middle of the nave,125 and in

some sort of figure to serve as the golden idol of the Biblical ac¬

count.126 Pointing to the idol, Nebuchadnezzar begins the action,

promptly by ordering two of his soldiers to command the Pueri

(Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) to fall down in worship.127

After they have spurned the idol, the three young men are con¬

ducted into the presence of Nebuchadnezzar. Hearing of their

contumacy, the king angrily orders that they be cast into the fur¬

nace. After the order has been executed and the furnace lighted,

the Pueri sing the Benedictus. Aroused by the sound of their

voices, Nebuchadnezzar asks his soldiers what the young men are

singing, and is told that they are praising God. The Vocatores

now intrude into the action, asking the king what he said at this

juncture. Nebuchadnezzar closes the dramatic episode by deliver¬

ing the testimony already known to us from the Laon version.

As to the day on which the Rouen processus was performed

scholars have not agreed. Du Cange,128 Sepet,129 and Chambers130

have assigned the performance to Christmas Day; Gaste131 asso¬

ciates it with the Vigil of Christmas (Dec. 24) ; and DuMeril132

and Chasles133 speak positively for the Feast of the Circumcision

125 Fornace in medio navis ecclesie lintheo et stupis constituta. See above, p. 50.

128 Ostendens ymaginemj ostendant ymaginem.

127 It may be that the Armati deliver the command to the Pueri twice (See

above, p. 61). The general action of this whole dramatic episode is provided by

Dan. iii, 13-92. Except in the Benedictus sung by the Pueri, however, the

dramatist does not use the Vulgate phraseology.

128 Du Cange (G-lossarium medice et infimce Latinitatis, Vol. Ill, Niort, 1884,

p. 460) introduces his text as follows: “Festum Asinorum, cujus Officium, quod

die Christi Natalitio celebratur, ut et nomenclature rationem, accipe ex Ordi-

nario Ecclesiae Rotomagensis Ms. : Nota, Cantor, si ...” I assume that

a similar annotation occurs in the earlier editions of Du Cange, momentarily

inaccessible to me.

129 Sepet (p. 42) writes as follows: Le texte nous indique positivement que la

Procession de Vane faisait partie de l’office du jour de Noel. What textual evi¬

dence Sepet refers to I do not know.

130 Chambers (Vol. II, p. 55) assigns the Ordo to Christmas, rather than to

the preceding day, because “the eeIntroit with which the text concludes is

Puer natus est, which belongs to the Magna missa of the feast-day, and not to

the eve.” Chambers overlooks the fact that Puer natus est is the Introit also

of the Mass of January first. As Villetard has observed (op. cit. infra, p. 47,

note), the entire liturgy of the Circumcision is essentially a compilation from

other feasts, chiefly Christmas.

151 Gaste (p. 4) assigns the dramatic performance to “La veille de Noel”

without reference to evidence of any kind.

132 See DuMeril, p. 181, note. DuM6ril cites no evidence.

133 Chasles writes (p. 126, note 3) as follows: “La procession des Prophgtes

du Christ avait lieu le jour de la Circoncision. Jusqu’S, present on avait pens£,

a la suite de M. Sepet et de M. Gaste, que cette procession se faisait le jour de

Young — Or do Prophetarum.

67

(Jan. 1). There can be no doubt that this last date is the correct

one, and that the other dates have been arrived at only through

neglect of the plain facts of the manuscripts. In Rouen Ms. 384,

for example, which is our chief source for the text of the Festum,

Asinorum, the dramatic text is found in the very midst of the ordo

for the service of January first,134 and is attached directly to the

Mass for that day.135 This attachment is made clear by the rubrics

preceding and following the Festum Asinorum itself. The intro¬

ductory rubric is as follows :

Processio fiat ut in die Natiuitatis Domini excepto quod ad introitum

chori dicatur responsorium: Confirmatum est.

Nota Cantor: Si Festum Asinorum fiat, processio ordinetur post Ter-

ciam; si non fiat Festum, tunc fiat processio ut prenotatur.136

From this rubric it is clear, in the first place, that the Festum

Asinorum might or might not be performed in any particular

year.137 If the Festum Asinorum were omitted, the usual liturgical

processio occurred immediately after Terce and before Mass, the

processio being identical with that of Christmas except that as the

chant at the entrance to the choir (Ad introitum chori) the re-

Noel. On s’appuyait principalement sur l’introit Puer natus est nobis entonnS

par les prophetes. Cela ne prouve rien, puisque cet introit est aussi celui de la

Circoncision . . . Enfin, nous avons trouve dans un ordinaire de Bayeux

(Ms. 121, publie par U. Chevalier, Bib. liturg., t. VIII, p. 75) le r6pons : Con¬

firmatum est, a, la procession de la Circoncision. Or c’est justement ce meme

repons qu’entonne le chantre quand les prophetes sont rentres au choeur. On le

chante, d’ailleurs, encore aujourd’hui, au 2e nocturne des matines de la Circon¬

cision. Les faits semblent bien imposer notre conclusion.”

134 The Cursus and Mass for St. Sylvester (Dec. 31) are found on fol. 31v-32v,

followed immediately by the Cursus and Mass for the Circumcision (Jan. 1) on

fol. 32v-35v. The Festum Asinorum is found on fol. 33r— 35r.

135 The ordo for this Mass is printed above, pp. 62-63. This Mass can be identi¬

fied as that for Jan. 1 by comparison of its basic elements with the same ele¬

ments in the Mass of the Circumcision for the Feast of Fools at Sens (Villetard,

op. cit. infra., pp. 109—117). Further evidence that the Rouen Festum Asinorum

belongs on Jan. 1 is provided by the following note written at the end (fol. 27r)

of the seventeenth-century copy of the dramatic text found in Bibliotheque Na-

tionale Ms. lat. 1232 (see above p. 63) : “Hsec supra scripta deprompta

fuerunt ex antiquo codice Rituali S. Rotom. Ecclesise, in Festo Circumcisionis

Domini.”

138 Rouen Ms. 384 (Y. 110), fol. 33r. The second paragraph is printed at the

beginning of the Festum Asinorum above, p. 50.

137 As to the reason for this option any person may, in the absence of facts,

guess to his heart’s content. Sepet conjectures (pp. 38-40) that the giving of

the performance may have been contingent upon the decorous conduct of the

spectators during the performance of the previous year. Of this conjecture

Chasles (p. 128) very justly observes, “Cette idee nous semble d§nu£e de tout

fondement.”

68 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

sponsory Confirmatum est supplanted the antiphon Hodie Christies

natus.138 In other words, when the Festum Asinorum was per¬

formed it merely supplanted the greater part of the normal pro -

cessio, the responsory Confirmatum est being retained ad introitum

chori ,139 From the liturgical point of view, therefore, the dramatic

performance may be regarded as a sort of introduction to the

Mass ; and it will be observed that at Mass the prophetce and their

assistants begin the Introit and rule the choir.140

The name of this dramatic performance, its attachment to the

liturgy of the Feast of Circumcision, and the presence of the

asina, — all these circumstances combine to raise the question of the

relation of the dramatic performance at Rouen to the ecclesiastical

ludi , or revels, of the Christmas season, particularly to the famous

Feast of Fools.141 This festival, variously known as festa asinaria,

or as festum stultorum, fatuorum, follorum, subdiaconorum, or

baculi, was usually celebrated on the Circumcision. The general

nature of the observance may be conveniently seen in the famous

manuscript inappropriately known as Missel des Fous, or Missel

de l’ cine, containing words and music for the Circumcision, written,

or compiled, by Pierre de Corbeil for use at Sens.142 This docu¬

ment is simply a choir-book containing troped, or embellished,

forms of the musical propria for the complete Canonical Office and

Mass of the Circumcision.143 The simple heading of the text as a

whole is Circumcisio Domini . The text itself begins, under the

rubric In januis ecclesie, with four lines of extra-liturgical verse,

138 In Rouen Ms. 384 (Y. 110) the Christmas processio is found (fol. 23v) as

follows : Ad Processionem cantor incipiat responsorium : Descendit de celis.

Prosa : Felix Maria. Versus : Tamquam sponsus. Prosa : Familiam custodi.

Et exiuit. Prosa : Te laudant alme. Conditor. In statione responsorium :

Verbum caro factum. Tres de maioribus in pulpito versum : In principio.

Plenum gratie. Ad introitum chori antiphona : Hodie Xpistus natus. Sequatur

Benedictio Archiepiscopi si presens fuerit. Hoc finito incipiatur Missa a can-

tore cappato.

139 See above, pp. 50, 67.

140 See above, p. 62.

141 The most convenient and comprehensive account of the Feast of Fools is

that by Chambers, Vol. I, pp. 274-335. The other ludi we need not, for our

present purpose, consider. Chambers considers the whole matter in masterly

fashion (Vol. I, pp. 274-371).

142 Ms. 46, of the thirteenth century, now kept in the municipal museum at

Sens. From this manuscript the so-called “Office des Fons” has been most re¬

cently edited by H. Villetard, Office de Pierre de Corheil (Bibliotheque Musi-

cologique, IV), Paris, 1907.

143 One may consult Villetard’s complete text, or the general descriptions

given by him (pp. 39-51) and by Chambers (Vol. I, pp. 279-284).

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

69

followed, under the rubric Conductus 144 ad tabulam, by the famous

“Prose of the Ass,” beginning,

Orientibus partibus

Aduentauit asinus.

Then follow the troped chants; for the complete Canonical Office

and Mass.

The rubrics accompanying the text are brief and apply, in gen¬

eral, strictly to the liturgical ceremonial. There is no suggestion

of burlesque.145 At Beauvais and elsewhere, however, the cere¬

monial included acts of revelry such as a drinking bout and a

censing with pudding and sausage.146 For our present purpose we

may omit a survey of these revels as a whole, and need mention

merely the fact that at Beauvais, during the singing of the “Prose

of the Ass, ’ ’ an asinus was actually brought into the church.147

What, then, is the relation of the Laon Ordo Prophetarum and

the Rouen Festum Asinorum to the Feast of Fools or similar eccle¬

siastical ludif For an answer, which I cannot improve, I adopt

the able words of Chambers :148

144 “Conductus design e un morceau de musique ou plutOt de chant qu’on exe-

cutait en marchant” (Villetard, p. 75).

145 Villetard (pp. 49-51, 73—82) considers and interprets the rubrics in detail.

One’s attention falls questioningly upon the rubric Conductus ad ludos, which

introduces the charming Noel (Natus est) just before the Te Deum of Matins;

but Villetard (p. 50) interprets this rubric as referring to the departure of the

congregation from the church “pour alle se reorder quelques instants.” The

serious tone of the observance at Sens is observed by Chambers (Vol. II, p. 281)

and by Villetard, the latter expressing himself (p. 51) as follows: “Rien, en

effet, k relever, dans cette vaste composition, qui soit de nature k choquer le

godt le plus exigeant. L’ouvrage, dans son ensemble, est incompatible avec

l’idee du plus leger desordre.” Chambers reminds us (Vol. I, p. 288), however,

that the more extravagant ceremonies would not be likely to be recorded in a

formal service-book.

148 See Chambers, Vol. I, pp. 286-287. I know of no complete edition of the

Circumcision office of Beauvais. Villetard (pp. 219-232) gives a complete

analysis of its content, and Chambers (Vol. I, pp. 284-287) gives a general de¬

scription. Chambers (Vol. I, pp. 279-281, 287-288) points out the fact that the

Circumcision office written for Sens by Pierre de Corbeil has undergone a

reform from which the Beauvais office escaped.

147 See Chambers, Vol. I, pp. 286, 331; Villetard pp. 49, 232. Concerning the

use of the ass in ecclesiastical ludi in general, see Chambers, Vol. II, pp. 330-

332. There is no proof that Pierre de Corbeil allowed an ass to appear in his

ceremony ; but his use of the “Prose of the Ass” indicates that at one period or

another the ass may have been used.

143 Chambers, Vol. II, pp. 56—57. The foot-notes are annotations of the present

writer.

70

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

I think it must he taken for granted that the plays149 are the older in¬

stitution of the two. They seem all to have taken shape by the eleventh

century,150 before there is any clear sign that the Kalends151 had made their

way into the churches and become the Feast of Fools. The plays may

even have been encouraged as a counter-attraction, for the congregation,

to the Kalends outside. On the other hand, I do not hold, as some writers

do, that the riotous Feasts of Asses were derived from the pious and

instructive ceremony so called at Rouen.152 On the contrary, Balaam and

his ass are an interpolation in the Prophetce both at Rouen and, more ob¬

viously, at Laon. Balaam, alone of the Laon performers, is not from

the pseudo-Augustinian sermon.153 Is he not, therefore, to be regarded as

a reaction of the Feast of Fools upon the Prophetce, 15i as an attempt to

turn the established presence of the ass in the church to purposes of edi¬

fication, rather than of ribaldry? I think the explanation is the more

plausible one.

We may, then, with reasonable certainty account for the mis¬

nomer Festum Asinorum attached to the prophet-play in the Rouen

manuscripts: The Feast of Fools contributed to the prophet -play

the figure of the ass, and the conspicuous presence of the ass forced

upon the prophet-play the alien name Festum Asinorum. The

question remains as to whether the ass in the Rouen play, — and in

the Laon play as well, — brought with it the comic associations of

the Feast of Fools. In the absence of documentary evidence, one

can only surmise that however solemn the intention of the writers

of the prophet-plays may have been,155 the spectators must have

149 In this part of his statement Chambers is referring to the several liturgical

plays of the Christmas season : OJficium Pastorum, Officium Stellas, and Ordo

Prophetarum. See Chambers, Vol. II, pp. 41-55.

iso ;por an application of this date to the Ordo Prophetarum see Chambers,

Vol. II, p. 53, note 4.

151 The word Kalends here refers, of course, to the festivities of the folk at the

beginning of the year.

152 Chambers notes that Gast§ (pp. 20-24) holds this view. See also Chambers,

Vol. I, p. 332, note 1. Chasles (p. 126, note 3) seems not to discriminate at all

between the Ordo Prophetarum and the Feast of Fools.

153 See above, p. 46.

154 Elsewhere (Vol. I, p. 332) Chambers presents this view more positively as

follows : “It has been pointed out, and will, in the next volume, be pointed out

again, that the ecclesiastical authorities attempted to sanctify the spirit of play

at the Feast of Fools and similar festivities by diverting the energies of the

revellers to ludi of the miracle-play order. In such ludi they found a place for

the ass. He appears for instance as Balaam’s ass in the later versions from

Laon and Rouen of the Prophetce, and at Rouen he gave to the whole of this

performance the name of the festum or processio asinorum.

155 Sepet (p. 28) undertakes to assure us that the conduct of the ass itself

was altogether decorous.

Young — Ordo Prophet arum.

71

experienced, at least surreptitiously, some of the mirth openly pro¬

claimed in the festa asinaria .156

We have still to notice the special chants with which the dramatic

performance of Rouen begins and ends. Like the Laon play, the

version before us begins with a processional use of the Gloriosi et

famosi. It will be observed, however, that the Rouen play dis¬

closes157 several stanzas that we have not seen hitherto. The ap¬

propriateness of this chant to the fundamental theme of the Ordo

Prophetarum is so complete as to suggest that the Gloriosi et

famosi was composed specifically for use in the dramatic procession

of the Prophetce .15S

Unfortunately a like appropriateness cannot be claimed for the

prose II or turn prcedestinatio which the Prophetce et Ministri in pul -

pito sing after the concluding prophecy of the Sibyl. The com¬

plete text of this prose will be examined below.159 Suffice it to say

here that in content this composition is related, not to the Ordo

Prophetarum , but to the theme of Easter. I can offer no plausible

conjecture to account for its presence in the Rouen version before

us.160

Glancing back over our survey, we observe that of the extant

examples of the Ordo Prophetarum in its use as a strictly liturgical

play, the Rouen version shows the most extended development.

The importance of this development consists not so much in the

mere addition of new prophets as in the use of mise en scene and

dialogue for the roles of Balaam and Nebuchadnezzar. Whereas all

the other prophetce are provided merely with a conventionally ade¬

quate impersonation, these two personages are the centers of dia¬

logues that approach the status of independent dramatic episodes.

158 As to whether the Feast of Fools was cultivated at Rouen itself, alongside

the prophet-play, I have no information. Chambers (Vol. I, pp. 303-304)

traces the presence of a Feast of Fools at Laon from “about 1280” on into the

sixteenth century.

157 The Rouen text, here and elsewhere, provides only the initia.

158 For its use elsewhere, see below, pp. 72-80.

159 See pp. 75-77.

160 Nor can Sepet (p. 47) or Gaste (p. 20). I consider this matter in detail

below, pp. 76-77.

72

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

VII

I have reserved for separate consideration two texts which are

directly related to versions examined above, but which raise special

questions.

The first of these texts is associated with Einsiedeln i* 1

AD PROPHETAS

Prophete venientes admonent:2 3 4 <p. 54 >

Gloriosi

Et famosl

Regis festum

Celebrantes

Gaudeamus;

Cuius ortum

Uite portum

Nobis datum

Predicantes

Habeamus.

1 Einsiedeln Ms. 366 (olim 179), Fragmenta liturgica ssec. xi-xii, pp. 53-54.

The manuscript is described by P. G. Meier, Catalogus Codicum manu scriptorum

qui in Bibliotheca Monasterii Einsidlensis O. S. B. servantur, Vol. I, Einsiedeln —

Leipzig, 1899, pp. 331-332. The part of the manuscript containing liturgico-

dramatic pieces (pp. 53-56) is more carefully described by W. Meyer, Frag¬

menta Burana, Berlin, 1901, pp. 51—52. I base my own text and observations

upon the manuscript itself. The liturgico-dramatic pieces are found as follows :

(1) p. 53 (beginning on the first line and ending on the next to the last line) :

a fragment of the Officium Stellce. For bibliography see a note of the present

writer in University of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature, No. 4,

Madison, 1919, p. 7, note 19. In this note I neglected to mention the fact that

this fragment is printed also by A. Schubiger, in Musikalische Spicilegien, Jahr-

gang IV, Lieferung II, Berlin, 1876, pp. 44-46.

(2) pp. 53 (last line) -5 4 (last line) : a fragment of the Or do Prophet arum ,

published by F. J. Mone, Schauspiele des Mittelalters, Vol. I, Karlsruhe, 1846,

pp. 10-12, and by Schubiger, op. cit., pp. 46-47 ; and republished herewith, with

collation of the texts of Mone and Schubiger.

(3) p. 55 (first three lines) : a fragment (latter part) of the prose Hortum

prcedestinatio, published by Mone, p. 12, and republished below, p. 74.

(4) pp. 55 (line 3) -5 6 (line 5) : a version the Visitatio Sepulchri, headed by

the rubric In Resurrectione ; published by Mone, pp. 12—13. See below, p. 74.

Since there is obviously no continuity between the last words on p. 54 and

the first words on p. 55 (See below, note 12) it is clear that one or more leaves

have been lost between (2) and (3). The lost part must have contained a

continuation of the Ordo Prophetarum and the beginning of the Hortum prce¬

destinatio. For further discussion of this lacuna in the manuscript see below,

pp. 76—77, and Meyer, pp. 51—52.

2 Ad Prophetas. Prophete venientes admonent] Omitted (Mone).

Young — Or do Prophet arum.

73

4 circuitu] circuitum (Schubiger; Mone, — who remarks, “Vor diesem Wort ist

per zu verstehen.” ) .

5Ammonitu] ammonitum (Mone).

6 Et famosi] etc. (Mone).

7Etfamosi] etc. (Mone).

74 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts f and Letters.

Chorus :

Gloriosi

Et famosi .8

Prophete:

Deum uerum

Regem regum

Confitentes

Per lauacrum

Saluabuntur.

Chords :

Prophete:

Sed Iudei

Facti rei

Condemnantes

Sacrum regem

Damnabuntur.

Gloriosi.9

Floruisse

Et dedisse

Nouum fructum

Dinoscitur

Radix Iesse.

Chorus :

Israheli

Infideli

lam Maria

Natus scitur

<Hic>10 adesse.* 11

Gloriosi.12

8 Et famosi] etc. (Mone).

9 Gloriosi] Gloriosi etc. (Mone) ; Gloriosi et fa. (Schubiger).

10 1 adopt Mone’s conjecture. Schubiger supplies nunc.

11 adesse] For this word and the word Gloriosi following, the music is omitted.

12Thus ends p. 54 of the manuscript. At the top of p. 55 begins the following:

centurio

Florem Marie proprio

Sepeliuit in tumulo.

Flos autem die tercio

Qui floret ab initio,

Refloruit e tumulo

Summo mane diluculo.

In Resurrectione

Angelus dicit :

Quern queritis.

Here follows a version of the Visitatio Sepulchri.

Young— Or do Prophetarum.

75

This fragment is obviously the processional beginning of a ver¬

sion of the Ordo Prophetarum. Although we must regret the ab¬

sence of the prophecies themselves, we are fortunate in having a

relatively complete form of the processional Gloriosi et famosi.13

From this text it appears that at Einsiedeln the Prophetce them¬

selves sang the stanzas of this cantio , a practice that was probably

followed at Laon, but certainly not at Rouen.

The most puzzling aspect of the text before us is the uncertainty

as to the relation of the fragmentary Ordo Prophetarum to the

fragment of the prose Hortum Prcedestinatio that follows it in the

manuscript. A complete version of this prose may be seen in the

following text:14

R esponsorium: Et ualde mane una sabbatorum ueniunt ad monu-

mentum, orto iam sole, alleluya. Versus: Et respicientes uiderunt

reuolutum lapidem ab hostio monumenti. Orto. Gloria Patri et Filio et

Spiritui Sancto. <Verstjs>: Et <respicientes>.

Prosa

<H>ortum predestinatio

Paruo sabbaifi spatio

Prouiderat in proximo

Ciuitatis proastio,

13 From this text we are able to complete one or two of the initia of the

Rouen text.

14 Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Ms. latin 2028, Breviarium Senonense ssec. xiv,

fol. 12 Or. So far as I know this text is now published for the first time. It

appears that texts of the Hortum prcedestinatio are relatively few. Chevalier,

Repertorium Hymnologicum, No. 8045, mentions only one text, in a breviary

of the year 1548. In the appendix to Analecta Bollandiana, Vol. XXXIII,

Fasc. 1, Jan., 1914, Chevalier’s information is supplemented by the following

note: “Ms. Douai, 170 (X. Is.), 72a. Rev. cath. Rouen, II, 868.” I have texts

also from Paris, Bibliotheque Mazarine, Ms. 349, Breviarium Farsemonasterii

ssec. xiii, fol. 82r— 82v, and Bibl. Mazarine, Ms. 346, Breviarium Sancti Maglorii

ssec. xv in., fol. 103v. From an unidentified Sens manuscript, the Hortum Prce¬

destinatio and accompanying Visitatio Sepulchri are published in Melanges de la

Societe des Bibliophiles , 1834, pp. 165—167, and this text is reprinted by Du-

Meril, pp. 98-100. It will be observed that the text now published from Paris

Ms. 1028 is from the use of Sens, and that, like the text reprinted by DuMeril, it

presents the Hortum prcedestinatio as associated with the Visitatio Sepulchri of

Easter. Although the Hortum prcedestinatio contains one or two rather awk¬

ward conceptions, I should not call it a “prose barbare”, as do the editors of

Melanges (p. 166, note 1).

15 proastio] proactio (Ms.). This reading explains the unintelligible pro fascio

of the Sens text reprinted by DuMeril, pp. 98-99. The reading proastio is found

in Bibl. Mazarine Ms. 346, fol. 103v, and prophastio, in Bibl. Mazarine Ms. 349,

fol. 82v. Proastium (“suburb”) may serve as the emendation desired by Meyer

(P. 51).

76

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

<H>ortura pomorum uario

Non msignem edulio

Quantum uirtutis spatio18

Coeqnalem Elisio.

In hoc magnns decurio

Ac nobilis centurio

Florem Marie proprio

Sepeliuit in tumulo.

Flos autem die tercio,

Qni floret ab initio,

Refloruit e tumulo

Summo mane dilucnlo.

Orto <iam sole>.

Post representationem Mariarnm17 sequltur:

Te Deum laudamns.18

Here the prose Hortum prcedestinatio is used as a trope of the

third responsory of Easter Matins, and is followed, according to

the rubric, by a version of the dramatic Visit atio Sepulchri.1* It

appears, then, that both through its content and through its tradi¬

tional associations the Hortum prcedestinatio belongs to the liturgy

of Easter,20 and was commonly used as a trope, or appendage, of

the third responsory of Easter Matins.21 It will be remembered,

furthermore, that it is immediately after this third responsory

that the dramatic Visit atio Sepulchri is commonly found.

These facts ought to provide a sufficient basis for determining

the relations of the fragmentary Hortum prcedestinatio in the Ein-

siedeln manuscript. This fragment of a prose is, to be sure, pre¬

ceded, — after a lacuna of unknown length,22 — by the beginning of

an Ordo Prophetarum; but the prose is immediately, and appropri-

18 spatio] precio (Mazarine Mss. 346 and 349), with obviously better sense.

17 The Representatio Mariarum is, of course, the well-known Visitatio Sepulchri

traditionally performed immediately before the Te Deum of Easter Matins.

18 The rubric In Laudibus follows immediately.

19 The actual text of the Visitatio Sepulchri happens not to be given in this

manuscript. The text referred to was probably similar to that reprinted by

DuMeril, pp. 99-100.

20 Chevalier, Repertorium Hymnologicum, No. 8045, assigns it to Easter.

21 This prose is used as a trope of the third responsory of Easter Matins not

only in the text printed above from Bibl. Nat. Ms. 1028, but also in my unpub¬

lished texts from Mazarine Mss. 346 and 349, mentioned above, note 14.

22 See above, note 1.

Young — Or do Prophetarum.

77

ately, followed by a version of the Easter play, Visit atio Sepul -

chri ,23 We ought, therefore, to feel assured that the Hortum prce-

destinatio in the Einsiedeln text does not belong to the preceding

Ordo Prophetarum , but is to be related to the succeeding Visitatio

Sepul chri.

But our assurance is not quite complete ; for although in thought

the Hortum prcedestinatio is decisively alien to the Ordo Prophet-

arum and to the Christmas season, the Rouen Festum Asinorum

does actually conclude with the singing of this prose;24 and the

Einsiedeln dramatist may have allowed a similar incongruity. It

must be admitted, moreover, that in the Einsiedeln manuscript it¬

self there is nothing to disprove absolutely the inclusion of the

prose in the preceding prophet-play, now largely lost. In the

present state of our information, the precise dramatic relations of

the fragmentary Hortum prcedestinatio in the Einsiedeln manu¬

script must be left undecided.25

The second text for special consideration is the following, of

uncertain provenience :26

lx Epiphania Domini

Lectio Isaiae prophetae: Surge, illuminare, Ierusalem, quia venit

lumen tuum, et gloria Domini super te orta est.

Gloriosi

Et famosi

Regis festum

Celebrantes

Gaudeamus ;

Cuius ortum

Vitae portum

Nobis datum

Praedicantes

Aveamus.

23 See above, note 12.

24 See above, pp. 62, 71.

23 Since the Hortum prcedestinatio fragment is immediately followed (not in the

margin, as Meyer says [p. 51], but as the ending of line 3) by the rubric In

Resurrectione , and since the opening words (Quern queritis) are written in

uncials, Meyer holds (p. 51) that the Hortum prcedestinatio fragment is effect¬

ually separated from the Visitatio Sepulchri, and has “Nichts mit dem Oster-

spiel zu thun.” I myself do not regard the rubric and the uncials as decisive in

effecting the separation. The general situation under discussion may be

grasped from note 1 above. Even though the Hortum prcedestinatio fragment

be regarded as effectually separated from the succeeding Visitatio, the associa¬

tion of the' fragment with the Ordo Prophetarum is a matter of uncertainty.

28 1 take this text from Analecta Hymnica Medii 2Evi, Vol. XLIX, Leipzig,

1906, pp. 182-183. Concerning his source, the editor, Clemens Blume, writes

(p. 183) : “Cod. ms. saec. 14.— -Bannister, dem ich die Abschrift verdanke,

konnte leider den Fundort und die Provenienz der Handschrift nicht mehr

ermitteln.”

78

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Quia, ecce, tenebrae operient terrain et caligo populos.

Ecce, regem

Novam legem

Dantem orbis

Circuitu

Praedicamus.

Quern futurum

Regnaturum

Prophetico

Admonitu

Nuntiamus.

Super te autem orietur Dominus, et gloria eius in te videbitur.

Sunt impleta

Quae propheta

Quisquis dixit

De future

Summo rege.

Impiorum

Iudaeorum

Corda negant

Regnaturo

Sua lege.

Et ambulabunt gentes in lumme tuo et reges in splendor e ortus tui.

Dilatata Et gentiles

lam privata Prius viles

Fit regali Convertuntur

Potestate

Plebs ludaea.

Leva in circuitu oculos tuos et vide .

tibi.

Deum verum

Regem regum

Confitentes

Per lavacrum

Salvabuntur.

Maiestate

Aetherea.

omnes isti congregati sunt, venerunt

Sed ludaei

Facti rei

Non fatentes

Regem sacrum

Damnabuntur.

Filii tui de longe venient, et filiae tuae de latere surgent.

Omnes gentes

Congaudentes

De cantu laetitiae,

Quia homo

Sit de domo

Natus David hodie.

Tunc videbis et afflues, et mirabitur et dilatabitur cor tuum, quando

conversa fuerit ad te multitudo maris, fortitudo gentium venerit tibi.

Isaias, die, de Christo quid prophetizas?

Est necesse Flos deinde

Virgam Iesse Surget inde

De radice provehi; Qui est filius Dei.

Inundatio camelorum operiet te, dromedarii Madian et Epha.

0 ludaei

Verbum Dei

Cur negastis hominem?

Yestrae legis

Vestri regis

Audite nunc ordinem.

Young — Ordo Prophetarum.

79

Omnes de Saba venient aurum et tus deferentes, et laudem Domino

annuntiantes.

Confunduntur

Convertuntur

iMaiestatis aethere.

Omnes gentes

Non credentes

Peperisse virginem

Since for our present purpose the interest of this liturgical piece

is somewhat subsidiary, I deal with it only briefly. It is a troped

form of the Epistle for the Mass of Epiphany: among the sentences

of the Vulgate (Isa. lx, 1-6) are distributed metrical compositions

in the nature of embellishments of the orthodox liturgical text.27

It will be observed that the trope begins with the Gloriosi et famosi,

and consists of stanzas virtually every word of which we have al¬

ready encountered in one version or another of the Ordo Prophet-

arum. That this trope is in some way related to the prophet-play

is further apparent in the intrusive summons Isaias , die , de Christo

quid prophetizas ?

The question arises, then, as to whether this trope is one of the

sources of the Ordo Prophetarum , or is itself under the influence of

the dramatic tradition. That the latter relation is the valid one

is suggested, in the first place, by the uniqueness and late date of

the text before us. In order to influence the development of the

Ordo Prophetarum it would have been necessary that this Epistle-

trope be in existence and be well-known as early as the eleventh

century, the date of the Limoges Ordo Prophetarum, for this

dramatic text contains substantial passages that are identical with

passages in the trope.28 That fact that the editors of Analecta

Hymnica have discovered only one text of the trope, and that this

text is relatively late (fourteenth century), seems to show that the

trope can scarcely have had sufficient age or repute for serving

as a source of the prophet-play of Limoges.29

Further indication that the trope is not a source of the prophet-

27 1 follow Blume in printing the liturgical Epistle itself in italics.

28 See above, pp. 25-31. In the trope are found also the following passages of

the Limoges text : Omnes gentes . . . per ordinem ; Est necesse . . .

est spiritus (filius) Dei; Et vos (Omnes) gentes . . . peperisse virginem.

29 The Beverend H. M. Bannister, who contributed the trope under considera¬

tion, was complete master of the trope manuscripts of Western Europe, as one

may infer, for example, from his list of troparia in Analecta Hymnica , Vol.

XL VII, pp. 22-25.

80 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

play, but rather an emanation from it, appears from such a stanza

as the following:

O Iudaei,

Verbum Dei,

Cur negastis horninem?

Whereas such an address to the Jews30 finds no special inspiration

in the liturgical Epistle that is being embellished, it accords per¬

fectly with the tenor of the pseudo-Augustinian lectio and of the

central motive of the Ordo Prophetarum. It would appear that

such a passage originated not from the liturgical Epistle of Epiph¬

any but from the dramatic tradition.

The text before us, then, may be regarded as an isolated liturgical

piece in which certain stanzas from the Ordo Prophetarum have

been used, with considerable appropriateness, as a trope of an

Epistle.31

VIII

In view of the detailed attention given above to the several ver¬

sions of the Ordo Prophetarum, our summary of the development

of this liturgical play may be brief.

There can be, in the first place, no doubt as to the origin of this

dramatic phenomenon. A re-examination of the matter has im¬

paired none of the essentials of Sepet’s original demonstration.1

The Ordo Prophetarum certainly arises from that part of the

pseudo-Augustinian sermon (Contra Judaeos, Paganos, et Arianos)

which was widely used as a lectio for Matins during the Christmas

season, this particular part addressing itself to the Jews and be-

30 See also the stanza beginning Sed Iudcei , and the stanza ending Plebs Iudcea.

31 1 can see no reason for reprinting here the Cantio de mulieribus beginning,

Recedite, recedite,

Ne mulieri credite !

Die tu, Adam, primus homo, etc.

In form this satirical composition may possibly show the influence of the Ordo

Prophetarum. A new version of the Cantio, with information concerning ver¬

sions previously published, is given by L. Suttina, Una Cantilena medievale

contro le donne, in Studi Medievali (ed. F. Novati and R. Renier), Vol. II

(1906-07), pp. 457-460. In the same volume (pp. 538-550), F. Novati, fetching

an analogy from the Ordo Prophetarum, undertakes to show that the Cantio

is “un dramma liturgico” for Ash Wednesday. I cannot accept the demon¬

stration.

1 See above, pp. 1-2.

Young — Ordo Prophetarum.

81

ginning with the words Vos , inquam, convenio, O Judaei. The

fresh documents brought forward in the present study merely ex¬

tend, elucidate, and confirm Sepet ’s conception of this liturgico-

dramatic development.

From the extant texts it appears that even as a procession of

prophets confined within the bounds of the liturgy the Ordo

Prophetarum attained a conspicuous development in the direction

of genuine and independent drama. It must be admitted, to be

sure, that in so far as the mere formula of the Ordo is concerned,

this dramatic invention tends toward a mediocre regularity. The

inevitable uniformity in the summoning of a succession of wit¬

nesses, and in the delivering of their testimonies, suggests

monotony.2 But it is also clear that the liturgical dramatists ac¬

complished a good deal in the way of variety. The Laon and

Rouen versions show great care in impersonation.3 The costumes

are at once brilliant and discriminating, and details of personality

are often penetratingly disclosed. More striking still is the provi¬

sion, for certain witnesses, of conspicuous properties or mise en

scene. The action centering in the ass of Balaam and in the fur¬

nace of Nebuchadnezzar, in the Rouen Ordo, develops into dramatic

episodes of independent interest; and since one of these episodes

is found near the beginning, and the other near the end, of a long

defile of prophets, the dramatist may have intended explicitly to

enliven a solemn formula with moments of comic suggestion.

Let it be understood, finally, that the present study does not

undertake to survey the career or the influence of the Ordo

Prophetarum beyond the confines of liturgical drama. Sepet pur¬

sues the matter much farther, and through demonstration and con¬

jecture, outlines a development of the Ordo through several later

and more comprehensive stages. He conjectures, in the first place,

a form of the dramatic procession in which new witnesses appear,

and in which prophets besides Balaam and Nebuchadnezzar were

the centers of dramatic expansion; and he holds that certain of

these special episodes may have been more extended than anything

that we have seen in the plays of Laon and Rouen.4 He then rea¬

sons that some of these special episodes detached themselves from

2 Upon this monotony of Meyer (p. 52) is particularly insistent.

3 It may be, of course, that the Limoges version also availed itself of im¬

personation, even though the rubrics of the extant text are silent. See above,

p. 37.

4 See Sepet, pp. 48-147.

6— S. A. L.

82 Wiscdnsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

the procession, and persisted as independent plays.5 Finally Sepet

assumes that these independent plays reunited in the form of Old

Testament dramatic cycles, such as we find in several of the ver¬

naculars of Western Europe.6

As to the validity of these comprehensive conjectures and infer¬

ences scholars have disagreed,7 and it may be that the extant texts

are insufficient for demonstrating with precision the part of the

Or do Prophetarum in the forming of the vernacular cycles upon

subjects from the Old Testament. In any case I mention the

matter here not for the purpose of passing judgment, but rather

in order to discriminate between the part of Sepet ’s study that

is demonstrably correct and the part into which enters tenuous

conjecture. However doubtful his more ambitious conjectures may

be, his derivation of the dramatic Or do Prophetarum from the

pseudo-Augustinian lectio is sound. Such additional evidences

and such corrections of detail as may be advanced in the present

study all combine in support of Sepet ?s important discovery.

5 See Sepet, pp. 49-80.

6 See Sepet, pp. 165-179.

7 See Meyer, pp. 53-56 ; W. Creizenach, in Literaturhlatt fur germanische und

romanische Philologie, Vol. XXIII (1902), col. 203 ; H. Craig, The Origin of the

Old Testament Cycles, in Modern Philology, Vol. X (1913), pp. 473—487 ;

Adeline M. Jenney, A Further Word as to the Origin of the Old Testament

Plays, in Modern Philology, Vol. XIII (1915), pp. 59-64.

To

ERNST VOSS

On His Sixtieth Birthday

October Thirteenth

Nineteen Hundred and Twenty

RICHARD WAGNER’S

“DIE MEISTERSINGER VON NURNBERG”

AND ITS LITERARY PRECURSORS

EDWIN C. ROEDDER.

The first performance of Richard Wagner’s musical comedy-

drama Die Meistersinger von Numb erg took place in the Royal

Opera House in Munich, June 21, 1868. As to its genesis we are

accurately and fully informed by the author himself, in passages

of his autobiographical writings as well as in his letters. Over a

score of years had elapsed between the first performance — the

most memorable one that any opera had ever had up to that

time, as an artistic achievement equalled only by the presentation,

in 1876, of T)er Ring des Nibelungen, and surpassed only by Par¬

sifal, in 1882 — and the first conception of the play which Wagner,

then musical director of the Royal Opera at Dresden, jotted down,

in 1845, during a stay at Marienbad in Bohemia, where he had

gone for the recuperation of his health. In his posthumous auto¬

biography My Life 1 he says :

“Owing to some comments I had read in Gervinus’s History of

German Literature* 2 , both the Mastersingers of Nuremberg and

Hans Sachs had acquired quite a vital charm for me. The very

name of the Marker, and the part he takes in the Mastersinging,

were particularly pleasing to me, and on one of my lonely walks,

without knowing anything particular about Hans Sachs and his

poetic contemporaries, I thought out a humorous scene in which

the cobbler — as a popular artisan-poet — with the hammer on his

last, gives the marker, who is forced to sing, a practical lesson,

thereby taking revenge on him for his pedantic misdeeds. To me

the force of the whole scene was concentrated in the two follow¬

ing points: on the one hand the marker, with his slate covered

*1 quote from the anonymous English translation, New York, 1911, vol. I,

page 366, taking the liberty of correcting some curious mistakes of the trans¬

lator.

2 The passages in question are collected in the appendix to this paper.

86 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

with chalk marks, and on the other Hans Sachs holding np the

shoes covered with the marks from his hammer blows, each inti¬

mating to the other that his singing had been a failure. To this

picture, by way of concluding the second act, I added a scene con¬

sisting of a narrow, crooked little street in Nuremberg, with the

people all running about in great excitement, and ultimately en¬

gaging in a street brawl. Thus suddenly the whole of my Meister-

singer comedy took shape so vividly before me that, inasmuch as

it was a particularly cheerful subject, and not in the least likely

to overexcite my nerves, I felt I must write it out in spite of the

doctor’s orders.”

In Wagner’s Mitteilung an meine Freunde 3, written six years

later, in 1851, we learn that his intention to carry out this new

plan was considerably strengthened by the advice of several well-

wishers, who wanted him to compose some opera of the lighter

kind, which would be likely to secure for his works admittance to

all German stages and thereby win for him the outward success

that he had so far missed and that was so necessary in his struggle

for existence. At the same time he mentions here another aspect

of the new plan : the Mastersinger drama was to be the humorous

converse of the tragic contest of the Minnesingers at the Wart-

burg, as treated in his Tannhduser, the score of which he had

completed in the month of April, and the first performance of

which took place on the 19th of October, 1845. Hans Sachs was

to personify the last appearance of the artistically productive

folk-spirit, and as such he was to be contrasted with the philistine

mastersingers, to whose comical pedantry, bound up entirely in

the rules of the “tablature,” Wagner expected to give a distinctly

personal expression in the figure of the marker.

The Marienbad sketch of the Meistersinger was jotted down

July 16, 1845. 4 The Mitteilung an meine Freunde contains a

synopsis of the plan from which the general reading public re¬

ceived its first knowledge of the subject. The final and defini¬

tive execution adheres quite closely to this first sketch, so far as

the general outward course of the action is concerned, but presents

vital departures in a number of points, especially in the charac¬

terization of Sachs and the youthful hero. The internal changes

are indeed so incisive that Wagner, when toward the close of the

3 Gesammelte Schriften, 4, 284 ff. (References to second and subsequent edi¬

tions.)

4 It is printed in full in Sdmtliche Schriften , 11, 344ft.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Niirnberg 87

year 1861 he wrote out the present form of his work, could say

that the original plan offered him little or nothing.5

To gain an insight into the growth of Wagner’s spiritual life

as expressed in the play from its first inception to its completion,

and at the same time to obtain a satisfactory answer to the ques¬

tion as to how much Wagner is indebted to his “ sources” for

the plot, it will be necessary to give a fairly detailed synopsis of

the Marienbad sketch.6 In this the characters are not yet named,

excepting Hans Sachs, his apprentice David, and Magdalene,

David’s elderly sweetheart, the kinswoman and companion of the

unnamed daughter of the senior of the mastersingers ’ guild. The

later Walter von Stolzing appears merely as a junger Mann, Beck-

messer as the Merker, and Eva as the Preismadcken, For brev¬

ity’s sake we shall in the following insert the names used in the

final version.

Walter, a young knight, inspired by the reading of the Helden-

buch and the old Minnesingers, an ardent lover of poetry, descends

from his impoverished ancestral castle in Franconia, in order to

learn the art of the mastersingers in Nuremberg. To join the

guild, he presents himself at the house of its senior, Veit Pogner,

the goldsmith, and here meets Pogner ’s daughter, with whom he

quickly falls in love.7 Pogner has offered his daughter’s hand as

a prize to the master who shall defeat his competitors in a sing¬

ing contest to be held in the near future. The deciding vote in

the matter is to be left to the maiden herself. When at the meet¬

ing of the guild Walter presents himself for the master’s test,

which he must pass in order to participate in the coming competi¬

tion, Hans Sachs, who happens to be the warden of the law for

the time being, reads to him the rules of the guild, with a decided

admixture of irony, and Walter is rather nervous and intimidated.

Beckmesser, the all-important marker, — whose official business it

is to keep tally of the mistakes and infractions against the narrow

rules and laws of the mastersingers’ art, — himself aspires to the

fair maiden’s hand and her father’s gold. He scents a rival, and

naturally avails himself of this glorious chance to put him out

of the way. So he interrupts Walter’s singing before he is half

5 Richard Wagner an MatMlde Wesendonk, p. 293.

6 For a full synopsis of the drama in its present form see Henry Edward

Krehbiel, Studies in the Wagnerian Drama, New York, N. D. (1891), pages

72-77, or Henry T. Finck, Wagner and his Works. The Story of his Life with

Critical Comments, vol. II, New York, 1893, pages 217-223.

7 So it is not, as in the final version, his acquaintance with Eva and his love

for her that suggests to him the desire to become one of the mastersingers

himself, but in first visiting Pogner’s house he has no ulterior purpose beyond

his reception into the circle of the masters.

88 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

through, and declares the young knight’s efforts to have been an

utter failure. Walter tries to defend himself, in his anguish begs

for another chance, and finally cries out in the greatest despair,

“Have mercy, masters!” and “ rushes away as though annihi¬

lated.”

When in the second act Walter meets Eva again, he gives vent

to this despondency and bitterness, and also to his disappointment

in the mastersingers ’ ways. In his desperate state of mind he

plans and attempts to abduct his lady-love, but Hans Sachs, who

has taken a fancy to him, frustrates this bold scheme, with the

best of intentions for the young couple. At the same time Sachs

utilizes the opportunity to vex and get even with the marker.

Beckmesser, intending to humiliate Sachs, has twitted him for not

finishing a pair of shoes that he had ordered from him. Now when

in the night prior to the great singing-contest the marker serenades

the girl with the song with which on the next day he hopes to

triumph over his rivals, Sachs, whose workshop is just opposite

Pogner’s house, likewise starts a loud song, since, as he explains

to the angry marker, he must sing in order to keep himself awake

when working so late at night; and no one knows better than

Beckmesser himself that the job must be done forthwith, for has

he not just a few hours since reminded Master Sachs most forcibly

that he is neglecting his duty as cobbler for the sake of his poetic

attempts. At last he promises the unfortunate marker that he

will stop singing, only the latter must permit him to indicate the

mistakes that he detects in Beckmesser ’s song in his own way, as

a shoemaker, by a hammer-stroke on the shoe over the last. Beck¬

messer sings, and Sachs uses his hammer very liberally. The

critical taps on the lapstone thoroughly infuriate and confuse the

marker, but all that he elicits from Sachs is the placid question

whether he is done. “Not nearly!” the marker cries, and Sachs

laughing holds up the shoes, the job having been finished merely

by the hammer markings. Beckmesser now bellows forth the re¬

mainder of his song without a pause, and fails most woefully in

the eyes of the female figure at the window. David has recognized

the latter as his beloved Magdalene and rushes out to fall upon

the singer, the noise calls out the other neighbors, and a battle

royal is the result. During this brawl Hans Sachs thwarts the at¬

tempt of Walter to abduct Eva, and takes him into his house.

On the next morning we listen to a long monolog of Sachs as

he sits in the bright sunlight, leaning back in his armchair, sur¬

rounded with books, a large volume on his knees, on which he

props up his arm while he muses on the state and condition of

poetry: “Is the fair art really coming to an end? Is it possible

that I, a shoemaker, should be the only one to breathe in the realm

of the great German past?” He continues philosophizing on the

decline of poetry, and sinks into a brooding mood, asking himself

whether his trade could dishonor him, — no indeed, for does it not

Roedder — “Die Meister singer von Numb erg .”

89

provide for him a better and more honorable livelihood than the

singing guild? Walter, who now enters, reveals to Sachs his keen

disappointment in his Nuremberg experiences: he had placed

high hopes on the mastersingers, from the repugnant present in

which he lived they were to lead him into a beautiful poetic life ;

here he had expected to find remnants of the ancient Thuringian

spirit, and now such disillusionment! He informs Sachs of the

poetry he has written hitherto, under the influence of the Helden-

buch and the great Wolfram, songs celebrating the great heroes

and emperors, and he submits to the older man his latest minne-

song, which makes Sachs exclaim, “You are a poet!” But, he

adds, “you can no longer thrive as such.” For he himself feels

keenly the pressure that weighs upon him: he was born to live

in an unpoetic age. “With a melancholy humor he depicts to Wal¬

ter the epoch in which they live, the imminent extinction of the

last mournful remnant of the old poetry, the mastersong! . . .

Believe me, for a long, long time poetry will be forgotten. Peo¬

ple will fight with other weapons than songs: with reason, with

philosophy, against stupidity and superstition ; aye, with the

sword they will defend these new weapons : you, who cherish such

fine, noble sentiments, are to join in such combat, and thus you

can achieve more than through the use of a gift that no one nowa¬

days appreciates. Sometime perhaps, after centuries have elapsed

and a new world has begun, they will turn back again and look

upon that which they once had: then they may possibly chance

upon Hans Sachs, and he will point the way farther back and

lead them to Walter, Wolfram, and the hero lays.” And when

the young knight asks him, “Advise me then, what am I to do?”

Sachs answers cheerfully, “Return to your castle, study what Ul¬

rich von Hutten and he of Wittenberg have written, and if it be

necessary defend what you have learned with the sword!” But

Walter’s thoughts run in another direction: “Very well, master!

But now I need a wife!”

Beckmesser, disconsolate over his failure in the previous night,

comes to Sachs, whom he holds responsible for his plight, and de¬

mands from him a new song for the competition. Sachs hands

him Walter’s song, pretending not to know where it came from,

and advising him to pay due attention to a suitable tune to sing

it to. The conceited marker deems himself invincible on this

score, and in the presence of the masters and the population of

Nuremberg who are to pronounce judgment, he sings the poem to

an utterly unsuited and disfiguring melody, so that he fails again,

and this time decisively. In his rage he charges Sachs with fraud,

in foisting on him a disgraceful poem. Sachs, however, asserts

that the poem is very good indeed, only it must be set to suitable

music. It is agreed that he who knows the right tune shall be de¬

clared victor. Walter naturally steps forward and with his sing¬

ing wins the bride, but disdains reception into the masters’ guild,

90 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

which is now offered to him. Sachs then begins to sing the praise

of the mastersingers’ guild half ironically, half seriously, dwelling

on its good features and the excellent things that have been pre¬

served and fostered by it. Thereby he assuages the mastersingers

themselves and wins them over. He closes with the words:

‘E’en should the Holy Roman Empire perish,

We’d still have holy German art to cherish.’ ”

Fully sixteen years after the completion of the Marienbad draft,

on October 3,0, 1861, Wagner wrote to his publisher Franz Schott

informing him that he expected to resume an old plan for a comic

opera :

“The opera is entitled Die Meistersinger von Numb erg, and the

poetical and jovial chief hero is Hans Sachs. The subject matter

has in it very much that is genial and droll, and I am pleased to

think that I have hit upon something unexpected and ingenious

in this plan, which is entirely of my own invention.’ ’

And on November 20, he added:

“When I surveyed this year, which was in every respect lost

to me, I asked myself, what am I to do? All of a sudden my

whimsical Mastersingers rose up before me, and at one blow I felt

myself again master of my fate. Evidently my good star had

formerly suggested to me this unique and even jolly subject, in

order to help me with it at the most critical moment. ”

From these remarks it is manifest that Wagner, at least at the

time of the execution of his plan, regarded the subject as entirely

his own. Neither do we have any statement from him at the time

of its inception which would contradict his later assertion. And

so Professor Golther seems fully justified in saying:8

‘ ‘ So far as the Meistersinger is concerned, we can hardly speak

of sources, so irrelevant and insignificant are the few external

traits that emanate from literary sources. Werner and Welti

have collected the few pertinent data in Kursehners Wagner jahr-

buch, 1886. 9 As the historical coloring of the tenth century was

employed in Lohengrin in a novel and independent manner, so

Wagner introduced in the Meistersinger the cultural background

8 Richard Wagners dramatische Dichtungen im Verhaltnis zu ihren Quellen.

Biihne und Welt, I, 2 (1898-99), p, 579.

0This book was not at my disposal.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Niirnberg.”

91

of the sixteenth century, especially from Wagcnseil’s well-known

mastersinger book. 1 no

In the Introduction to his edition of Wagner ’s works, p. 286,

Golther says,

“The original plan appears as a comic opera, which for the out¬

ward course of the action took a few things from Deinhardstein ’s

drama Hans Sachs (1827) and from Lortzing-Reger ’s opera, but

in the main was freely invented. ” * - . . ■ . ,

r

Over against this minimizing of foreign influences, we "have in

Miss Anna Maude Bowen’s Cornell dissertation (published at

Munich in 1897) a scrupulous, almost meticulous attempt to gather

every detail that Wagner might possibly have taken from others.* 11

Miss Bowen even deems it necessary to defend Wagner against a

possible charge of plagiarism for his adoption of motives. Wag¬

ner himself tells us in his autobiographical writings as a rule

quite freely and fully about the genesis of his poetic works — we

learn from his pages, e.g., that Das Liebesverbot was based on

Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure, and Die Feen on Gozzi’s La

Donna Serpent e — and informs us concerning the poetic process

of transforming the subject matter thus provided until it suits

his purposes. As he does not mention the plays named above,

and as he refers to his mastersinger comedy distinctly as an in¬

vention of his own, it is obvious that Golther and Miss Bowen con¬

nect very different ideas with the term sources. Curiously enough,

Miss Bowen overlooked Goethe’s Poem Hans Sachsens poetische

Sendung (1776), which, if anything, must be termed a source of

Wagner’s work if we turn our attention to the characterization

of Hans Sachs. That she should not have mentioned Gervinus ’s

Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung is not to be wondered at, since

at the time when the monograph was written Wagner’s autobiog¬

raphy Mein Leben had not yet appeared. Looking upon Wag¬

ner’s drama as a large stream the works that Miss Bowen cites

10 The reference is to Johann Christoph Wagenseil, Be Civitate Norimbergensi

Commentatio, with its appendix Buch von der Meistersinger holdseligen Kunst

Anfang, Fortubung , Nutzbarkeiten und Lehr-Satzen. Altorf 1697.

11 The subject was suggested to Miss Bowen by her erstwhile teacher, Pro¬

fessor Franz Muncker, who in his book Richard Wagner. Eine Skizze seines

Lebens und Wirkens (2nd ed., Bamberg 1909) , p. 99f., enumerates the works

quoted by Miss Bowen, without however attaching much importance to their

influence.

92 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters .

do not appear to ns as its headwaters, but as little rivulets which

join it at some distance below and are carried along without for

a moment changing its original course. Dropping the figurative

speech we shall be content to speak of Wagner’s literary precur¬

sors rather than of his sources.

The most important of these is Johann Ludwig Franz Dein-

hardstein. Born in Vienna, June 21, 1794 — almost exactly three

hundred years after Hans Sachs — Deinhardstein became professor

of classical literature and aesthetics in the university of his native

city in 1827, and in the same year wrote his Hans Sachs, Schau-

spiel in vier Aufziigen.12 From 1832 to 1841 he was vice-director

of the Vienna court theater; from 1841 to his death, July 12,

1859, dramatic censor in the same institution. His plays, col¬

lected in seven volumes, have gone to well-merited oblivion, and

his stage versions of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew and

Twelfth Night have now been superseded by the originals on prac¬

tically all German stages. The only connection Deinhardstein

still has with the modern stage is through his Hans Sachs, and this

but indirectly, as the source of Lortzing’s comic opera. In its

day Deinhardstein ’s drama enjoyed an extraordinary success.

The first performance took place at the Royal Court Theater of

Berlin, February 13, 1828, preceded by a prolog which Goethe

had written for the occasion (“Da stehf ich in der Fremde ganz

allein”). How highly Goethe thought of Deinhardstein ’s work

is evidenced by the following lines :

“Und wie auch noch so lange getrennt

ein Freund den andern wiedererkennt,

hat auch ein Frommer neuerer Zeit

sich an des Vorfahren Tugend erfreut,

und hingeschrieben unit leichter Hand,

als stiind ■ es farbig an der Wiand,

und zwar mit Worten so verstdndig,

als wurde Gemaltes wieder lebendig

We no longer share Goethe’s high opinion of Deinhardstein ’s

drama. It probably was subconsciously due to the fact that Dein¬

hardstein here paid tribute to a figure that had meant so much to

the youthful Goethe. And it must be conceded that owing to its

unprecedented run on the stage it resuscitated and popularized the

12 Conveniently accessible in Reclams Universal-Bibliothek, No. 3215.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Niirriberg.” 93

figure of Hans Sachs for the whole nation, just as Goethe’s Hans

Sacks ’s Poetic Mission had aroused the interest of the poets of

the Storm and Stress period, after the untutored artisan-poet had

for two centuries been despised as a wretched rhymester.

The rising curtain reveals to us Hans Sachs, a young man of

twenty-three years, seated beneath a blooming tree in his garden,

trying in vain to write a poem, more dreaming than composing.

One of his fellow mastersingers comes to return to him his poem

4 'The Goddess’s Nine Gifts;” with very adverse comment, since

Sachs has in it, as he thinks, grossly offended against the rules of

poetry and also failed to show the modesty becoming so young

a writer. A second mastersinger joins them and announces a

meeting of the guild, at which new privileges granted by Emperor

Maximilian are to be proclaimed. That these privileges are due

mostly to Sachs’s writings, which have found favor with the em¬

peror, the two mastersingers, stung with jealousy, carefully con¬

ceal from their young colleague. Nor is Sachs envied by his

brothers in Apollo alone: James the baker and Martin the grocer

likewise find fault with him, unconsciously feeling his superiority:

Jakob. Er ist fast jeglichem ein Dorn im Aug’,

der Meister Superklug.

Zweiter Meisters anger. • Er hat Talent,

das ist wohl wahr — allein —

Erster Meistersanger. Talent! — Talent! —

Wir brauchen kein Talent, Tabulaturam

soil er befolgen; die Aequivoca,

die Relativa und die blinden Worte

soil er vermeiden, keine Milben brauchen,

glatt singen soli er, das begehren wir ,

nicht aber dabei zucken, wie er’s tut ,

das macht den Dichter und nicht das Talent.

Talent kann jeder haben, aber nicht

das rechte Ohr und jene Sorgsamkeit,

so uns die Fehler klug vermeiden lassen,

und die sprech ’ ich ihm ab; er ist noch nicht

gesetzt genug, ihm macht die Phantasei

zu vielen Schaden noch.

Jakob (der erstaunt zugehort hat, zu Martin).

Das ist ein Mann

von anderm Schrote als der Meister Sachs;

wenn man den reden hort, da lernt man was.

I have quoted in full what I regard as the best passage in the

whole play. 0 si sic omnia! But unfortunately the spectator is

supposed to believe in the greatness of Deinhardstein’s hero more

94 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

on the basis of the judgment of others, especially the rancorous

aspersions of his jealous associates, than on the basis of any posi¬

tive achievements of his own. This is the snag that any frail

craft sailing on the perilous waters of the Kiinstlerdrama is so

apt to strike, and which Wagner so skilfully avoided — in the Mei-

stersinger we are not merely invited but actually forced to believe

in the greatness of both Hans Sachs and Walter von Stolzing, be¬

cause we receive in both cases irrefragable proof of it, instead of

having to infer it by antithesis from Beckmesser ’s malicious sneers.

The scene changes, and the author takes us to a garden in front

of the house of Master Steffen, a rich goldsmith, the father of

Sachs’s lady-love, Kunigunde, who returns her lover’s affection

but is very anxious that he should give up his lowly calling, since

her purse-proud father would never consent to the marriage of his

only child with a cobbler. Sachs however takes a manly stand and

is not willing to humor her; on the contrary, he makes up his

mind to sue now openly for the girl’s hand. No sooner has Sachs

left than Steffen enters and announces to his daughter that he has

brought her a birthday gift, the Augsburg councillor Eoban Runge,

to whom he has promised his daughter in marriage. Eoban, to set

him off against Hans Sachs, is depicted as an intolerable coxcomb

and coward, and when Sachs shortly afterwards reappears on the

scene, a quarrel ensues in which Sachs easily shows himself the

superior of Kunigunde ’s unwelcome suitor.

The second act takes us to the square in front of Hans Sachs’s

house. We learn that at the meeting of the mastersingers ’ guild

he has been so mercilessly ridiculed on account of his latest poem

that he has left the assembly pale and trembling. He complains

of his humiliation in a monolog. In this mood he meets his rival

Eoban for the second time. Eoban has torn his shoe on the sharp

cobble-stones of the Nuremberg pavement, and seeing the shoe¬

maker’s sign, demands that the hole be mended forthwith. Learn¬

ing that his fellow suitor is a shoemaker, he hurries away to Kuni¬

gunde, to convey to her the supposed bit of news. Before he ar¬

rives, Kunigunde has almost coaxed her father into consenting to

her marriage with Sachs, provided that he can approve of her

lover’s calling, when Eoban rushes in, out of breath, to impart his

information. In her confusion she promises to wed the Augsburg

councillor if what he has stated be correct, hoping of course that

under the pressure of circumstances Sachs will now be willing to

give up his trade, which, being a wealthy man, he need not pursue

anyway. But Sachs, who comes to ask openly for Kunigunde ’s

hand, is now more determined than ever to remain true to his

work, and Kunigunde, exasperated beyond patience, bids him leave

her for good.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Niimberg.”

95

Grieved and sad, Sachs has left Nuremberg in quest of a new

home elsewhere. In a large forest at some distance from his un¬

grateful native city, he meets a distinguished-looking stranger in

hunter’s garb, who is none other than the Emperor Maximilian,

traveling incognito, on his way to Nuremberg. The stranger wants

Sachs to show him the way, and on learning his guide’s name is

overjoyed, since he values him very highly as a poet, and the same

opinion he says is held by the monarch himself. The latter would

certainly be pleased to meet him, and if Sachs ever should have a

special request would do his best to comply with it. Thoroughly

appeased, Sachs returns to Nuremberg with his new friend, whom

he imagines to be a powerful count and high dignitary of the court.

Again the scene changes, and once more we are in Master Stef¬

fen’s garden. Eoban, decked out for the approaching wedding,

gets scant encouragement from the disconsolate Kunigunde, who

cannot forgive herself for her treatment of Sachs. He hopes to

compel her to accept him as her husband, and when a number of

citizens bring the announcement that Steffen has been elected

burgomaster of the city, Eoban is the first to convey this precious

piece of news to his prospective father-in-law, with the intimation

that he was chiefly instrumental in bringing about this decision.

Steffen promises Eoban that Kunigunde shall wed him on this very

day, and as he is about to force her to consent, Sachs, who with

the emperor’s retinue has just passed by outside, leaps over the

wall to protect the girl and threatens to invoke the law against the

father and would-be bridegroom. Steffen, who himself now repre¬

sents the majesty of the law, commands him to leave the premises

instantly. Kunigunde, awakening from a swoon, entreats Sachs

to forgive her and plights her troth to him anew. With the definite

promise that he will protect her, Sachs hurries away, confident of

success.

In the emperor’s ante-room, in Act Four, Sachs craves an im¬

mediate interview with the supposed count, and is directed to re¬

pair to the city hall square within an hour. Here, in the next and

final scene, the burghers are assembling for the festive installation

of the new mayor, and we learn that the council has decreed Sachs’s

banishment for having broken the peace in entering Steffen’s gar¬

den. Sachs is informed by Kunigunde of the impending edict,

and decides to leave the city at once. Kunigunde is resolved to

accompany him, though Sachs tries to dissuade her, and as she

clings to him, Steffen with the councillors and citizens steps forth

from the city hall and proclaims the decree against Sachs, on which

Eoban comments with malicious jeers. The emperor appears in

the nick of time. After eliciting Steffen’s legal opinion on a ficti¬

tious case in which a jewel was withheld from the man to whom it

rightfully belonged, he discloses his identity, and declares Kuni¬

gunde to be the jewel and Sachs the rightful owner according to

the burgomaster’s judicial wisdom. Steffen urges his debt of grati-

96 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

tude to Eoban and the latter’s supposed assistance in clothing him

with his new dignity, but is quickly disillusioned, and as the Augs¬

burg councillor steals away, Kunigunde crowns Sachs with a laurel

wreath, and the whole assembly burst out in cheers for the emperor.

From Deinhardstein’s own prolog to his play, we are led to con¬

clude that Hans Sachs is not the real hero of the drama, or that at

least he shares this distinction with Emperor Max :

“Und so empfehlen deutsche Verse wir;

die schildern, wie ein grosser deutscher Fiirst

mit Macht und Weisheit GiLte auch vereint,

und eines deutschen Dichters Eigenheit

dem heissgelieMen deutschen Vaterlande .”

The characterization of Hans Sachs is the weakest part of the play.

The reader finds it difficult to conceive how the interest of the spec¬

tator in the hyper sentimental young man can possibly be sus¬

tained.13 About half a dozen times the stage directions prescribe

that his words and ways should be gutmutig • There is nothing

about Master Steffen to commend him to our sympathy, and Eoban

has no redeeming features whatever, not even as a comic figure.

The synopsis will have sufficed to show how much the play leaves

to be desired structurally.

When Philipp Reger (1804-1857) in 1839 wrote the book for

Lortzing’s opera Hans Sachs, jointly with his friends Philipp Jakob

Diiringer (1809-1870) and Gustav Albert Lortzing (1801-1851),

basing his text on Deinhardstein’s drama, almost all of the numer¬

ous changes he made were improvements on the original.14 Rene

Doumic says, “On ne ref ait pas une piece, on en fait une autre,”

and, naturally, either a better or a poorer one. To preface what

we have to say with what will be our final verdict, Lortzing-Reger ’s

opera ( Diiringer ’s share does not amount to very much) would to

this day enjoy well merited popularity had not Wagner ’s Meister-

singeir crowded it off the stage by its superior qualities. After see¬

ing Shakespeare’s masterpieces, only an antiquarian would desire

13 And yet the audiences at the time of the first appearance of the play seem

to have taken a great fancy to this character. In Hamburg the actor imper¬

sonating him received from the shoemakers’ guild a diploma promising to him,

his children, and his children’s children, free shoes for their lifetimes.

14 The text with a very illuminative introduction by G. R. Kruse, can be

had as No. 4488 of Reclams Universal-Bibliothek.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von NurnbergK” 97

to witness a performance of the plays of his predecessors, no mat¬

ter how good they might be in themselves.

The first scene takes place in Sachs’s shop. The journeymen are

busy working; Gorg, the apprentice, has fallen asleep over his job

and is unceremoniously, by a blow with the stirrup, awakened by

the others, who flout his pretensions to proficiency in poetry, his

master’s art. When the hour to stop work for the day has come,

Gorg, remaining behind alone, detects a manuscript of his master’s,

a poem written for the occasion of his sweetheart’s birthday, which

Gorg purloins, in order to read it to his beloved Kordula, the cou¬

sin of Sachs’s lady-love Kunigunde, daughter of Master Steffen,

the goldsmith. An unknown visitor, Emperor Maximilian, enters

to pay his respects to Sachs, whose poetry, he tells him, the monarch

and the whole court appreciate very highly. Sachs, who has en¬

tered from the garden, can at first scarcely believe such good news,

which indemnifies him for many hours of grief in his unapprecia¬

tive native city. He is now in the right mood to compose his

prize poem for the competition that is to take place on the next

day. Then, as he is about to leave for Master Steffen’s house,

Eoban Hesse15, an Augsburg councillor and also a mastersinger,

demands his professional services in repairing a hole in his shoe.

While Gorg attends to the job, with many facetious remarks at the

stranger’s expense, Sachs learns from the latter’s words his real

purpose in coming to Nuremberg : Master Steffen has promised him

the hand of his daughter, and Sachs’s happiness seems short-lived.

Kunigunde, whom we meet in the next scene in her father’s gar¬

den, is very much distressed at Eoban ’s wooing, but the energetic

Kordula encourages her, and Sachs, who with Gorg appears for

his visit, is confident of his success in next day’s competition,

which he thinks will win over Kunigunde ’s father. But the

haughty Master Steffen, unfortunately, is just now apprised of his

election as burgomaster, and Eoban is quick to enter complaint

against the shoemaker, from whose own mouth he has heard of his

love for Kunigunde. In the contest Sachs sings16 the praise of

15 Helius Eobanus Hesse — or Hessus, since according to the custom of the

scholars of his time he Latinized his name — was a noted German humanist

(1488-1540), who wrote Latin poetry of marvelous elegance of form and

since 1526 held the chair of poetics in the newly founded Nuremberg univer¬

sity. To his contemporaries he was best known through his Bohemian habits

and his stupendous feats in drinking. His portrait, preserved in a sixteenth

century woodcut, shows him as a handsome middle-aged man of serious mien.

Being a writer of Latin verses, he naturally would have laughed at the idea

of ever joining the mastersingers.

16 Or rather speaks, except the last line, which is sung. This is one of the

inexplicable oddities of the opera, and proves that the authors knew very little

about the rules of mastersong. To the mastersingers the tune was everything,

and the text was of very subordinate consideration. Cf. Gervinus, in the

Appendix.

7— S. A. Li.

98 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

Ver Liebe Gluck, das Vaterland, and the assembled people are

unanimous for according to him the prize, but Steffen decides in

favor of Eoban, who recites an incredibly silly mastersong on Ab¬

salom’s rebellion against David. The jealous mastersingers side

with Steffen, and the latter publicly announces his daughter’s be¬

trothal to Eoban. During a public festival on a meadow outside

the city walls, Gorg reads to Kordula the poem which he has filched

from his master as his own, then loses the manuscript, which falls

into the hands of some crossbowmen of the emperor, and they

pocket it with the intention of handing it to Max, whose fondness

for poetry is universally known. Hans Sachs, deeply grieved by

his humiliation at the contest in the morning, has made up his

mind to leave Nuremberg, and comes to the festival only in order

to bid farewell to Kunigunde. Like her prototype in Deinhard-

stein’s play, she tries to coax Sachs into giving up his trade, but

is not so insistent and more than willing to ask his forgiveness

when she notices how she has hurt his feelings. As they embrace,

Steffen and Eoban step out of the burgomaster’s tent, and Steffen

after a brief conference with the councillors pronounces the decree

of banishment for Sachs. Sachs leaves, accompanied by the faith¬

ful Gorg, who is resolved to share his master’s exile. Steffen soon

repents of the council’s action: Emperor Maximilian, who has just

arrived in the city, wishes to meet the author of the verses that his

soldier has handed him — Sachs’s poem which Gorg had appropri¬

ated for his own use. With Maximilian, Sachs has returned to

Nuremberg, and during a clandestine visit at Steffen’s house over¬

hears an agreement between Steffen and Eoban according to which

Eoban is to pose as the author. In the last scene at the great ban¬

quet hall the emperor demands that Eoban prove his authorship,

and his attempt fails dismally. Sachs naturally recites his poem

by heart and is publicly acknowledged as the author. After this

recognition by the sovereign, the authorities of the city are of

course only too glad to receive Sachs back into their fold, Kuni¬

gunde is solemnly betrothed to Sachs, and the curtain drops amid

jubilant cheers for the monarch.

The few external features that Wagner’s work shows in com¬

mon with Reger and Lortzing’s adaptation of Deinhardstein’s

drama may be briefly summarized as follows: A young and en¬

thusiastic poet fails before the guild of the older men, as a result

of their incapacity and unwillingness to understand and appre¬

ciate his superiority. A poem composed by the hero is stolen by a

rival, and the latter is put to shame when asked to recite it. Gorg,

Hans Sachs’s apprentice in the earlier opera, is a votary at the

shrine of the Muses, as is David in the Meister singer. Gorg and

Kordula are the forebears of David and Magdalene, excepting

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurriberg.” 99

that in the latter ease the girl is about a dozen, or perhaps a score,

of years older than her swain.17 Eoban’s song of Absalom is as

silly as Beckmesser’s serenade. That is all. That there should be

choruses of journeymen, and cobbler songs, is almost imperative

in a musical work dealing with Hans Sachs. The invention of the

festival on the meadow in Lortzing’s opera and the blooming tree

in Hans Sachs’s garden in Deinhardstein’s play would not require

an exuberant poetic imagination and need not be accounted for on

the basis of “influence.” Both features are in Wagner’s play

much more organically connected with the action than in either

of the other two works.

Of internal relationship between Reger-Lortzing’s work on one

hand and Wagner’s on the other I am not able to detect any pro¬

nounced traces. Granting, for argument’s sake, that the poetic

idea of Wagner’s comedy is present in embryo in the earlier play,

it will be generally conceded that it has been very badly stunted,

if not shriveled and wizened in its growth. If, at the time of the

publication of Wagner’s text and the first performances of the

opera, any distinct similarity with Lortzing’s work had been felt,

Wagner’s numerous enemies, who attacked the Meistersinger as

viciously as his earlier creations, would most certainly have pointed

it out, to disparage the composer. But there is to my knowledge

not a trace of this in all the acrimonious criticism of the sixties,

which today strikes us as so irresistibly amusing.

If we point out similarities in Lortzing’s and Wagner’s works,

it is but fair to call attention to a radical difference. In the ear¬

lier opera, as in Deinhardstein’s drama, the emperor plays a

very significant part and toward the end overshadows the hero

completely. In fact, Emperor Max is a sort of deus ex machina,

without whose intervention in favor of the poet the latter’s fate

would remain very dubious. Neither does in Deinhardstein’s and

Reger-Lortzing ’s plays the principal figure fight for the recogni¬

tion of a new principle in poetry: here he is only, or is supposed

to be, the superior of his colleagues and thereby becomes the ob¬

ject of their open and secret hostilities. In Wagner’s play the

victory at the end is not bestowed as a present from above; it is

17 1 do not see the necessity of assuming that I^unigunde and Kordula have

been patterned after Agathe and Aennchen in Weber’s Freischiitz. They may

have been ; but cousins of about the same age and different temper and out¬

look on life do not appear to be so exceeding scarce in the pages of literature.

100 Wisconsin Academy of Science s, Arts, and Letters.

the natural and organic result of a battle royal that Walter von

Stolzing and, directly and indirectly with him, Hans Sachs have

been fighting. There is here no monarch, the weight of whose

personal opinion could have borne down with it the resistance of

the opponents. Indeed, it is characteristic that in Wagner’s Nu¬

remberg, the free imperial city, the emperor’s name should not

once be mentioned. May we not in this fact see an indication of

the democratic sentiments that filled Wagner’s soul in the years

prior to the Revolution of 1848, and that subsequently led to his

political activity in the interest of this movement as well as to

his flight from Germany and his long exile ? And is it not worthy

of recognition that Wagner in the final execution of the Meister-

singer did not introduce any features that might have detracted

from the glory of his Nurembergers’ civic pride and love of free¬

dom, although his intimate friendship with King Ludwig II. of

Bavaria might very easily have suggested such to him ?

A word will have to suffice concerning Wagner’s indebtedness

to E. T. A. Hoffmann’s narrative Meister Martin der Kiifner und

seine Gesellen,t to which Miss Bowen assigns the distinction of

having furnished the chief motive of the plot of the Meister singer,

viz., that Master Martin’s daughter Rosa is offered as a prize for

a masterwork (not, it must be noted, for a poetic or musical mas¬

terpiece), only on condition that she herself consent (1. c., p. 54) :

“ There can be no doubt that Wagner drew his principal motive

thus from this very tale.” While Hoffmann’s influence on Wag¬

ner must be admitted — Hoffmann’s Kampf der Sanger was one

of the works that inspired the Tannhduser — the motive in ques¬

tion here is so often used in the literature of the first half of the

last century that it seems indeed presuming to try to locate its

first appearance precisely. The frequency with which it occurs

is no doubt sufficiently accounted for by the fact that in the early

decades of the nineteenth century the paterna potestas disposing

of a daughter ’s hand was already greatly on the wane in Germany.

The other references to mastersinging in Hoffmann’s tale may

possibly have kindled the youthful Wagner’s interest in this fea¬

ture of the German past, but it is just as likely that in his very

intensive studies of German antiquities he had become acquainted

with it.

There remain three more works that must be mentioned in this

connection. One of these was unearthed from the archives of

j Roedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg.” 101

the Royal Opera at Dresden by Kurt Mey18 and bears the title

Hans Sachs. Im vorgeriickten Alter. Romantisch-komisches Sing-

spiel in zwei Akten. Musik von Adalbert Gyrowetz (1763—1850).

It seems that the opera was performed, or a performance contemp¬

lated, in 1834. The writer of the book is not named. The text

is very romantic indeed, but could not have offered Wagner any

suggestions. We need not enter here into its contents. The only

feature that should be recorded is the character of the hero, who

is depicted as a mature and experienced man, a roguish poet full

of humor, a citizen proud of his work, modest and yet superior to

all the rest. This I quote on the authority of Mey, and I have

to take it on the same authority that Wagner’s conception of the

character is infinitely deeper and his portrayal much more

poetic. It is questionable whether Wagner ever knew of the ex¬

istence of Gyrowetz’ opera. His position as musical director of

the Dresden opera may have given him a chance to become ac¬

quainted with it. It is however extremely unlikely that he ever

read it. We should be willing, even if there were documentary

proof of this fact, to accept in full Wagner’s word that Die Mei¬

stersinger is his own invention.19

A scene which in its broad humor and in its combination of

comic elements may be regarded as the archetype of the scene of

Beckmesser’s serenade and the attendant circumstances is found

in August von Kotzebue’s Die deutschen Kleinstadter (1802). 20

It is found in Act IY, scenes 3-5. While the lovelorn Sperling is

singing before the window of his chosen one, Sabine herself is in

the company of Herr Olmers, to whom she has plighted her troth,

and Sabine’s aunt, Frau Staar, is singing her evening hymn, in¬

terrupted by, and in turn disturbing, Sperling’s musical efforts.

To make confusion worse confounded, the nightwatchman appears

on the scene with his call and blowing his oxhorn, and Sabine and

Olmers are forced to hide behind a lamp post until the danger is

past. All the elements entering into the delightful scene in front

of Pogner’s house while Beckmesser sings his prize song, disturbed

18 Cf. his Der Meistergesang in G-eschichte und Kunst. Leipzig- o. J. (See-

mann) .

19 In this connection it is interesting to learn that Wagner at one time con¬

templated treating Hans Sachs’s second marriage — provided that a note of

Professor Golther’s in Biihne und Welt , I, 2, 579, is correct. I am unable to

verify it.

20 My attention was called to this by two of my colleagues independently,

Miss A. B. Ernst and Professor A. R. Hohlfeld.

102 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

by Hans Sachs’s Schusterlied, and Walter and Eva are hiding

behind the bushes in Pogner’s garden, are here found together.

Wagner certainly was acquainted with Kotzebue’s play, which

was a great stage favorite when he was young, and the make-up

of the scene in question must have made its way into his comedy

unconsciously.

The last work that we have to consider is Ferdinand Raimund ’s

drama Die gefesselte Phantasie. Raimund (1790-1836) is known

to German literature as the master of the Vienna magic- and fairy-

play in the early decades of the last century. His <( Phantasy En¬

chained” was written in 1826 and represents his first attempt at

a serious drama that tries to attain its effects without resorting to

parody and travesty. It was not performed before 1828, January

28, a couple of weeks before the first performance of Deinhard-

stein’s Hans Sachs.21

Phantasy, the goddess to whom all poets owe their inspiration, is

captured by two direful sorceresses, the sisters Vipria and Arro-

gantia, at a time when her assistance to her protegees is most urg¬

ently needed; for Hermione, the youthful queen of the island of

Flora, has promised her hand and heart to the successful competi¬

tor in a poetic contest, confident that her beloved Amphio will be

the victor. This Amphio is a young prince, the son of the king

of Athunt, but in true fairy tale fashion has hitherto concealed his

identity and nevertheless won Hermione ’s love, tending her fa¬

vorite flock as a shepherd and writing enamored verses in praise

of his mistress. The contest is to take place in the evening of the

day on which the play opens. When the two magic sisters learn

that it is Phantasy on whom the poets depend for their inspiration,

they waylay her and then secure a most repugnant Vienna ale¬

house harpist by the name of Nachtigall, whom they plan to make

the husband of Hermione, on the terms proposed and sworn to by

the young queen when she announced the contest. Nachtigall is

introduced to the enchained goddess, and tries first by fair words

and finally by brute force to get her to dictate to him the neces-

21 1 believe that Raimund knew Deinhardstein’s drama when he wrote his

play. There seems to be an allusion to Hans Sachs in Act I, scene 2, where

Distichon, the court poet, says : Wir haben keinen Schnee, als wenn uns

Zephyr weisse Bliiten streut ; darum begeistert uns der ewige Blumenduft und

weihet uns zu Priestern des Apoll, so dass der Schuster selbst mit einer Hand

nur seinen Stiefel schafft, in der andern halt er hoch die goldne Leier:

“Sein kiihner Geist ist mit Apoll verwandt,

1st seine Leier gleich mit Schustergaim bespannt.>>

The quotation marks here, which are Raimund’s own, seem significant. In

another place Distichon says, “Ich werfe sie mit Knittelreimen tot.” The

doggerel verse is characteristic of Hans Sachs’s tales and farces.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg.”

103

sary lines for the prize poem. From the misunderstood sentences

that Phantasy in her distress utters he manufactures the veriest

nonsense, and finally runs away in despair, determined to sing a

popular street ballad and merely to substitute the queen’s name

for the heroine’s. The poets of the whole island are in the worst

possible plight — not one of them succeeds in finding a single rhyme,

and Hermione is horrified to see that even her beloved Amphio

has turned as stupid as all the rest. The fateful hour arrives—

Nachtigall is the only candidate to enter the lists, and Vipria and

Arrogantia, disguised as the priests of Apollo, declare that Her¬

mione must wed him if nobody produces a better poem, even

though all those assembled are incensed and furious at Nachti¬

gall ’s song. All seems lost when Phantasy, in the supreme moment

freed by Jupiter, appears on the scene and inspires Amphio to

sing Hermione ’s praise in a long poem at the close of which he

reveals his identity. Apollo appears in person to plunge the two

sorceresses into the deepest depths of Orcus, and Amphio and

Hermione are married, and, let us hope, live happily ever after.

It is to be regretted that Raimund’s poetic power did not suffice

to do justice to this idea, which would have been worthy of Shakes¬

peare’s pen. He lacked markedly what Coleridge calls ‘'the

shaping spirit of imagination.” Die gefesselte Phantasie is one

of his weakest plays, and appears on the modern stage only at

long intervals. Even Schubert’s music does not sustain it on the

boards.22 In the author’s own time this evidently was different:

22 The following extract from Eugen Kilian, Felix Mottl. Karlsruher Erin-

nerungen (in Siiddeutsche Monatshefte, 1911—12, I, 488—496 ; reprinted in Aus

der Praxis der modernen Dramaturgie. Der Dramaturgischen Blatter zweite

Reihe. Miinchen 1914, pp. 294-302), gives a good idea of the possibilities con¬

tained in Raimund’s play when properly staged : “Mottl was especially de¬

lighted with conducting the musical rehearsals of Raimund’s magic-play Die

gefesselte Phantasie, with Franz Schubert’s music arranged for this purpose.

This new musical adaptation of the old Vienna magic-play, the arrangement

of the music of Schubert’s long forgotten Magic Haw for Raimund’s work,

and its further embellishment with Schubert tunes and dances, was an ex¬

ceedingly felicitous and in its way ingenious idea of Mottl’s. This superb

score deserves first rank among all his works belonging under this head.

My co-operation with Mottl in the rehearsals of this play belongs among

the most beautiful reminiscences from the time of my Karlsruhe activity.

Mottl set his whole heart on, and watched over, this creation, on which the

double star of Raimund and Schubert beamed, with a truly touching tender¬

ness. The whole kindliness and warmheartedness of Old Vienna, the naive

and yet graceful, exquisitely humorous ingenuity of Raimund’s play was a

true heart’s delight to Mottl, the Viennese. It was blood of his blood, flesh

of his flesh that here he laid on the altar of art with patriotic pride. As he

was conducting the rehearsals at the piano, he would enjoy again and again

the charm and frolicsome humor of these Old Vienna figures, and could laugh

till he cried when Fritz Herz as Nachtigall in his duo with Phantasy chained

to the writing desk — one of the most superb gems of all humorous literature !

104 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

he took the play along on his tours and appeared as Nachtigall in

Munich, Hamburg, and Berlin, with distinct success (1832). Wag¬

ner may have made the acquaintance of Die gefesselte Phantasie

while he was musical director at Madgeburg. Indeed he may have

had to direct a performance of it in this capacity. Again, he may

have witnessed a performance of the play during his prolonged

stay in Vienna in 1861-1862. It is at present impossible to verify

any such surmises. Wagner had a high opinion of Raimund’s

poetic genius. In his essay on Das Wiener Hofoperntheater (1863 ;

Gesammelte Schriften vii, 295ff.), he says:23

“What Vienna quite of itself can do for even Art, on the path

of a purely speculative, an un-subventioned commerce with an

imaginative, gay and genial public, is proved by two of the most

original and delightful products in all the realm of public art : the

Magic-dramas of Baymund and the Waltzes of Strauss. If you

don ’t wish for higher things, then be content with this : indeed its

intrinsic worth is nothing to be made light of. ’ ’

And again, in TJeber Schauspieler und Sanger (written in the

early seventies, Gesammelte Schriften, 9, 186) :

“Out of the Viennese popular farce, with its types still dis¬

tinctly akin to the Kasperl and Hanswurst of old, we see Ray-

mund’s magic dramas rise up to the realm of a truly ingenious

theatrical poetry.”

Rudolf Fiirst in the introduction to his edition of Ferdinand

Raimund’s works (Goldene Klassiker-Bibliothek) , page LXV, says:

“The possiblity that the scene of the singing contest, the tri¬

umphant lover Amphio, and the caviling critic Distiehon24, in

conjunction with NachtigalFs attempts to piece together a prize

song from misunderstood fragments, may have influenced the

poet of Die Meister singer von Numb erg, can hardly be set lightly

aside.”

• — unfolded his magnificent, heartfelt humor. And when Fritz Plank, the ever

memorable, as the Vienna tapster in the capital alehouse scene of the first

act set his heavy, stout limbs in droll motion to the catching tunes of Schu¬

bert’s German Dances, then rapturous contentment gleamed in the eyes of

Mottl the artist : that was home, those were images and visions whose radi¬

ance derived from the native soil of Mozart and Grillparzer !”

23 Translation by William Ashton Ellis, Richard Wagner’s Prose Works, vol.

Ill (London, 1907), page 386.

24 “Das Gedicht ist voller Fehler.” Which it is, indeed. Amphio’s prize

song is the weakest part of the play.

105

Eoedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg.”

In its guarded form this statement is more of an hypothesis

than of a thesis. There might be something in it provided that

it can be shown that Wagner knew Raimund’s play before he pen¬

ned the Marienbad sketch. For all the features mentioned occur

also, as we have seen, in Lortzing’s opera.

What if Wagner had consciously utilized the work of his pre¬

decessors? I hope to have shown that he did not. But if Mo-

liere, charged with literary piracy, had really said, “Je prends

mon bien oil je le trouve” — a repartee invented by one of his de¬

tractors — he would have done so with a perfect right. In all

art it matters little what materials the artist uses, or where he

gets them. It does matter what he makes of them. And Die

Meistersinger von Numb erg is one of the few truly great come¬

dies of all literature.

With this assertion we are not paying Wagner’s work tribute

above its meed. The year 1918 witnessed the semi-centenial of

its first performance. Half a century is time enough for both

fulsome panegyrics and unfair personal criticism against the

poet’s individuality to give way to soberminded judgment, and

half a century has rendered its verdict.

No other work of Wagner’s is so narrowly circumscribed as re¬

gards time and place, and yet scarcely another is more universal

in its human appeal. “As a picture of medieval life,” says

Finck, 1. c., page 224, “it is as realistic, accurate, and delightful

as the best of Scott’s novels.” It is a wonderfully correct por¬

trait of sixteenth century life in the free imperial city of Nurem¬

berg in its most flourishing state, with its industrious citizens, its

proud trade and craft guilds, its pedantic but worthy and honor¬

able mastersingers, and the towering figure of its Hans Sachs. In

this respect it is the most distinctly German work of the com¬

poser, and it is noteworthy that he wrote the text during his stay

in Paris in 1861-62. In Wollen wir Jioffenf (1879; Gesammelte

Werke, x, 119 f.) he says:

“In my execution and presentation of the Meistersinger, which

at first I hoped to bring out in Nuremberg itself, I was guided

by the intention of offering to the German public a picture of its

own true nature which heretofore had been presented to it only

very unsatisfactorily, and I , cherished the fond hope of winning

serious recognition from the heart of the nobler and superior ele¬

ments of the German middle classes. An excellent performance

in the Munich Royal Court Opera House met with the warmest

106 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

reception ; but curiously enough it was some French guests present

on that occasion that with great animation recognized the popular

element of my work and welcomed it as such.”

Its broad human appeal may best be judged, aside from its en¬

thusiastic reception all over the globe, if in our minds we transfer

the battles that are fought in the Meister singer to other phases of

human activity, substituting for the mastersingers any other set

of more or less self-centered artists, or professional men, or in¬

deed men from any walk of life, in any country, at any time.

The comic elements will remain the same: there are the jealousies

and rivalries of the individuals making up the class among them¬

selves, the overt or covert animosities against the daring innova¬

tors that chafe against the narrow fetters of tradition, the con¬

certed fight against outsiders, the unconfessed but ever present

opposition of old age against the rising generation, and the event¬

ual triumph of youth. And there is the everlasting and irresist¬

ible comedy element, la lutte pour la femme, here aggravated

by the fact that the rivals are not only representatives of the

younger and the older generations, not only the impersonations

of romanticism and philistinism respectively, a dashing young

knight and a pompous old scribe, but additional zest is lent to

their fight because they are the representatives of young and old

in art. And these elements are treated with a humor

“essentially German and Wagnerian — a combination of play¬

fulness, exuberant animal spirits, practical jokes, puns, burlesque,

and withal an undercurrent of amiability, seriousness, passion, and

even sadness, as in all great humorous literature. Every form of

humor is represented, the lowest as well as the highest; from the

horse-play accompanying the riot scene, the pun on Vogelgesang’s

name, and the broad burlesque of Beckmesser’s serenade, to the

more subtle persiflage of Kothner’s address, the merry mockery

of the apprentices, the quaint spectacle of the watchman, the

chivalrous bluster of the knight, the rollicking cobbler songs, and

the subtle satire of Sachs. In this variety of humor, from the

lowest to the highest, Wagner resembles Shakespeare.”25

The chief charm of Wagner’s comedy-drama, however, lies not

in such comic incidents, no matter how delightful they may be in

themselves, but in the delineation of the characters. This is what

gives the play imperishable value.

25 Finck, l.c., page 225.

Roedder — “Die Meistersinger von Numberg.”

107

A word will have to suffice for Eva, this truly winsome and be¬

witching lineal descendant of our general mother in paradise, and

first cousin to Julia Capulet in her frankness and outspokenness

in love as well as her astounding daring in taking her fate in her

own hands, irrespective of the desire of her beloved father. She

is especially engaging in the manner in which she tries to draw out

her father and her old friend Hans Sachs concerning Walter von

Stolzing’s success in the singing test in St. Catherine’s Church,

in her playfully disguised apprehension that Sachs might enter

the fateful singing contest on St. John’s Day, in her pouting when

she misunderstands Sachs’s subtle irony as he refers to the other

mastersingers ’ feeling of inferiority towards Walter, and in her

complaint about all the trouble she has with the men folk when

Walter is about to rush upon Beckmesser in front of Pogner’s

house. She becomes a pathetic figure in the moment when the

realization of Sachs’s true feelings for her and his suppressed

grief overwhelms her, and yet how engagingly natural is her re¬

turn to the sun of her happiness in Walter’s presence immediately

thereafter. Eva is altogether one of the most fascinating youth¬

ful figures in all operatic literature.

On Magdalene, her confidante, David’s sweetheart, and on David

we need not dwell. Wagner avoided the pitfall of making these

two characters mere repetitions of types, and provided them with

sufficient individuality to impress them on the spectator’s memory

as beings of flesh and blood.

The mastersingers as a class are excellently described by Kreh-

biel, 1. c., p. 92f., where he sets forth the two melodies that char¬

acterize them throughout the comedy:

4 ‘Note that as the mastersingers belonged to the solid burghers

of old Nuremberg — a little vain, as was to be expected in the up¬

holders of an institution of great antiquity and glorious traditions ;

staid, dignified, and complacent, as became the free citizens of a

free imperial city, whose stout walls sheltered the best in art and

science that Germany could boast — so these two melodies are

strong, simple tunes; sequences of the intervals of the simple dia¬

tonic scale ; strongly and simply harmonized ; square-cut in rhythm ;

firm and dignified, if a trifle pompous, in their stride.” \

The musical characterization of the mastersingers alone would

suffice to convince any one that in the figure of Beckmesser Wag¬

ner did not mean to put on his feet the typical mastersinger, even

if we forgot for a moment that Hans Sachs is a mastersinger as

108 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

well as Beckmesser. The latter simply is the personification of

mastersong carried to its last consequences, and as such he stands

out in the prelude to the work. In him Wagner chastises all that

is foolish in the mastersinger’s ways, with a smile, for all great

comedy ridendo castigat mores. For the subject of this chastise¬

ment Wagner

1 ‘ chooses only things which are temporary aberrations from the

good. What is strong and pure and wholesome in the art of the

mastersingers he permits to pass through his satirical fires un¬

scathed. Classicism in its original sense, as the conservator of

that which is highest and best in art, he leaves unharmed. ' ' (Kreh-

biel, p. 96).

Beckmesser is, then, the arch exponent of the rule-of-thumb pe¬

dantry and formalism; the worshipper of the ossified common¬

place ; a stubborn believer in the necessity of the unchanging main¬

tenance of a status which the progress of time has long since ren¬

dered untenable ; such an upholder of tradition that he would re¬

gard the best possible innovation as worthless in comparison to

the imitation of inferior models, provided that these be old; an

example of Robert Burns's statement, which is more emphatic than

is consistent with our latter day notions of good breeding, that

“a man may be an excellent judge of poetry by square and rule,

and after all be a d — — blockhead "-—except that Beckmesser has

ceased to be an excellent judge. But while he is pavilioned in the

glittering pride of his supposed accomplishments as a mastersinger,

he is by no means unaware of his lack of personal attractiveness

to the fair sex, and so he endeavors to assure himself of the sup¬

port of Eva's father, and does not approve of the stipulation that

Eva herself may reject the successful competitor in the singing

contest if he is not to her liking. As a further consequence, he

strives to remove his rival Walter von Stolzing by declaring him

versungen at the test ; and as his follies advance in geometrical pro¬

gression, he at last becomes a thief and steals what at the time he

regards as the song with which Hans Sachs would enter the lists

on St. John's Day. Many critics, sincere admirers of Wagner's

art among them, have taken exception to this character delineation.

Thus Krehbiel says, 1. e., page 80 :

“Beckmesser ought not to have been made the blundering idiot

and foolish knave that he appears to be in the stage versions, but

at the worst a shortsighted, narrowminded, and perhaps malicious

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg.”

109

pedant. As he stands in the stage representations Beckmesser is

an ill-natured and wicked buffoon, a caricature of a peculiarly

gross kind, and only an infinitesimally tiny corrective idea lies in

the fact that a manly young knight who loves a pretty young wo¬

man should have saved her from falling into such a rival’s hands

by marrying her himself. He would have had the vote of the

public on his side if he had sung like a crow and Beckmesser like

Anacreon. ’ ’

This last statement, in order to clear one objection out of the

way, seems to me begging the question. First, the public had no

vote in the matter, Hans Sachs’s motion at the meeting in St.

Catherine ’s having been voted down ; and secondly, it was a mat¬

ter of outsinging the competitors and not of personal attractive¬

ness and similar advantages. But to revert to the charge, let us

quote Erich von Schrenck:26

“In Beckmesser there is so much grotesque exaggeration that

sober criticism should not be content with mere praise. One need

only think of the mutilated prize song, with which Beckmesser al¬

most ranges himself among the lunatics. It is not easy to see how

critics can pass over such matters as though everything were here

as it should be. ’ ’

On the other hand Finck, p. 228, has this to say :

“Another amusing actual feature in this comedy is that some

of the critics who feel more or less guilty of having once been

Beckmessers, still are a little sore on the subject and mercilessly

abuse actors who are intelligent enough to treat this part in a real

burlesque spirit. But Wagner shows by his whole treatment of

this role — the blackboard scene, the tuning and twanging of the

lute, the grotesque serenade, the antics (musical and mimic) in

Sachs’s room after the fight, and especially the laughable parody

of the prize song on the little stand on the meadow, that he in¬

tended this character to be essentially a burlesque, and not the

doleful, dignified duffer the critics referred to would have it. Wag¬

ner even rewrote the mock prize song and made it more extrava¬

gant than before. Beckmesser is naturally a silly fellow, and in

this case his pedantry, arrogance, and incompetence are aggravated

in such a manner by blinding jealousy that he cannot help mak¬

ing a fool of himself. If he did not make a fool of himself, why

should the people laugh at him loudly, and the Masters exclaim:

“What does this mean? Can he be crazy?” — A note to this page

adds: “Of course, the self -burlesque must be unconscious on

26 Richard Wagner als DicTiter, Munchen 1913, p. 167.

110 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences Arts , and Letters.

Beckmesser’s part. Wagner wrote to a tenor in 1872: ‘Be seri¬

ous throughout . . . Great pettiness and much gall. Take as

a model any captious critic. ’ ’ ’

Wagner’s mention of the “captious critic” brings up a matter

on which the dust of controversy has not yet settled, namely, the

amount of autobiographical material that is, or is supposed to be,

contained in his Meister singer.

“A word of caution,” says Krehbiel, p. 79f., “should be uttered

against the autobiographic stamp which some extremists have

wanted to impress upon it. The comedy is not rendered more in¬

teresting or its satire more admirable by thinking of Walter as

the prototype of Wagner himself, of Beckmesser as Wagner’s op¬

ponents, and of Hans Sachs as King Ludwig, embodying in him¬

self, furthermore, the symbol of enlightened public opinion, which

neither despises rules nor is willing to be ridden by them. Such

an exposition of its symbolism lies near enough in its broad lines,

but there is danger in carrying it through all the details of the

plot. When it is too far pushed, critics will ask in the future,

as they have asked in the past,' how this can be accepted as the

satirical motive of the comedy when the hero who triumphs over

the supposed evil principle in the drama does so, not to advance

the virtue which stands in opposition to that evil principle, but

simply to win a bride — a purpose that is purely selfish, however

amiable and commendable it may be. Walter does, indeed, dis¬

cover himself as the champion of spontaneous, vital art, and the

antagonist of the pedantry represented by the mastersingers ; but

this is not until after he has learned that he can only win the

young lady by himself becoming a member of the guild, and de¬

feating all comers at the tournament of song. Knowing none of

the rules, he boldly relies on the potency of the inspiration begot¬

ten by his love, and does his best under the circumstances ; that he

ultimately succeeds he owes to the help of Sachs, and the fact that

his rival defeats himself by resorting to foul means.”

The very fact that the naive spectator all over the world can

appreciate and enjoy Wagner’s Meistersinger without knowing

how much of the poet ’s own experience is contained therein, should

give us pause when we search for autobiographical material in this

play. This criterion furnishes the best of evidence that we are

dealing with a genuine work of art, one in which the gold has been

cleansed in the furnace of creative inspiration of all the dross of

individual experience which had clung to it. To be sure, Wag¬

ner’s works, like Goethe’s, and like all great works of art, are

‘ 1 fragments of a great confession, ’ ’ but the exact knowledge of the

Roedder — “Die Meistersinger von Niirnberg.,f 111

individual experiences that the artist had to undergo is not indis¬

pensable for the enjoyment of his creation; indeed, it may even

prove an obstacle. On the other hand it must be granted that it

may also augment its charm.

Now the last named feature is exactly what may be claimed for

Die Meistersinger. Of course, it would be narrowminded to state

in cut and dried fashion that Wagner identifies himself with Wal¬

ter, and the like. Wagner is identical with Walter, but he is also

identical with Hans Sachs, in both cases to a certain extent. We

know from his letters that in the delineation of Pogner, especially

m the musical part of this character, he meant to do homage to his

friend Otto Wesendonk, Mathilde’s husband. We know that for

some time he had intended to call the present Beckmesser by the

name of his bitterest critic, Hanslick — his name appears as Hans

Lick and as Hanslich in some of the drafts preceding the final ver¬

sion. On sober second thought he abandoned such purely personal

allusions, certainly not to the detriment of the finished work. The

figure of Beckmesser stands for the whole chorus of hostile critics

that greeted the appearance of every new work of Wagner’s with

a volley of vituperation. In writing out the final version he may

very well have had in mind the fate of his Tannhauser in Paris.

It may not be amiss to hear on this point the drastic words of El¬

bert Hubbard :27

“Mr. Henry I. Frick has compiled a list of over one hundred

names of musical critics who placed themselves on record in opposi¬

tion to Richard Wagner and his music. Only such men as proved

themselves past masters and adepts in abuse are given a place in

this Academy of Immortals. No writer, musician or artist who

ever lived brought down on his head an equal amount of contumely

and disparagement as Richard Wagner. Turner, Millet and Rodin

have been let off lightly compared with the fate that was Wagner’s ;

and even the shrill outcry that was raised in Boston at sight of

MacMonnies’ Bacchante was a passing zephyr to the storm that

broke over the head of Wagner in Paris when after one hundred

and sixteen rehearsals Tannhauser was produced. The derisive

laughter, catcalls, shouts, hisses and uproar that greeted the play

were only the shadow of the criticisms that filled the daily press,

done by writers who mistook their own anserine limitations for

inanity on the part of the composer. They scorned the melody

they could not appreciate, like men who deny the sounds they can¬

not hear, or those who might revile the colors they could not dis-

27 Richard Wagner, in Little Journeys to the Homes of Great Musicians ;

vol. VIII, No. 1 (January, 1901).

112 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

tinguish. And worse than all this, the aristocratic hoodlums re¬

fused to allow any one else to enjoy, and would not tolerate the

thought that that which to them was 4 jumbling discord, seven times

confounded’ might be a succession of harmonies to one whose per¬

ceptions were more fully developed.”

Some of the criticisms that Beckmesser and a few of the other

masters hurl at Walter’s trial song sound as though Wagner had

taken them bodily from the paragraphs of the daily press dealing

with his works. But, it should be noted, there is, thanks to his

humor, not a trace of bitterness in Wagner’s treatment of these

matters, he has risen superior to it all.

The comedy character of the play demanded imperatively the

introduction of a figure of the type of Beckmesser. Wagner had

to show where mastersong, as the representative of formalism in

art, in its ultimate consequences would lead. And if we grant the

poet’s right of using his personal experiences, Beckmesser had to

resort to theft in order to show what would become of Wagner’s

art in the hands of those that were called but not elect. A cer¬

tain, if you will a large, amount of caricature and overdrawing is

present in this figure, but in Wagner’s case it would hardly be

appropriate to call this a concession to public taste — a good per¬

formance (the crucial test of every dramatic work) should also in

the case of Beckmesser not leave an unpleasant taste in one’s

mouth. One question which so far has not been raised by the

commentators is this, how does a man like Beckmesser attain to

the office of marker in the mastersingers ’ guild? It seems incon¬

ceivable, with such men as Hans Sachs, Pogner, and Nachtigall in

the society. Here, if anywhere, we have an unconscious concession

to comedy, which in motivation does not appear to make such rigo¬

rous demands as tragedy.

Why did Wagner choose the name of Beckmesser for this charac¬

ter? It is that of an historical figure, a mastersinger of Nurem¬

berg and contemporary of Hans Sachs, an honorable man who in

his life had done nothing to be held up to derision. Is it the sound

of the name which in itself strikes the ear as funny, reminding as

it does of the fussy bleating of a goat ? The etymological meaning

certainly has nothing to do with it.

Walter von Stolzing! There is music in the very name. And

indeed he seems a direct descendant of Walter von der Yogel-

weide, the greatest lyrical genius of the German Middle Ages. For

he is a poet, not merely a rhymester, but one who has something

Roedder-—“ Die Meistersinger von Nurriberg.” 113

new to say, thoughts that breathe, and is possessed of the gift to

say it beautifully, in words that burn. Even though his poetry

has about it something dreamlike, visionary, hazy, there is ‘ ‘ clearer

promise of refulgent day”, and Hans Sachs, who in clearness and

strength of vision and in luminous clarity of diction is Walter’s

superior, willingly yields homage to the genius of the younger man.

And if Beckmesser and his like are afflicted with arteriosclerosis,

Walter’s blood courses through his veins with leaps and bounds,

and it will take some time yet before it will flow in the even, warm

pulse-beat of Hans Sachs. In his make-up the elements of caution

and expediency are noticeably lacking — to this extent he is the

image of his creator— -and the sense of humor is entirely absent,

in which respect he differs widely from Wagner as well as Hans

Sachs. He presents a wonderfully impressive picture when “in

shape and gesture proudly eminent”, seeing his attempt at winning

the master’s title fruitless, he still continues to sing, hurling de¬

fiance at the masters’ code of rules, and yielding homage only to

the eternal laws of poetry — as he feels them. There is here a

marked contrast between the “young man” of the Marienbad

sketch and the Walter von Stolzing of the final version; and from

the former’s “Have mercy, masters!” to the latter’s “Nicht Mei-

ster, nein! Will ohne Meister selig sein!” seems indeed a far cry.

True, even in the original draft he finally disdains the distinction

conferred on him, but here it looks more like the petulant vexa¬

tion and self-sufficiency of the youth who exults in his victory over

old age, and not as the expression of a deep conviction. In refus¬

ing the masters’ badge in the final form, however, Walter is con¬

sistent, for he has from the beginning regarded his singing before

the masters in St. Catherine’s as merely instrumental in winning

the hand of Eva. It cannot be denied that the impression he cre¬

ates even in the final version by his blunt refusal is not pleasant

to the spectator, and is felt as indicating a lack of tact, which only

Hans Sachs’s grand speech “Veracktet mir die Meister nicht und

ekrt mir ikre Kunst” succeeds in effacing. Even Walter’s noble

discontent with his Nuremberg experiences and his burning feel¬

ing that “all is dross that is not Helena” should not permit his

passionate unrestraint to leap forth. For he forgets entirely that

what won him Eva’s hand and Nuremberg’s approval after all was

a mastersong, composed with the kindly assistance of his friend

Hans Sachs— even though he has enriched and ennobled the form

— and that he did not offer new wine in new vessels, but that it

8— S. A. L.

114 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters .

sparkled in the old.28 Still the final effect after Hans Sachs’s ad¬

dress is one of perfect harmony, and we feel that now Walter has

indeed bowed to the older poet’s matnrer insight and judgment,

and is not simply submitting to the wish of Sachs that he refrain

from hurting the feelings of his elders. There is a beautiful sym¬

bolism of enduring value in the final scene, when Walter accepts

the mastersingers ’ chain and Eva places Walter’s crown on Sachs’s

head, and the orchestra bursts forth in magnificent strains glorify¬

ing the union of the new art and the old. The old art willingly

and happily passes on its laurel to the new, and the new is willing

and happy to recognize what there is of intrinsic worth in the old —

just as Goethe and Schiller in Rietschel’s monument instinctively

grasp the same wreath.

Hans Sachs’s great speech at the close of the play, in which the

influence of Gervinus’s vigorous portrait can be distinctly traced,

is, as we have seen, contained also in the first draft of Die Meister-

singer. But one who is familiar only with the final version can¬

not help being surprised by the passage quoted above, “Thereby

he assuages the mastersingers, and wins them over.” For in the

play as we have it today, Sachs’s leadership in the guild as well

as among the population of Nuremberg at large admits of no doubt.

Not so, however, the Hans Sachs of the Marienbad sketch. A man

who can advise an ardent lover of poetry like the young knight

there depicted to give up writing verses altogether, cannot feel so

sure of his ground as to become the recognized leader of his master-

singer associates. The sketch says, 4 ‘ They have their scruples about

him and doubt whether he means honorably by the guild. . . .

His conduct at times seems dubious to the masters.” Eva warns

Walter against him, “Do not trust him, he is a false man! . . .

Father has often told me.” This trait must appear passing

strange to any one who calls to mind even a few of the outward

signs of the charming relation between the aged master and fair

Eva, such as their playful chat in the second act (entirely lacking

If we wish to allow for the autobiographical element in this, the interpre¬

tation would be easy enough. Wagner says to his opponents, “Gentlemen, the

moment I make up my mind, I am master of the form you worship, and I can

handle it even better than you !” Was not the quintet in the first part of the

third act born of this spirit? Some interpreters call it a concesssion to the

old operatic form. No doubt Wagner here deviates from his musical theory.

But the beauty of this quintet, which has rightly been said to dwarf any simi¬

lar effort in all musical literature, is likely to reconcile even an extreme theorist

with this departure from the composer’s principles.

Roedder — -“Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg.” 115

in the original sketch), and the girl’s exclamation, “Ach, der hat

mich lieb!”

In view of the fact that the outward events in both the first and

final versions are virtually the same, Wagner’s statement that for

the final execution of the play the original draft offered little or

nothing would seem extraordinary. It becomes clear as soon as we

realize that in the final version Hans Sachs, heretofore merely an

ornament — even though owing to his historical character and his

intellectual caliber he rose considerably above his surroundings —

is now the vitalizing center of the whole play, and that everything

hinges on his love for Eva and his renunciation.29 The action is

now placed within his soul and finds expression in tones rather

than words. Only once, in the quintet of Act III, does Sachs

softly say to himself :

“For dem Einde lieblich hehr

mocht’ ich gem wohl singen;

doch des Herzens suss ’ Beschwer

gait es zu bezwingen.

’s war ein schoner Abendtraum:

dran zu deuten wag ’ ich haum”

For a long time he has loved Eva, and on St. John’s day, his

birthday, in the singing contest at the public festival, his heart’s

fondest wish is to be consummated : no longer young in years, but

buoyant in the undying youth of genius, he would outsing his com¬

petitors and carry off the fair prize. And everybody else has ex¬

pected this outcome: Eva herself, who up to this time has loved

the master with the fondness of a child ; her father ; David the ap¬

prentice; David’s friends; and the malicious Beckmesser. Now

Walter von Stolzing appears, and all is changed at once. Eva has

fallen in love with him at first sight: “Doch nun hat’s mich ge-

wdhlt zu nie gekannter Quad: und werd ’ ich heut ’ vermahlt, so

war’s ohn ’ alle Wahl! Das war ein Musseny war ein Zwang.”

But long before he finds out from Eva herself that she loves the

young knight, Sachs with quick intuition sees how matters stand:

Walter’s request to be received into the mastersinger ’s society, by

all the others treated as a surprising incident, opens his eyes, and

29 Cf. on this point especially Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Richard Wag¬

ner. Translated from the German by G. Ainslee Hight and revised by the

author. London and Philadelphia, 1900, page 281ff. Also the fine essay by

Julius Burghold, Wagners Meistersinger: Erlebnis und Dichtung } in Ludwig

Frankensteins Richard Wagner-Jahrbuch, I, 41f£.

116 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

his resolve to leave the field to him is taken at once. To be sure,

his sly joke at Beckmesser’s expense, “Nickt dock, Herr Merher!

Aus jungrem Wachs als ich und Ihr muss der Freier sein, soil

Evchen ihm den Preis verleihn,” would seem to indicate that he

harbors no desire to enter the lists; still it is here nothing more

than a well-meant advice to Beckmesser not to make himself ridicu¬

lous by competing. But soon after, while Sachs continues “to

show to the world a serene and energetic face, ’ ’ a plaintive motive

from the orchestra reveals to us his real feelings ; it is repeated in

Act II, during his chat with Eva, at the words liJa Kind! eine

Freiung machte mir Not,” (the word Freiung being here taken in

a double sense), and soon after this in the third stanza of the merry

cobbler song a similar strain strikes our ears and hearts, and Eva

exclaims, “ Mich schmerzt das Lied, ich weiss nickt wie!” These

strong undercurrents are most pronounced in the prelude and the

first scene of the third act, picturing the last struggle in the aged

man’s soul, until in the “lofty mirth which heals our pains” he

achieves the triumph over his passion and “calmed and appeased

reaches the serenity of a mild and blissful resignation.”

This last quotation, from his Entwiirfe, Gedanken, Fragmente,

may be applied to Wagner’s own state of mind at the time when

he finished the drama. It is the culmination of one of the deepest

experiences in the poet’s own life, his love for Mathilde Wesen-

donk, his victory over himself, and his renunciation. “Now only

am I fully resigned,” he writes to Mathilde, as he is working on

the final draft, and “Look out for your heart when you meet Hans

Sachs! you will surely fall in love with him.” By giving it im¬

mortal expression in a creation of his genius, Wagner the artist

has risen above the painful experience of Wagner the man. Now

he has made himself truly a master — master of his art, and master

of himself, and the fact that from this time on Wagner loved to

call and sign himself der Meister gains a deepened significance.

Just as the historic Hans Sachs is one of the most interesting

and impressive figures of sixteenth century Germany, the Hans

Sachs of Wagner has become one of the most sympathetic charac¬

ters of the highest type of comedy, and it is difficult indeed not

to fall in love with him. What endears him to us is his truly

God-given humor — not simply an intellectual gift, to be defined as

the sense of proportion, but a quality of the heart that recognizes*

the ordained place for everything in the universe and is willing

to content itself with its place in the eternal scheme of things.

Roedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg.”

117

Its undercurrent of sadness makes it all the more lovable — indeed

this is the token of all true humor: “ There’s not a string at¬

tuned to mirth but has its chord in melancholy” sighs Thomas

Hood, and “ Chords that vibrate sweetest pleasure thrill the deep¬

est notes of woe” moans Robert Burns.

Such glorious humor is not the chief trait of the earlier Hans

Sachs, the one of the Marienbad sketch. He is far from conquer¬

ing the world; his humor is a rather pessimistic irony which at

best toys with, and generally scorns and derides, the world. The

changes in Hans Sachs’s philosophy of life incorporated in the

second version may easily enough be explained on general grounds.

When Wagner wrote the Marienbad sketch he had not yet reached

the prime of life. When he finished the play he was almost fifty

years old. His Lohengrin, the colossal Der Ring des Nihelungen,

his Tristan und Isolde ,, as well as most of the theoretical writings,

had in the meantime been completed. The happy period at Dres¬

den had been followed abruptly by his ten years’ exile in Switzer¬

land. New years of migration had succeeeded the latter. They

had brought numerous handicaps to his development and creative¬

ness. He had gone through the most serious domestic and finan¬

cial distress, and suffered the bitterest disappointments, such as

the open hostility of most of the contemporary critics to his work.

But all these factors combined could not make him lose faith in his

mission, and he felt now as sure of his ground and his place in the

history of art as Schiller did when to clarify his views he wrote

his treatise TJeber naive und sentiment alische Dichtung.

The victory that Walter von Stolzing with his art wins in the

Marienbad draft is at best half a victory — with Hans Sachs as

there depicted the game is scarce worth the candle. Considering

the superior greatness of Hans Sachs in the final execution, both

as a poet and as a man, Walter’s victory is complete. Nor is its

force lessened by the fact that in some respects Hans Sachs is

decidedly the younger man’s superior even as a poet. Such he is,

as Erich von Schrenck points out, 1. c., page 169ff., in the measure

in which the naive artist — he who is one with nature — is superior

to the sentimental one who seeks nature:

“Sachs’s poetic pictures are delineated with bold, firm strokes*

Walter is ever in danger of becoming verbose, sometimes even

diffuse. Sachs shines in sunny clarity, Walter has something

vague and romantic about him. . . . For Walter the poetry of

dreams and the prose of actual life are much farther apart than

118 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

for Sachs. Sachs looks upon all life as poetic, Walter flees from

prosaic reality into the world of poetry. For Sachs everything, no

matter how trite and trivial it may seem, becomes an object of

poetic musing, Walter seeks his ‘poetic’ themes. Therefore Sachs

is more versatile than Walter. Sachs takes joy in all things, he

abandons himself to them. Walter selects, and always connects

with his subject matter a relation to his own soul. Sachs is an

objective poet with a subjective element, Walter is purely subjec¬

tive. . . . Sachs regards the hostile powers with the eyes of

the wise man: he laughs at them and outwits them; Walter looks

upon them with the eyes of a knight who places himself in posture

for battle. Therefore Sachs’s poetry, like its creator, is humor¬

ous; Walter’s, pathetic ... Of course, both types of poets

have their justification, their significance. This is beautifully

shown in Sachs’s conduct. For he, who certainly is the greater,

willingly bows before the young man who possesses one side of

art that he, the mature poet, lacks. The sweetness of dream poetry,

the perfume of romanticism have so captured Sachs’s susceptible

poetic soul that the fiery ‘poet-hero’ appears to him as the true,

heaven-gifted poet. His own workaday poetry seems to him irrele¬

vant in comparison . . . However, both types are needed : the

sunny poetry of daylight with its clear features and sharp con¬

tours, with its irradiation and transfiguration of sober reality, as

well as the vague moonlight poetry with its diffuse lines and myste¬

rious figures — naive and sentimental poetry. ’ ’

Naturally Wagner did not intend to exemplify in his work

Schiller’s famous distinction— this is a by-product of the composer’s

creation, and as such interesting in the extreme. Neither did he

attempt a portrait of the historical Hans Sachs ; at the time of the

origin of the first sketch he expressed in no uncertain terms his

disapproval of the biographical Goethe and Schiller dramas that

were popular in the forties and fifties. Wagner simply desired to

place among the circle of the mastersingers an eminent, real poet,

such as the historic Hans Sachs was. It is worth while to observe

that while the earlier Hans Sachs reminds us more of the Hans

Sachs of the thirties and forties as Gervinus portrays him— for, as

we have seen, Wagner designates Gervinus as one of his sources —

the Hans Sachs as we have him today resembles more closely the

Hans Sachs of the fifties in the same treatise. It may well be left

to the reader to trace out the corresponding features in the passages

quoted in the Appendix. When his general character was thus

altered, Wagner quite naturally dropped the allusion to the Refor¬

mation in the first draft. Such an allusion seemed a matter of

course in a drama the scene of which was laid in sixteenth century

Roedder — ‘‘Die Meistersinger von Niirriberg.”

119

Germany, but as it stands, the result of this great movement ap¬

pears destructive rather than constructive — the Reformation is not

treated as one of the great fructifying epochs of the race but as

subversive of the last remnants of poetry and artistic endeavor.30

By infusing into Hans Sachs’s veins drops of his own blood,

Wagner has endowed his hero with a broader human appeal than

the genial cobbler-poet of the sixteenth century could ever have

for our own time. His innermost life, as we have seen, is too deep

for words — a linguistic expression of the depth of his love, the in¬

tensity of his grief, and the greatness of his self-conquest would

have destroyed the glorious virility of this character. But twin-

born with the words, the expression of the masculine conceptual

thought of the poet, is music, in which the feminine lyrism of the

emotion finds its voice. It constitutes the lasting triumph of Wag¬

ner’s genius that in his dramas we have “ music not written for

the text nor text written for the music, but music and text created

at the same time, the melody mirroring forth the soul of the

words.” One need not himself be a poet, full of limitless feeling

struggling with the limited utterance of words, to fathom that a

new art has here been given birth, fulfilling the age-long yearning

of sage and poet. To the word-tone-poet the lines of Oliver Wendell

Holmes ‘ ‘ The flowering moments of our mind lose half their petals

in our speech” do not apply. Music imparts to these our flower¬

ing moments immortal beauty of color and imperishable fragrance.

30 The praise of practical political activity in connection with the reference

to the Reformation, so alien to Wagner’s ways of thinking in his later years,

Julius Burghold, l.c., attributes to the interest and sympathy with which the

coming Revolution of 1848 was even then filling Wagner’s soul. It seems to

me more likely that Gervinus had at least a large share in it — all the more

so since, as Golther points out, l.c., page 297, this praise of practical political

life is really a superfluous departure even in the original version, as is evi¬

dent from the young knight’s answer to Hans Sachs’s admonitions, “Very

well, master ! But now I need a wife.” Together with the allusion to tne

Reformation, all the extraneous elements of the original scholarly apparatus

were excised, i. e., the references to the Heldenbuch , to Wolfram and his Par-

zival, to the Nibelungenlied with Siegfried and Kriemhild, of whom Walter

was to sing before the masters in St. Catherine’s. Only the reference to Wal¬

ter von der Vogelweide remained — naturally enough, for the mastersingers

counted him as one of the founders of their art, and Walter’s baptismal name,

for the earlier Konrad, was given him with a definite purpose.

120 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

APPENDIX

Extracts from G. G. Gervinus, Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung ,

2. Band, 4. Auflage, Leipzig 1853.#

Chapter VI. Decline of Knightly Poetry and Transition to

Popular Poetry. 10. Mastersong.

(Page 245.) But it may be wrong to look at these songs at all

from the viewpoint of poetry. For historical purposes it suffices

to have shown that their poetic texts mark the uttermost decline

of the old lyric poetry. These songs were not meant for publicity,

let alone immortality, they remained consequently unprinted in

their obscurity, and history had better let them rest there. Even

in the case of minnesong we disdained a too searching analysis,

and here the analytic method would be still less proper. A more

accurate characterization of mastersong would incontestably be the

task of the historian of music, if indeed its music were preserved.

The mastersingers, in the period when they had established real

singing schools, let themselves be heard only as singers. With

them, as well as with the French and Dutch rhetoricians, the high¬

est achievement was the invention of a new tune; in their tunes,

however, melody was the essential thing. Little depended on the

text ; it was permissible to render the same text in different tunes ;

only in melody were they inventive; and this must not encroach

on the tunes of other mastersingers to the extent of four syllables,

but melody and fioriture were to be entirely original. And so in

the examination of such new tunes great emphasis was laid on the

musical rendition. . . . If it was found that the melody did

not encroach on any other tune to the extent of four syllables, it

was registered, its parent had it christened and invited sponsors

to the ceremony.

(Page 246). We deemed the relation of minnesong to the moral

status of the people far more significant than its aesthetic side,

and we do this also in the case of the mastersong. There we had

* Sincere thanks are due to Professor B. Q. Morgan for generous help in the

preparation of this translation as well as for the revision of the entire manu¬

script.

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Niirriberg.” 121

found that the soulful minnesong exercised wonderful power in

helping to check the brutality and violence of the knights. In the

fifteenth and sixteenth centuries all the lower classes were in a

state of ferment ; a rush and race for gain, distinction and author¬

ity seized even the lowly, and . . . mutual jealousy, hostility,

and persecution between the various ranks of society and the vari¬

ous crafts disfigured the middle classes of the time. Considering

all the intensity of professional jealousy and the downright char¬

acter of this sort of people, what a solidity and soundness of nature

must we presuppose to account for the fact that men united and

segregated themselves in the collective guild of the singers, threw

a common bond about the citizens, and educated them to a touching

devotion to a purpose that was not infected by any selfishness, that

kept aloof from baseness and vulgarity, and could only found

friendship and mutual confidence. Even though the great ma¬

jority of artisans and craftsmen after their day’s work would re¬

pair to the ale-house, it was all the more, at a time when the physi¬

cal vices were so monstrously rampant, wholesome that at least a

number of stalwart masters applied their hours and days of rest

from labor to something worthier, in taking down the old art of

the courts into their circle and essaying to arouse and keep alive

an interest in it ; for had not Hans Sachs so popularized the gra¬

cious art that around him there were two hundred and fifty mas¬

ters in Nuremberg? These would sit down after the hard work

of the day and compose their songs, think out new tunes and prac¬

tice the old ones, copy everything in big books, and take joy in pre¬

serving for posterity what with love and gratitude they had in¬

herited from their predecessors. The dignity of the life and the

unselfishness of these masters compensates us for their labored art.

Heretofore poetry had begged for bread at the courts and even in

its most flourishing period had not cast off the parasitic note to¬

ward Maecenases and patrons, but mastersong is the foundation of

our modern independent poetry in this respect also, that it taught

people how in the heartfelt practice of a fine pursuit, even with

indifferent success, there is a felicity that needs no further reward.

With what self-denial did the good masters devote themselves with¬

out any compensation to instructing their apprentices and pupils

in the difficult tunes, depriving themselves of rest and sleep in

order to have leisure to recruit and educate new votaries to their

art, since the day was filled with their professional labors. And

with what love did the pupil then look up to his master !

122 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

(Page 251). The mastersinger tablatures do to be sure repre¬

sent most defective poesy, the weakness of which as compared with

ancient classical poetry was at once recognized, and the reason why

the mastersingers affected so much secrecy as to their rules was

that they suspected that every one versed in the new poetry and

music who inquired about their rules did so only to ridicule them,

and because the new learned versifiers really did view the master-

singers’ art as far beneath them.

Chapter VII. Reception of Popular Poetry. 7. Hans Sachs.

(Page 409). Hans Sachs (of Nuremberg, 1494-1576) was the

first one to feel vaguely that all poetry had sunk to a low level in

which it could not possibly persist. As of everything truly na¬

tional that we possess in medieval poetry, so also of this man, as

a purely German phenomenon, we must say : we must appreciate

him historically to establish his merit and determine his worth

accordingly. He occupies as it were a middle ground between the

old and the new art, and his works both point to older creations

of the nation and also lay the foundation for later ones yet to

come ; he embraces the poetic past of the people, and treats in many

ways all the forms and subjects that had become popular since the

rise of middle-class poetry; he seizes on all the actualities of his

time, and participates in the whole course of its religio-politieal

poetry; then he is the first one to withdraw from this, removes

poetry from its trend toward actual life and devotes himself to

the dramatic form, which since his time has remained the chief

form of all modern poetry. He draws all history and the full ex¬

tent of all knowledge and action into poetry, tears down the bound¬

aries of nationality, and thus gives warning of what was to be

henceforth the most characteristic feature of German literature.

He is in a certain sense a reformer of poetry as Luther is of re¬

ligion, as Hutten in politics; more fortunate than Hutten, less

fortunate than Luther, of far more unconscious talent than both

of them, like them indefatigably at work, little recognized in his

true value, indeed for a long time reviled as the representative of

mastersong, from which he strove to break away, for which he

composed only in private, in which he esteemed only morally what

from the viewpoint of poetry he considered unworthy of printing.

Only in recent times did Goethe, uncovering the poetic germs in

his forms and language, bring him again to notice and recognition,

Boedder — “Die Meistersinger von Number g.”

123

so that one may now name the venerable old master as one of the

chief figures of the epoch of the Reformation, so prolific in great

minds and characters.

(Page 411). As much as the lack of knowledge of human na¬

ture had impaired medieval court poetry, just as much did exces¬

sive association with men of a low class injure the middle class

poets. As much as the lack of important domestic affairs had left

the poetry of chivalry impoverished and lifeless, just as much did

the momentous domestic events of the epoch of the Reformation

blight contemporary poetry. The vortex of these events had un¬

balanced so many, the coarse tone of the progressive party of the

period had marred the language and everything most needful to

poetry. Hans Sachs’s life falls in the middle of this cultural

period, is involved in the fortunate and unfortunate phases of the

new doctrine, and his early youth coincides with the first move¬

ments. If like so many others he had let himself be carried along,

it would not be cause for wonder, considering his zeal and his

talent; if after winning his first applause he had joined in the

general chorus, he might plead the example of such great men!

What a deep nature does it indicate that this man could with such

minute and penetrating versatility follow the aspects of his times

and his nation, and fathom and depict, praise and blame them,

without faltering in his sobermindedness, without sinking down

from the height from which he viewed things. The entire range

of contemporary life, the vast movement of his time are unfolded

for us in the countless writings of the honest cobbler, animate and

eloquent, but not passionate; vivid and penetrating, but without

unrest, effortless and undesigning. He takes us into the plebeian

crowds, but one sees at once that he is one of those finer natures

who had forsworn the vulgar mob in the interest of social refine¬

ment. He shows to us the whole world in its whirling motion and

haste, imperturbed himself from his quiet cell in which nothing

escapes him, nothing leaves him indifferent, but also nothing robs

him of his equanimity. He examines the empire’s manifold de¬

fects, but he does not wish to reform them. Only one sees that he

is the inhabitant of a city which then enjoyed an enviable pros¬

perity of public and domestic finances, as well as of culture ; whose

good fortune has been lauded by every poet since Rosenblut’s time,

described by every writer from Aeneas Sylvius on, whose constitu¬

tion was the envy of every enlightened person, which not only gave

124 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

birth to, and held fast, great talents, but knew how to attract for¬

eign talents, something that scarcely any republic has been capable

of at one and the same time; which was prominent in commerce

and industry, in mechanics and inventions, the center and citadel

of mastersong; which through more than a hundred years, from

Rosenblut and Folz down to Hans Sachs, remained the cradle of

the German drama; and which sheltered in its walls the greatest

men in all branches, Regiomontanus, Celtes, Yischer, Diirer, Pirk-

heimer, Hans Sachs ; which showed such a fecundity in artists and

scholars that no other German city, and indeed not many German

states, can display such a line of artists and scholars, which is sur¬

passed in part only by the great Italian republics. In this refuge,

full of incitement and without excitement, it was easier for him

to observe, easy to rise above and master what he had observed;

he surveyed from a distance and did not get confused by prox¬

imity.

(Page 413). As his poetic share in the pamphlet (Eyn wunder-

liche W eyssagwpig von dem babstumb, 1527) was very harmless, so

also his further writings for Protestantism were indeed forceful

and definite, but always moderate and calm and entirely devoid of

all excesses in form and content. . . . He combatted the coarse

tone of life and art, not by imitating this rudeness, like Murner,

but by trying to elevate his language and presentation, and to keep

above common reality.

How he did this shows what an innate poetic talent was his. And

that attracted Goethe so much to him (who himself knew how diffi¬

cult it is to remain superior to irruptive epochal events), to see

with what playful ease the honorable master treated the world

and life, how securely and placidly he roamed about, how the really

creative power of the poet wrought in him, not passion (414) and

personal interest and excitement; how his poetry is not a stupid

copy of life, but a free reproduction of it. It is true, we can in

his case speak only of a rough draft, not of perfect execution;

only of vigor and expressiveness, and of the great humorous power

of his language, which under Goethe ’s finishing touches ingratiated

itself so much with us, while in his own case the monotony and

heedlessness with which he throws off his rhymes annoys and de¬

ters us. It is true again that there is in his works a good deal of

idle chatter, of awkwardness in treatment, of unconcerned seizing

upon the first theme that offers, and later of soulless versified

Roedder—“Die Meistersinger von Nilrnberg

125

scribbling from mere force of habit. However, one may be chari¬

tably inclined even toward such artless versifying, where it is meant

for an artless type of people, unpretentious and amusing, if only

in its inner core it is entirely sound, serene, conciliating, and en¬

couraging. ... It is admirable to remain truly human in

great events of public life with so much interest and wholehearted¬

ness; more admirable than his attempt to make a completely van¬

ished poetry to bloom afresh and produce new seed for further

plantings. It was a time when so many unbidden meddled with

things that did not concern them, when so many lost or misjudged

their place in life. But how Hans Sachs, after the Muses had in

his twentieth year called him to his poetic work, quickened him

with their gifts, inspired him to praise virtue and to relieve sad¬

ness, and he, chained to his modest trade, had at first followed

their call with less inclination, how from that time on, even when

the loud applause of Germany was already honoring him, he kept

to his limits in the same even temper, with modesty and self-knowl¬

edge, and (415) ever remained the artisan-poet and the poet-arti¬

san, how in his life he kept up the same tone that his poems evince,

— all that is easier to observe than to comprehend. He might have

argued with Hutten which one of them knew human nature bet¬

ter, watched conditions in Germany more keenly, felt more ardently

for the fate of his fatherland and its culture and improvement,

but yet his poems on the conditions of the times in comparison to

Hutten ’s form a perfect contrast of placidity to nervous agitation,

of self-restraint to bold self-confidence, of moderation to portentous

passion, and, so far as poetic treatment is concerned, of superior

mastery of the subject to being mastered by the subject. . . .

He did not suffer himself to be carried away by the coarse tone in

the writings of his times; in the greatest passion and indignation

he does not use invectives such as Luther and even the rulers of

the period did; his style is vigorous and rich almost beside that

of any other contemporary; it is innocent, animated, and lumi¬

nous beside Murner’s, much more poetic, plastic, impressive, and

noble than Hutten ’s; full of health and pure humor in compari¬

son to Fisehart’s, and next to Luther’s his language is by far the

most remarkable of the century; it is a treasure-house for every

future humorist and satirist.

(Page 416). In the youthful products of his muse he con¬

centrates entirely on the question of chaste love, which usually

126 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

brings to every moral man Ms first battle with life. He shows

himself as a man with plain middle-class sentiments, and praises

conjugal love above the adventurous Mnd, as every rightminded

man of his time considers it his duty to do. At an early period

(1517), in his Venus’s Retinue, he manifests how little he would

be skilled to interpret love and its nature in any other fashion.

Early and late, in his youthful poem on Chastity Exiled (in which

the stringent commands that he imposes on himself do honor to

his fine character), as well as in the theme of Tristan, which he

treats late in life, he gives the admonition to reserve love for matri¬

mony; and the sanctity of this union is also in his serious and

comic works the constant pivot about which his moralizing poetry

almost prefers to circle. In musing meditatively with himself, or

when his private genius listens at the window-shutters, in looking

into the heart of family life, or in escorting Ulysses to the abodes

of Calypso and Circe, he makes it an occasion to praise wedded life,

to scourge the common infidelity, to ridicule and curse the evil

domestic life in cities and villages.

(Page 417). As early as 1523 he wrote his Wittenberg Night¬

ingale, and saluted the new doctrine with so much determination

that nothing but a glance at this poem is needed to recognize his

attitude toward the Reformation and at the same time to see how

Luther’s teaching struck and roused long dormant thoughts of the

honorable middle classes of Germany, how the upright intellect of

this class, with the guiding testament in hand, now secured for it¬

self light in all directions, how the honest citizens hailed the day

with the singing nightingale, how they let themselves be called

back by it from devious wanderings, from desert and darkness

whither the crafty lion had lured them, how they withstood all the

yelping of his aiding fiends.

(Page 418). The attentive study of religious conditions in Ger¬

many led Hans Sachs of itself to the German Empire and its state,

especially at the time of the Smalkaldic War. Hence in the fifth

decade of his life the master’s poetry is particularly occupied with

it. He scourges what Hutten and with him every unselfish man of

the period scourged, but he does it in his own peculiar manner.

He remains true to the conviction, which Hutten abandoned, that

public spirit and concord alone would be Germany’s salvation.

. . . (421) Most of those allegorical and other poems that with

a satiric whip persecute the aberrations of the time as vices, while

Boedder — “Die Meister singer von Niimberg.”

127

later, more mild and forbearing, lie but laughs at them, arise in

this sturdy period, during which he was also more active in public

life (fourth and fifth decades). The felicitous and unfaltering

observation of the world and ol men, which was natural to our

master’s genius, found plentiful food in the tendency of the sages

of antiquity to consider man’s inner nature; and their judicious

moderation fortified him in the placid calmness with which he views

unconfused the antlike medley of human beings, and confronts the

people with the mirror of his truthful paintings; their contempla¬

tive wisdom fostered his plastic sense. . . . (422) From ancient

history he emphasized for his contemporaries that which in school

we present in the same way to the minds of children, and in the

most direct manner he conducted the purest water of the spring he

had found even into the lowest classes of people. What two or

three centuries had already done would have been wholly lost if

at this time of the first printed books, when the common people

were really eager to learn and read, a man who had mastered the

tone of the common folk had not taken the whole mass of what

Thomasin, the Renner, and all the didactic poems and collections

of moral examples had long been spreading broadcast, and modern¬

ized it in a new language and suitable diction. Let us never fail

to give Hans Sachs credit for this service. He became a humanist

teacher of the common people, as the scholars became teachers of

the young. He was the first to popularize the ancients from their

purely moral side in our country, just as in recent times Wieland

introduced his Cicero, Lucian, and Horace from the side of the

philosopher of life and man of the world.

From his sixth decade on another taste begins to predominate in

Hans Sachs’s poetry. He centers his attention more on rhymed

tales and carnival farces, he loves to attach the didactic to exam¬

ples, the ethical character of his poems becomes more plastic, his

German style of painting becomes more Dutch, his allegory is ex¬

changed for the fable, direct references to the present become

rarer, and he takes us from public into private life. He then sees

the classes and ranks of men less in their relation to their civic and

social obligations than to human nature and the rational world in

general ; he pictures the droll doings of men more humorously, and

laughs at them instead of scourging them as heretofore. His im¬

pressively severe teaching rather disappears beside his goodhu-

mored description, his censure becomes ironic delineation; his po¬

etry, which formerly was more bent on enjoining virtue, is now

128 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

more directed toward the alleviation of sadness; the severity of

manhood wears off giving way to the benignity of old age. At all

times of his life the master wrote rhymed stories and tales, from

the fifties on, however, they become both more frequent and better.

The whole monotony and mechanical fertility of his (423) produc¬

tion shows itself in this species, but it is at the same time his high¬

est triumph. He had inherited this type of instructive tale, seri¬

ous or comic, from older periods, whose novelettes, folk tales, and

farces he modernized in countless numbers and multiplied by new

ones, but he also left them to posterity. No older story teller is

his peer in moral earnestness, few later ones in skill of treatment

and genuine humor. . . . The animation and accuracy of de¬

scription, the motley throng of subjects, and the uniform precision

and reliability of his brush impart an uncommon charm to these

pieces, and it was these qualities that attracted our Goethe, who in

Hans Sachs’s Poetic Mission erected the most reverent monument

to the old master. The figures move and stir before our eyes, and

if Hans Sachs praises the painter because he can so place every¬

thing before our eyes that one could not narrate it more clearly,

he himself narrates and describes everything so that one could not

paint it more plainly. The most playful and frolicsome humor

tints the pictures of the magic chest that he throws open to us,

. . . (424) and all this is to be compared only with the bur¬

lesques of Dutch painting. . . . Everything that characterizes

the good German middle class, craftsmanship, self-respecting trade-

unionism, common sense, honesty (425) and integrity, pious sim¬

plicity, a sound moral core, and practical insight into life, speaks

amiably from every tone and every line of these pieces, poor as

many of them are in content and stale jests.

In the last decades of Hans Sachs’s poetry, a distinct change

takes place. He himself complains repeatedly of the decline of art

in general. Formerly, he says, it flourished, all nooks and corners

were full of scholars, there were ingenious craftsmen and artists

enough and books in abundance, now the arts are common and

despised, few devotees remain, looked at ascance as visionaries;

the world is madly bent on lust and gold, the Muses are leaving

the country. His eulogy of good morals had brought him envy and

hatred; often he meant to stop writing, also because at last his

reason told him that his poetic power was on the wane. But yet

he means courageously to make the most of his talent; after forty-

four years of poetic activity he will not now desist from preaching

Roedder — “Die Meistersinger von Nurriberg.”

129

virtue and relieving sadness, and no defamer shall disturb him in

his sacred calling. . . . (426) The present furnished no more

themes for poetic treatment ; folk poetry, and the occasional poem

ran out of material, in addition the writers were weary of the

coarse tone, withdrew from the realities of life and sought after

another, nobler element for poetry. Before ancient art or its

Italian and Spanish imitations found reception, one pointed back

once more to the old romantic period and reproduced it in old and

new forms. A foolish idea. One might now, like Puschmann,

gather in prose form the rules of the art of yore, but it was no

longer to be kept alive; the Heldenbuch theorized on giants and

dwarfs, heroes and men. . . . (427) Nevertheless it remains

remarkable enough that Hans Sachs, just as in his treatment he had

always striven away from the vulgar and decadent manner of his

contemporaries, aspired toward the end of his life in the choice of

his subjects after something nobler, although in the absolutely ig¬

noble treatment of these heroic themes he showed how little the

period was suited to a revival of these things.

9— S. A. L.

g

THE PASSING OF AN HISTORIC WATERWAY

BY P. E. WILLIAMS.

The early development of any country depends primarily upon

the avenues of entrance to its interior. The opening of the in¬

terior of the United States was largely balked by the eastern moun¬

tains, which served to divert the entrance to northern routes. It

was natural that waterways should be sought, because of the greater

ease of travel in the canoe than on foot. With the practically

continuous water route of the St. Lawrence, Ottawa and the Great

Lakes, at their disposal, explorers soon found their way into Wis¬

consin. As early as 1634, Nicolet, following the north shore of

Lakes Huron and Michigan to Green Bay, thence the Lower Fox,

Lake Winnebago, and the Upper Fox reached a point in the vicinity

of Berlin, Wisconsin.1 In 1655 Badisson and Groseilliers2 crossed

from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River following the Fox-

Wisconsin waterway which was for many years one of the most

used highways in the northwest. Probably some of the coureurs de

hois and voyageurs had earlier passed this way as we know it was

a path much used by the Indians. It soon became a regular route

for the French fur traders and Green Bay became one of the most

noted fur depots of the northwest. Along it came the great mot¬

ley procession of adventurers, explorers, priests, traders, trappers,

and soldiers who paddled their canoes and rowed or poled their

batteaux or, in later years, their Durham boats. “Throughout

127 years of French control, down through the 25 year period of

English control, and on to the days of the American railroad in the

’60’s, this nature-made highway of travel between the Great Lakes

and the Mississippi was a link in a great continental waterway — a

part of a Pathway of Empire.”*

1 Thwaites, Reuben Gold, Wisconsin, The Americanization of a French Settle¬

ment, New York 1908, pp. 20-32.

a Ibid, p. 40.

s Whitbeck, Ray Hughes, The Geography of the Fox-Winnebago Valley, BulL

XLII, Wis. Geol. & Nat. Hist. Survey, Madison, 1915. p. 27.

131

132 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters .

With the knowledge of the success attained by the completion of

the Erie Canal in 1825 came an agitation for the construction of

canals in several parts of the country, especially in those states

which touch the Great Lakes. The introduction and improvement

of the steamboats was a further incentive to waterway improvement

as many of the streams used by the pioneer were too shallow or re¬

quired portages, both disadvantages in their use for profitable

steamboating. Such a highway was the Fox-Wisconsin. In 1829,

just four years after the completion of the Erie canal, an agitation

was begun for the improvement of the Fox-Wisconsin highway in

order that steamboats might be used.4 This agitation came not

only from the merchants and the usual boomers of real estate in

the small towns along the way, from the farmers and boatmen, but

also from representatives in Congress who took an active part in

bringing the proposed improvement to the attention of the govern¬

ment and the public. Great was the optimism in regard to the ad¬

vantages to be gained by those along the highway and to the whole

northwest. Cities situated along this water course were sure to in¬

crease rapidly in size and become the most important in the state.

Along this valley would move the pioneers to the region farther

west. In their wake would follow supplies and implements, and in

return would go the furs, the lead of southwestern Wisconsin, and

the products of the constantly increasing number of farms.

Since the Fox-Wisconsin route had been the one most travelled

between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River in the early ex¬

plorations, in the fur trade, and subsequent communication, it was

but natural to believe that it would be the one most easily converted

into a waterway for boats of deeper draught and heavier cargo.

There was a great difference of opinion as to the navigability of

this waterway, depending probably on the season of the year in

which the several trips were made and consequent differences in

volume of water. All accounts agree in a general way as regards

the conditions on the Fox River, and when later surveys were made

the engineers agreed as to the manner of improvement and quite

closely as to the estimated cost. The Wisconsin, on the other hand,

had so many changes in volume, channels, and general behavior

that even able surveyors and engineers arrived at different con¬

clusions. Marquette says in his journal that “It is very broad,

with a sandy bottom, forming many shallows, which render navi-

Whitbeck, p. 29.

Williams — The Passing of An Historic Waterway. 133

gation very difficult.”* 5 Another writer says “that the general

depth of the river is, at the ordinary height of the water, from four

to five feet, but the sand-bars often extend entirely across the river

and have not more than eight or ten inches of water; the sands,

however, are quick and oppose but little resistance.”6 The other

extreme, high water stage, is shown by the fact that in 1828 the

fifth regiment of U. S. Infantry came in barges from St. Louis up

the Mississippi and Wisconsin Rivers and down the Fox to Fort

Howard without unloading.7

As time went on and the success of other canals became apparent,

the agitation for improvement increased. The government early

inaugurated a movement to improve the Fox River for navigation

purposes. In 1836 the war department had A. J. Center make a

survey from Fort Howard, at Green Bay, to Tail Point, a distance

of six miles.8 In 1837 a hurried survey was made of a consider

able portion of the river.9 In 1838 the improvement of the route

was recommended by the Secretary of War for the purpose of facil¬

itating troop and munition transportation.10 In 1839 a preliminary

survey of the Fox River was made by Captain Cram under the di¬

rection of the Secretary of War.11 In 1846, Morgan L. Martin,

territorial delegate from Green Bay, introduced a bill in Congress

for the improvement of the Fox and Wisconsin rivers. This bill

which was favored by President Polk, passed in that year, and con¬

tained a provision that a large amount of public land in the Terri¬

tory of Wisconsin be granted by Congress and the funds from the

sale of this land to be used for the purpose of making a water way

navigable from the mouth of the Wisconsin River to Green Bay, as

soon as Wisconsin became a state.12 Land equal to one-half of three

sections in width on each side of the Fox River and of the lakes

through which it passes was to be sold, the proceeds to pay for the

6 Thwaites, Reuben Gold, Down Historic Waterways , 2nd edition Chicago 1907,

p. 239, quoting from Marquette’s Journal.

6 Warren, Major G. K., Report on the Transportation Route along the Wis¬

consin and Fox Rivers , Executive Document. No. 28, 44th Cong., 1st session.

Government Printing Office, 1876.

7 Durrie, Daniel S., Early Outposts of Wisconsin, Green Bay for ZOO years ;

1639-1839. A paper read before the Wisconsin Historical Society, 1872, p. 10.

8 Warren, p. 25.

9 Ibid, p. 25.

10 Art Publishing Co. (no author) The Valley of the Lower Fox: Historical,

Descriptive, Picturesque , 1887.

11 Ibid.

12 McLenegan, Annie Susan, Pioneer Life in the Fox River Valley, Proc. Wis.

Hist. Soc. 1905, p. 279.

134 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

improvement. The work was to begin within three years after Wis¬

consin’s admission as a state and was to be completed within twenty

years. An act of the Wisconsin legislature in 1848 provided that

5/6 of the sales should go to improve the Fox River and 1/6 of

the sales to improve the Wiseonsin.lsThis act shows how little and

how carelessly the facts about the Wisconsin River had been con¬

sidered. The legislature evidently believed that the Wisconsin

River with slight improvement, could easily be made navigable. In

1849, or about twenty years after the agitation began, the state com¬

menced work upon the improvement. By 1850 the lock at De Pere

rapids was completed. The canal connecting the Fox and Wis¬

consin Rivers was dug and a little dredging of shallower portions

of the river was accomplished.14 Land sales were much slower than

had been anticipated, money ran out, interest was accruing on the

first debt, and work was nearly stopped. An issue of state bonds

was proposed but this was held unconstitutional by the state legis¬

lature. So after spending over $400,000, the state resolved to sur¬

render the whole improvement, the remainder of the public lands

unsold, and the hydraulic privileges to a private company. With

a number of provisions regarding toll and free use by the United

States, the whole project was turned over to the “Fox and Wis¬

consin Improvement Company.’’15 In 1855 Congress passed an

act giving to the state an additional two sections of land making

in all five sections per mile for the whole length of the Fox River

and of the lakes through which it runs, a distance of about 216

miles.16 By 1856 the Lower Fox could be traversed by vessels draw¬

ing three feet of water and the Upper Fox by boats of slightly less

draught,17 Much rejoicing was caused by the arrival at Green Bay

of the Aquila, a small steamer that had come from Pittsburgh down

the Ohio and up the Mississippi and Wisconsin rivers and down the

Fox. A public celebration was held and many believed that the

long dreamed of waterway which would be used as one of the na¬

tion’s most important highways had come into its own.18 In 1856

the Wisconsin legislature passed another act providing that the

capacity of the Lower Fox be increased to a draught of 4 feet ; the

13 Warren, p. 27.

14 Whitbeck, p. 80.

15 Whitbeck, p. 80.

16 Warren, p. 39.

17 Whitbeck, p. 31.

18 McLenegan, p. 285.

Williams — The Passing of An Historic Waterway. 135

Upper Fox to 3 y2 feet; and providing for locks 160 feet long, by 35

feet wide. The work was begun and carried on vigorously by the

company until the panic of 1857. From this time on the com¬

pany encountered many difficulties and in the summer of 1866, be¬

cause it had failed to fully perform its agreement with the state,

the trustees sold the improvements, lands, and franchises at public

sale. The purchasing company was the “ Green Bay and Missis¬

sippi Canal Company.”19 A short time before this the national

government took a renewed interest in the waterway and during

the third session of the 37th Congress a resolution was passed

that a “committee on naval affairs be appointed to inquire into

and report upon the practicability and the probable cost and

time required to improve the Wisconsin and Fox Rivers, so as to

give an uninterrupted navigation from the Mississippi River to

Lake Michigan for vessels of war 200 feet in length, 34 feet beam,

and drawing not less than 6 feet of water. ’ J2° The committee which

reported in 1863 estimated the cost at $2,387,000 and suggested

that the Lower Fox be improved to a 12 foot draught with the

further suggestion that Lake Winnebago might become a naval

station provided this could be done under the “treaty of 1817.”

The full committee decided against the naval station proposal,

however, and closed the report with the following: “The true

ground as the committee think, upon which to place the propriety

of yielding assistance to this Wisconsin enterprise, is its great

natural importance in making cheaper and easier the intercourse

between the grain-regions of the Northwest and the manufacturing

and commercial states of the East. The expenditure of twenty

millions in the completion of this work and that of Illinois with a

corresponding enlargement of the means of conveyance in the East,

would be many times repaid in the increased general prosperity

which would result from it. Whenever some systematic and well-

matured plan shall be laid before Congress, which shall compass

this result, it is to be hoped that it may be adopted.”21

In 1870 the waterway was taken over by the United States Gov¬

ernment, but it did not take over the land grants or water power

franchises of the Green Bay and Mississippi Canal Company. This

company is still in existence and maintains the right of control over

19 Warren, p. 47.

^Warren, p. 46.

21 Ibid, p. 47.

136 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

all the surplus water beyond the needs for navigation purposes.22

Agitation continued for years in the attempt to induce Congress to

complete the work already begun. The governors of four states

called a convention which was held at Prairie du Chien in 1868. The

delegates sent a memorial to Congress declaring that the ‘ ‘ immedi¬

ate opening of said channel is demanded by the interests of the

people of the entire country ; the work is one of national import¬

ance, required as a channel of commerce, as a ligament to bind to¬

gether the states, in securing national unity and as a defense in

case of war.”23 Between 1866 and 1875 a most thorough investi¬

gation of the problem was made by Major G. K. Warren for the

government. His report, issued in 1876, is very full and con-,

elusive. It contains a short outline of recommendations, made be¬

fore, and the work accomplished up to that time, as well as the

results of his own work and his conclusions. Major Warren spent

much of his time in a detailed study of the Wisconsin River for

he realized that the work previously done was more superficial here

than along the Fox River. It is true that other engineers working

either for the state, the two private companies, or for the govern¬

ment had made preliminary or reconnaisance surveys. Commis¬

sioners Croswell and Richardson as well as Mr. J enne believed that

the Wisconsin River would be improved by the construction of

wing-dams located so as to contract the shallow portions of the chan¬

nel. Seven of these dams had been built in 1852, but most of them

soon disappeared, — “A fate which attends all wing-dams not con¬

stantly cared for.”24 It was also proposed to keep boats running

at points where bars tended to form and thus keep the sand moving.

Earlier authorities believed that all that was necessary to keep a

three foot channel was to remove the snags and overhanging trees.25

The chief reason for these differences of opinion was the inaccurate

data of slope and current available to the early engineers. Major

Warren concluded that the use of the Wisconsin, especially for a six

foot channel as desired, was impossible because of the constant for¬

mation of sand bars. There are two particularly important require¬

ments for a rectified river. It must be narrow enough to give a

required depth at low water, and broad enough to carry off the

excess water in times of floods. Furthermore, such arrangements

22 Whitbeck, p. 32.

23 Whitbeck, p. 33.

24 Warren, pp. 32, 34.

25 Ibid, p. 30.

Williams — The Passing of An Historic Waterway. 137

must be made as to insure the return of the main stream to the nar¬

row channel.26 Inasmuch as the Wisconsin was broad and shallow

at low water, and as the wing-dams designed to narrow it were

either quickly buried or destroyed, Major Warren advocated the

building of a canal along the Wisconsin River, using the river itself

for short distances. This would necessitate locking in and out of

the river. He estimated the cost of the improvement of the Wis¬

consin alone at $4,000,000 and an additional $50,000 yearly for

maintenance.27 This large initial cost in conjunction with the de¬

crease in the use of canals in general caused the improvement of the

Wisconsin River to be shelved. The government, however, did en¬

large and improve the locks on the Fox river, and now maintains

navigation about 8 months of the year without toll charge.

Up to this time about $4,000,000 has been expended on the

waterway of which only $590,000 has been spent on the Wisconsin

River. The average yearly cost of operation and care has been

about $56,000, and since 1902 the yearly expense for operation has,

with few exceptions, exceeded this average.

After the opening of the canal, the major part of the traffic was

on the Lower Fox from Green Bay to and on Lake Winnebago.

Few records are found of boats of any size having made the con¬

tinuous passage from Green Bay to the Mississippi River. Men¬

tion has been made of the small steamer Aquila which made the

trip in 1856 at high water. In the early 50 ’s, there were regular

steamer routes for short distances along the Fox and six steamers

were running between Green Bay and Kaukauna, one from Fond du

Lac to Oshkosh and then up the Fox and Wolf Rivers to New Lon¬

don. During the sixties and the seventies, the decades in which

the waterway was of most importance, steamboat building was ac¬

tive on the Fox and Wolf rivers. Over 60 boats were built between

1844 and the present time, about 50 of which were constructed be¬

fore 1880. With the exception of coal barges and pleasure boats

however the Fox River is of little use at this time. In recent years

there have been approximately 800,000 tons of coal carried annu¬

ally, principally on the Lower Fox and Lake Winnebago.28

No regular lines of steamboats now run on the Lower Fox but two

or three small steamers or power boats make more or less regular

2« Warren, p. 92.

27 Ibid, pp. 106, 114.

28 Whitbeck, p. 35.

138 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

trips on the Upper Fox and Wolf Rivers. The number of lockages

has increased since 1900 but this is due for the most part to pleasure

boats, especially small gasoline launches. Although the Fox River

has not measured up to anticipations as a highway for steamboats,

it was important in opening up that part of the state more rapidly

than the surrounding regions. The water power developed at the

dams, which were necessary for locks, has been of great advantage

in building up there a concentrated group of industrial cities not

equaled anywhere else in Wisconsin except along the shores of Lake

Michigan. However many of the plants in this section, and four

of the most modern, are now using steam power only.

Steamboat navigation on the Wisconsin has always been almost

negligible. In the 50 ’s following the improvement of the: Fox River,

two steamers were partially successful in the attempt to make regu¬

lar trips to carry lead from Galena to Fort Winnebago (near Port¬

age).29 In 1859 a steamer made regular trips on the Wisconsin

River between Sauk City and Portage.30 Many are the records of

failures in the attempt to navigate the Wisconsin except at high

water stages. In 1868 the Wisconsin, a side wheeler drawing only

two feet, made the attempt and met with little difficulty in the

Upper Fox but found it almost impossible to get down the Wiscon¬

sin at all. Later that same year a dredge boat tried to get up the

Wisconsin from the Mississippi but was unable to get into the Wis¬

consin. The boat drew 32 inches but only 24 inches of water could

be found on the bars of the Wisconsin for six miles up from its

mouth. In 1869 some work was done on the river between Portage

and Sauk City and two small side wheeled steamers were enabled

to make trips but with difficulty.31 In 1887 the bridge tender at

Helena on the Wisconsin River said that it had been four years

since he had swung the draw for a river craft. He told of an at¬

tempt of a small steamboat to make the passage on what was then

considered a good stage of water from Portage to Lone Rock. She

had been two weeks making the 21 miles from Arena to Lone Rock

and finally was abandoned on a sand bar.32 These are but a few

of the many attempts that might be cited. In 1916 I asked the

superintendent of the power plant at Prairie du Sac how many

times he had opened the gates of the dam during the year. He

29 Whitbeck, p. 32.

80 Warren, p. 42.

31 Ibid, p. 59.

82 Thwaites, Down Historic Waterways, p. 262.

Williams - — The Passing of An Historic Waterway. 139

answered: “Three; twice for small launches from Sauk whose

occupants were going up into the lake to hunt for ducks and once

for two new houseboats that were made in Oshkosh for use on the

Mississippi River.”33

Although the causes for the decline of this water way are many,

a few may be mentioned: 1. The shallow depth of most of the

channel. This applies to the Upper Fox and Wisconsin Rivers.

2. The crookedness of the Upper Fox. The devious, winding,

obscure course of this part of the river discouraged and perplexed

even the early canoeist.

3. The closing of the waterway by ice from three to five months

each year. This required the development of some other means of

transportation which could he used the whole year unless there is a

very great advantage in water transportation during the summer

months.

4. The direction or trend of the waterway is against it for

present day commerce. It extends northeast — southwest while the

principal trend of trade for all territory north and west of Chicago

is northwest — southeast. During the present difficulties of railway

transportation it has been proposed that a line of barges be estab¬

lished on the Fox River. This has met with but small encourage¬

ment, largely because of the reason just given.

5. The slowness of the waterway — its use for passengers especi¬

ally was possible only before other means of transportation were

developed.

6. The extremely poor natural facilities of the Wisconsin River

for navigation. This has been touched upon several times in this

article but deserves emphasis. Few writers point out the detri¬

mental effects which the Wisconsin River had on the attempt at

Fox-Wisconsin improvement. True, there have been other influ¬

ences that have been more potent in taking away the trade of this

highway, but if the Wisconsin River had been navigable in the

’50 ’s and ’60 ’s when the agitation and interest were highest, a

traffic would have been established which would have continued

for some time in spite of outside competition. It is a long step

from one of the most perfect natural canoe routes to an even

passable steamboat channel.

7. The chief cause of decline was the competition of other means

of transportation, to a small extent roads, but principally rail-

33 Greene, Kenneth, Personal Communication.

140 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

roads. In the early ?50’s stage lines and other plank roads were

developed connecting tl principal places and diverted considerable

of the river passenger traffic.34 In 1857, the Milwaukee and

Prairie du Chien Railroad, crossing the Wisconsin River three times,

was completed to the Mississippi River. In 1862 the Chicago and

North Western Railroad reached Green Bay,35 so before the wa¬

terway had reached its highest stage of improvement, powerful

competitors entered the field and drew the trade into new channels

before the route had been fully tried out. The railroads were able

to accomplish this in spite of the fact that for the greater part of

the route, or from Spring Green to Oshkosh, no railway parallels

the waterway. In 1887, R. G. Thwaites made an excursion through

the waterway and has painted a vivid word picture of fallen

grandeur and prosperity. He says, 4 ‘The canal, like the most of

the Fox-Wisconsin improvement, is fast relapsing into a costly

relic. The timbered sides are shaky and worm-eaten, and several

moss covered barges and a stranded old ruin of a steamboat turned

out to grass tell a sad story of official abandonment.”36

Today the dream of a commercial waterway is past, but the

scheme has added a very pretty pleasure route to the beauties of the

state. There can be no doubt that this project, though a failure

in itself, was of great advantage to the state, in that it attracted

attention to the importance of the region. The route did serve as

an avenue of early access to the settlers and the agitation and partial

improvement hastened the coming of statehood. To the villages and

cities along the route, the failure of the Fox-Wisconsin to become

a great commercial highway was a bitter disappointment, but the

results of such delusions must inevitably be shared by all those

whose hopes for commercial greatness are tied to a small inland

waterway.

34 Warren, p. 40.

35 Whitbeck, p. 32.

36 Thwaites, Down Historic Waterways, p. 144.

THE ARSENICAL SOLUTIONS

No. 1. Liquor Potassii Arsenitis

(Fowler’s Solution)

H. A. LAN GENH AN.

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT

The history of arsenic therapy is of considerable interest in the

evolution of the materia pharmaceutica. Natural compounds of

arsenic, such as realgar and auripigment were used during anti¬

quity,1 but primarily for external purposes. Because of the change

which they produced in the color of copper, arsenical compounds

have played an important role during the alchemistic period of

chemical history.2 As a result, new derivatives of arsenic were

discovered,3 some of which at least were destined to play a role in

the battles between the iatrochemists and the representatives of the

old or Galenical School of Medicine.4 A larger increase to the

number of arsenic compounds, however, did not come until the

close of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth cen-

1 For a concise statement of the knowledge of the ancients, see Kopp,

Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 89.

Berendes, Des Pedanios Dioskurides Arzneimittellehre, p. 531 (Chap. 120 :

Arsenikon ; and Chap. 121: Sandaracha.)

Pliny, Natural History (Bohn’s Classical Library, vol. 6, p. 104 (Orpiment)

and p. 220 (Sandarach and Arrhenicum).

Scribonius Largus (Felix Rinne, Das Receptbuch des Scribonius Largus, vol.

5 of R. Robert, Historische Studien aus dem Pharmakologischen Institute der k.

Universitat Dorpat, p. 79 ( Auripigmentum) and p. 84 (Sandaraca.)

For a more detailed account see, “Historical Notes on Arsenic and its prin¬

cipal combinations: by G. F. Babcock, New Remedies, vol. 12, (1883) pp. 98,

131 and 170.

2 Comp. E. v. Meyer, History of Chemistry (3rd ed.) p. 58: “On account

of this behaviour, the pseudo-Geber calls arsenic Medicina Venerem dealbans”.

See also Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 94.

3 The arsenicum album (As2 03) of the alchemists; the arsenicum fixum of

Paracelsus (arsenic acid or its potassium salt). Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie,

vol. 4, p. 95.

4 Meyer, History of Chemistry (2d ed.) p. 94.

141

142 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

tury.5 Still later followed the organic derivatives of arsenic that

formed the basis of the classical researches by Bunsen.6 7 Com¬

paratively few of these have found application in medicine, one of

the latest being the much discussed specific “606” or salvarsam.1

If the chemotherapy of arsenic includes but few of its com¬

pounds, pharmacopoeial preparations of the derivatives of this ele¬

ment are even less numerous. Those of the U. S. P. and N. F. are

but seven in number and can be grouped as follows :

1. ) Solutions of arsenous acid and its salts:

1. ) Liquor Acidi Arsenosi, U. S. P.

2. ) Liquor Potassii Arsenitis , U. S. P.

2. ) Solutions of arsenates:

3. ) Liquor Sodii Arsenatis , U. S. P.

4. ) Liquor Sodii Arsenatis, Pearson, N. F.

5. ) Liquor Arsenicalis, Clemen’s, N. F.

3. ) Solutions of arsenic trihalides (or rather “double salts”) :

6. ) Liquor Arseni et Hydrargyri lodidi, U. S. P.

7. ) Liquor Auri et Arseni Bromidi, N. F.

I. Solutions of Arsenous Acid and Its Salts.

The socalled “arsenious acid” of the older chemists, our arsenous

acid anhydride, or arsenic trioxide, is but sparingly soluble in wa¬

ter, yet sufficiently soluble to form solutions with a 1 p. c. As203

content. Nevertheless such a solution is not official in any of the

latest editions of the pharmacopoeias.8 9 Neither does the simple

solution appear to be prescribed at present by physicians, although

arsenic trioxide is frequently prescribed in solid form as pill,®

°Kopp Geschichte der Chemie, 4, p. 96.

6 The reprint of these has been edited by A. v. Baeyer in Ostwald’s Klassiker

der exakten Wissenschaften. vol. 27.

7 This epoch making discovery is discussed by Schweizer “Ehrlich’s Chemo¬

therapy— a new science” in Science, vol. 32, p. 809. (Dec. 9, 1910.)

8 In the French Codex of 1884 a Solute Arsenical ou Mineral (Boudin), one-

tenth as strong as the corresponding U. S. P. arsenical solution, was official,

but has been dropped in the latest edition. See also Dorvault, L’Offfcine, 15th

edition (1910), p. 1289, which also gives a formula for a Solute Arsenical (Is-

nard), which is only one-tenth of the strength of Boudin’s solution.

9 Arsenic trioxide enters the Pilulae Ferri, Quininae, Strychninae et Arseni

fortiores of the National Formulary 4th revision ; also Pilulae F. Q. S. et As.

mites , N. F. IV with less arsenic trioxide.

The French Codex of 1866 and 1884, but not the latest edition, contains.

Granules d’ Acide Arsenieux ; also Pilules Arsenicales (Pilules Asiatiques) ; see

also, L’Officine 15th edition (1910), p. 1061; Binz, Lectures on Pharmacology,

vol. 2, (1897), p. 88, translation by Latham.

Langenhan — Tine Arsenical Solutions.

143

powder,10 or tablet. The slow solubility of arsenic trioxide in wa¬

ter may be accelerated either by hydrochoric acid or by potassium

carbonate. The question may well arise, are these adjuncts mere

pharmaceutical conveniences or do the resulting reaction mixtures

differ sufficiently chemically to make the products different thera¬

peutic agents'? If essentially alike as therapeutic agents, another

pharmaceutical question may be asked, viz., are the two solutions

required in medical practice to avoid chemical incompatibilities

when prescribed with other substances? The first question is an¬

swered in the negative by modern pharmacologists.* 11 The socalled

neutral solution being unstable,12 the acid and alkaline solutions

afford pharmaceutical advantages only. Both are official so that

incompatibilities may be avoided by using either the one or the

other.13

In a general way, the chemistry of these two solutions has cer¬

tain aspects in common, hence may be considered together if for

no other reasons than to avoid unnecessary repetition. The reac¬

tions involved may be reviewed from the following points of view :

A. ) The hydration of arsenic trioxide.

B. ) The action of an alkali, such as potassium hydroxide or

potassium carbonate, on the hydration products.

C. ) The action of hydrogen chloride on the hydration products.

A. Hydration of arsenic trioxide.

When arsenic trioxide, arsenous acid anhydride, is dissolved in

water, its hydration to metarsenous and other arsenous acids may

be assumed. This hydration finds a ready expression in the fol¬

lowing structural formulas of these compounds :14

As^°

\ II

O + OH

AS\\

O

— - —

Arsenous acid

anhydride.

10 In the French Codex of 1866 there was official a Poudre d’ Acide Arsenieux.

11 See letters by Bernard Fantus, A. S. Loevenhart, and Torald Sollmann.

“See letter by Dr. Withering, in Fowler’s Report, p. 124.

m See letters by Dr. Fantus and Dr. Sollmann.

14 'Similar formulas are used by A. Stavenhagen in his article on “Beitraege

zur Kentniss der Arsenite”. Joum. pr. Chem. (1895) 159, p, 1.

As— OH

As— OH

Metarsenous acid.

144 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts , and Letters.

H

As + OH

\()H

Metarsenous acid

/OH

As— OH

\OH

Ortho-arsenous acid.

For a better understanding of the chemical possibilities of prod¬

ucts obtained upon the evaporation of the solution of the arsenites,

the following condensation products of ortho-arsenous acid with

itself may be referred to.

/OH

As— OH

\OH

— h2o

/OH

As-OH

\()H

Ortho-arsenous acid

w? r

/OH

As— OH

^O

As— OH

\OH

Di-arsenous acid (tetra basic)

Still another dehydration reaction may be indicated by the fol¬

lowing formulas :

HO

OH

As

O

-HsO

HO — As

OH

OH

As

As

OH

O

Uiarsenous acid (dibasic)

A trioxide of arsenic resulting upon complete dehydration of

this dibasic diarsenous acid which, however, is different structur¬

ally, hence in its properties, from the compound with which we

started out, readily follows:

O

.As\

OH '

OH

'As^'

O

H20

O

As

<To

As

Diarsenous acid (dibasic)

Diarsenous acid anhydride.

The possibilities of other hydration products of arsenic trioxide

need not here be considered.

15 Salts of this acid have been prepared by Stavenhagen, 1. c.

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

145

B. Action of Alkalies on Arsenous Acid.

Leaving out of consideration the diarsenous acid,16 as well as

other possible polyarsenous acids, it is quite apparent

1.) That metarsenous acid is monobasic and with metals may be

supposed to form the simple metarsenites :

As

\0— IT

Metarsenous acid

As

\(J_M

Metarsenites

2.) That orthoarsenous acid is tribasic and may be expected to

form three types of orthoarsenites, viz. :

/OH

As— OH

\OH

/OM'

As— OH

\OH

/OM'

As— OM'

\OH

/OM'

As— OM'

NOM'

o — Arsenous acid Mono-metal

dihydrogen

orthoarsenite

Di-metal Tri-metal

monohydrogen orthoarsenite

orthoarsenite

This leaves out of consideration, for the time at least, the possi¬

bility of the re-arrangement of the atoms of the orthoarsenous acid

molecule made possible by a change of valence, such as that of the

phosphorus, from three to five and the salts of the new ic acid.

As— H

\OH

\()H

ic Isomer of o — arsenous acid

Which of the above salts are formed depends, in part at least,

on the ratio of acid and alkali. Presumably a mixture, not a single

compound results. As to which may dominate in the equilibrium

resulting from a given formula for preparation need not be con¬

sidered here, but will receive such attention as seems desirable,

under the study of the pharmaeopoeial formulas in use.

18 Pyroarsenites have also been prepared by Stavenhagen, 1. c.

/OH

As— OH

\OH

o— Arsenous acid

10— S. A. L.

146 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

C. Action of Hydrogen Chloride on Arsenous Acid.

For the present purposes the diarsenous acids and other more

or less complicated possibilities may be disregarded. Taking into

consideration only the simple meta and orthoarsenous acids, the

possibilities are indicated by the following structural formulas :

/OH /OH /OH ^C1

As— OH As— OH As— Cl As— Cl

\OH \C1 \C1 \C1

^O 5^0

As — OH As— Cl

Again it becomes apparent that when arsenic trioxide is dis¬

solved in water with the aid of hydrogen chloride, a number of

products, rather than a single one, are likely to result and that the

equilibrium, that finds its expression in a given pharmacopoeial

preparation, will depend on a number of factors.

LIQUOR POTASSII ARSENITIS (FOWLER’S SOLUTION).

History : — The arsenicum album17 of the alcemists, the arsenous

acid of the antiphlogistic nomenclature, our arsenic trioxide, ap¬

pears first to be mentioned in the Latin alchemistic manuscripts

formerly attributed to Geber.18 Under the ban of the phlogistic

theory, it was regarded as the calx of the regulinic arsenic, a half

metal (Brandt, 1733). 19 This conception paved the way to the

recognition of the “white arsenic” as an oxide of the element.20

The differentation of the two oxides as acide arsenieux and acide

arsenique in accordance with the new nomenclature of Morveau,

Lavoisier, Berethollet and Fourcroy (1787) naturally followed.

The recognition of the several arsenous acids: ortho, meta and

pyro and their several salts also of the isomeric trioxides came

later.

17 So called to contrast it with arsenicum citrinum (auripigment) and arseni-

cum rubrum (realgar), Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 90.

18 Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 90 ; also E. v. Meyer, History of

Chemistry (3rd ed.) p. 58.

1#Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 92.

“Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 99.

Lang enhan— The Arsenical Solutions.

147

As already pointed out, the medicinal use of arsenic compounds

was restricted largely to external purposes (depilatory, etc.)-

Whether arsenic, or more correctly, arsenous acid or its salts, or

possibly organic derivatives of arsenic, played a role in the famous

Aqua tofana of about 1700 may possibly never be definitely cleared

up.21 That white arsenic combines with aqueous alkalies was shown

by Maequer22 in 1746 and 1748, who called the products resulting

fois d’ arsenic , or arsenic liver, reminding of the times when ar¬

senic was supposed to be similar to sulphur.23

It was this property that Hughes, apothecary of the infirmary

at Stafford, made use of when requested by Fowler to analyze and

duplicate a quack remedy, known as “Tasteless ague or fever

drops” which the latter had found efficacious in the “cure” of

“agues, remitting fevers and periodic headaches”.24 This was in

1786. “It is universally recognized that Fowler introduced the

modern medicinal employment of the arsenic, but it should in

fairness be remembered that he was guided to his discovery by a

quack remedy, as he himself fully acknowledged”.25

Fowler’s solution quickly found its way into the pharmaco¬

poeias: first of all into the London Pharmacopoeia of 1809. 23 From

this it quickly passed into the first edition of the United States

Pharmacopoeia which was published in 1822. On the European

continent, it made its first appearance in the Pharmacopoea Han-

overana of 1819. Its rapid admission to the other state pharma¬

copoeias is indicated by the following chronological list:27

1822 Pharmacopoea Bawatrica

1823 Pharmacopoea Belgica

1826 Codex Medicament arius

21 Comp. Peters, Aug pharmazeutischer Vorzeit, neue Folge, sweite Aufl.,

(1899), p. 124.

22 See Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 4, p. 95.

Maequer, Dictionary of Chemistry, pp„ 648 and 666 ; Maequer however, does

not differentiate between the potassium arsenite obtained by dissolving arsenic

trioxide in potassium carbonate solution, and potassium arsenate, obtained by

dissolving arsenic trioxide in aqueous potassium nitrate solution.

23 A similarity that is even today reflected in the classification of minerals

as illustrated by the isomorphous series of pyrites and arsenical pyrites.

34 Wootton, Chronicles of pharmacy, vol. 2, p. 134; See also Wilson’s patent

in appendix.

26 Wootton, p. 135.

28 Powell’s translation of the Pharmacopoeia Londinensis, 1809.

27 Whether in all cases the date given is that of the first appearance has not

been definitely settled because of the inability to consult complete sets of edi¬

tions in all cases.

148 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

1827 Pharmacopoea Borussica

1831 Pharmacopoea Slesvico-Holsatica

1855 Pharmacopoea Austy*iaca

1868 Pharmacopoea Danica

While Macquer,28 who was professor of Medicine and Chemistry

at the University of Paris, points out that only quacks used arsenic

for internal administration, the regular medical practitioners of

the infirmary of Stafford, England, used the “Tasteless ague and

fever drops,” a secret preparation,29 during the years 1781, 1782,

and 1783 as a remedy against intermittent fevers. This adoption

of a “patent medicine”30 by the physicians of the infirmary,

caused the apothecary Hughes to analyse30 and imitate31 this secret

preparation, basing his experiments on the “pharmaceutic his¬

tory” of arsenic found in Lewis’s Materia Medica.32 Even of the

milder sulphide minerals, Lewis makes the following statement:

“The native minerals have been used as medicines in the eastern

countries, and by some imprudently recommended in our own”.

(Materia Medica, p. 104.)

According to the account of Dr. Withering of Birmingham, this

physician used a simple solution of arsemcum album, one grain to

each ounce of distilled water, the solution being “facilitated by

boiling for a minute or two in a Florence Flask, or other glass

vessel”. “Long continued boiling” he adds “disposes it to pre¬

cipitate again ’ \33 The same formula was employed by Dr. Arnold

of Leicester34 who directs the solution to be filtered. While this

solution was satisfactory in hospital practice, where the quantity

28 Diet, of Chemistry, p. 103: “Arsenic is a very violent corrosive poison:

it produces always the most painful symptoms and fatal effects, whether it be

taken internally or applied externally. It ought never to be employed medi¬

cinally, although some people not very intelligent, give small doses of it in

obstinate intermittent fevers, which it effectually cures, but is always attended

with bad consequences to the patients, such as phthisis, and other no less

troublesome diseases.”

29 Fowler, Medical Reports, Preface, p. vii.

30 Ibidem, Preface, p. vi ; See also Wootton, On patent medicines in Appendix.

Ibidem, p. 124, Withering, letter to Fowler.

31 Ibidem, Preface, p. vii.

32 An Experimental History of the Materia Medica of the Natural and Arti¬

ficial Substances Made Use of in Medicine. Containing A Compendious View

of their Natural History, An Account of their Pharmaceutic Properties, And

an Estimate of their Medicinal Powers, so far as they can be ascertained by

Experience, or by rational Induction from their sensible Qualities. By William

Lewis , London. 1761.

83 Fowler, Medical Reports, p. 124.

34 Ibidem, p. 117.

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

149

prepared was used up quickly, it did not suffice for private prac¬

tice because precipitation took place upon standing. In order to

overcome this, Mr. Baley, the apothecary of Birmingham, added

“nitre” to the solution “by the direction of Mr. Hughes”.35

Fowler, in his report states that he used “fixed vegetable alkali”.36

At the same time he points out that the “fixed vegetable alkali” is

not “perfectly pure; for that which is of the Druggists is fre¬

quently so impure, a double Proportion of purified nitre may be

substituted” instead of going to the trouble of purifying the al¬

kali.37

We have, therefore, at the very beginning, when arsenical ther¬

apy was transferred from the secret practices of nostrum venders

to the above board practice of the regular physician, three differ¬

ent pharmaceutical preparations:

1. ) The simple solution of arsenic trioxide in water;

2. ) The solution of arsenic trioxide in water with the aid of

potassium carbonate, a chemical solution socalled with the

formation presumably of a potassium arsenite;

3. ) The solution of arsenic trioxide in water with the aid of

potassium nitrate whereby presumably a potassium arsen¬

ate is formed.

All three solutions have found their way into pharmacopoeias

or similar standards. Thus the simple solution of arsenic trioxide

was official in the French Codex. That of the ratio of 1 :1000 as

Solute Arsenical ou Mineral (Boudin) in 1884. A Solute Arseni¬

cal Isnard, ratio 1 :10000, is likewise mentioned by Dorvault in his

L’Officine (1910), p. 1289. The solution of arsenic trioxide in

aqueous potassium carbonate is the one that became official in most

pharmacopoeias, with “Fowler’s Solution” either as title or syn¬

onym. The third solution has become official as Liquor Arsenicalis

Clemens, N. F., IV, though the oxidation is effected not by the

nitric acid set free from the nitre, but by bromine. Similar sodium

compounds are official as Liquor Sodii Arsenatis , U. S. P. and

Liquor Sodii Arsenatis, Pearson, N. F., IV.

Names and Synonyms. The compound resulting upon the union

of “white arsenic” (As203) and alkali in aqueous solution was

named fois d’ arsenic, liver of arsenic, by Macquer in 1776 because

of the similarity of arsenic to sulphur which produced the socalled

35 Ibidem, p. 125.

36 Ibidem, Preface p. viii ; also p. 79.

37 Ibidem, pp. 82 and 83.

150 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

livers (liver of sulphur) under similar conditions. When Fowler

prepared his arsenical solution in 1786, the new nomenclature of

acids, bases and salts of Lavoisier and his committee of four (1787)

had not been worked out. Moreover, he desired particularly to

omit any reference to arsenic, hence he called his preparation

(t Mineral Solution”.38 Somewhat later the solution was merely

known as Liquor (solwHo) arsenicalis Fowleri and as such became

official in the London Pharmacopoeia of 1809.

In the U. S. P. of 1820 the English title is still “ Arsenical solu¬

tion”, but in the Latin title an attempt was made to make it con¬

form with the new nomenclature of the antiphlogistic system of

chemistry, hence Liquor Potassae Arseniatis.39 Whether this

should read Arsenitis and whether it is to be assumed that the ad¬

ditional “a” is due to a typographical error, it may be too late to

ascertain. The 1830 Philadelphia edition makes the correction :

Liquor Potassae Arsenitis, whereas the New York edition uses

Liquor Arsenicalis as the official Latin title and Solution of Arsen-

ite of Potass, as well as Fowler’ s solution as English synonyms for

Arsenical Solution.

The change from the oxygen acid to the hydrogen acid nomen¬

clature, viz. to Liquor Potassii Arsenitis ,, is made in 1870 and con¬

tinues throughout after that date. Fowler’s name appears only

in connection with the synonyms for the New York 1830 edition

and in the revisions of 1880, 1900 (index only) and 1910.

A list of recent pharmacopoeia! titles follows with references to

sources.40

38 In his report, preface page x, Fowler, makes the following statement :

“ as the idea of poison seems to be so strongly connected with that of ar¬

senic, it will be found to be very difficult to separate them in the mind, when¬

ever that term is named ; and therefore to correct as much as possible such

disagreeable ideas, in the practice of the healing art, the medicine now about

to be introduced to the notice of the public, will be distinguished by the name

Mineral Solution.”

39 Up to the present date the British Pharmacopoeia refuses to apply a chem¬

ical designation to this solution, but calls it Liquor Arsenicalis. In comment¬

ing on the British usage the editors of the U. S. Dispensatory, 13th ed. in 1872,

make the following statement: “The name by which this preparation is desig¬

nated in the U. S. Pharmacopoeia is the most correct. It has however, been

denied that the carbonate of potassa is decomposed by the arsenious acid,

which is supposed to be merely held in solution ; and, in this view of the nature

of the preparation the British name Arsenical Solution would be appropriate.”

40 For non pharmacopoeial names and synonyms, likewise for older pharma¬

copoeia! nomenclature see the glossary.

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

151

Arsenikdropper, Ph. Svenska (1908).

Arsenicalis Liquor Fowler H, Ph. Belg. (1906).

Arsenical Solution , Ph. B. (1914).

Fowler’s Arsenikdraaper, Ph. Norv. (1913).

Fowler sche Loesung , P. G. (1910).

Fowler’s Solution , U. S. P. IX.

Kalii arsenicosi liquor, Ph. Belg. (1906).

Kalium Arsenicosum solutum, Ph. Helv. (1907).

Licor Arsenical de Fowler , Ph. Hisp. (1905).

Liqueur Arsenicale de Fowler, Ph. Belg. (1906).

Liqueur de Fowler , Fr. Cod. (1908).

Liquor Arsenicalis , Ph. B. (1914).

Liquor Arsenicalis Fowleri,, Ph. Norv. (1913).

Liquor Arsenicalis ex Fowler, Ph. Hisp. (1905).

Liquor Arsenicale del Fowler (F. I.), Ph. Ital. (1909).

Liquor Arsenitis Kalici, Ph. Svensky, (1908).

Liquor Arseniitis Kalici, Ph. Norv .(1913).

Liquor Fowleri, Ph. Norv. (1913).

Liquor Kalii Arsenicosi , Ph. G. (1910).

Liquor Potassae arseniatis , U. S. P. (1820).

Liquor Potassii Arsenitis, U. S. P. (1916).

Potassium arsenit licuid, Ph. Roman. (1893).

Solucion de Arseniio Potasico, Ph. Hisp. (1905).

Solute d’ Arsenit e de Potasse, Fr. Cod. (1908).

Solutio Arsenitis Kalii composita, Nedrl. Ph. (1898).

Solutio Arsenicalis Fowleri, Ph. Russ. (1910).

Solutio Kalii arsenicosi, Ph. G. (1910).

Soluto le arsenito de Potassa, Ph. Port. (1876).

Solution of Potassiu\m Arsenit e, U. S. P. IX.

Solutum Arsenitis Kalici, Ph. Port. (1876).

Solutum arsenitis potassici, Ph. Hisp. (1905).

Soluzione del Fowler, Ph. Helv. (1907).

Soluzione alcalina di metarsenito di potassio, Ph. Ital. (1909).

The London and British Pharmacopoeias afford an interesting

example of apparent chemical misnomenclature. The Latin title

of the 1809 London Pharmacopoeia, the first to make Fowler ’s solu¬

tion official, is Liquor Arsenicalis. This title was used in the Lon¬

don Pharmacopoeia of 1824, but that of 1851 used the dualistic

title Liquor Potassae ArsenMis. The British Pharmacopoeia re-

i

152 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

turned to the title Liquor Arsenicalis 41 and has maintained it

throughout its revisions ; the title of the London Pharmacopoeia of

1851, viz. Liquor Potassae Arsenitis being used as a synonym.

If the official title is to be justified because we really know little

about the exact chemistry of the solution, this excuse or line of

reasoning will not hold when we study the English practice as to

the designation of the principal ingredient of the solution. In the

1809 London Pharmacopoeia it was Arsenici Oxidum Sublimatum,

hence in accordance with the dualistie nomenclature. Yet in 1824

it was changed back to Arsenicum album sublimatum. In 1851 it

became Acidum Arseniosum, again in accordance with the dualistie

nomenclature. But whereas the designation of 1809, viz. Arsenici

oxtidum, is indicative of a base, that of 1851, Acidum Arseniosum ,

is plainly indicative of an acid. It is possibly because of this that

the phrase ( Acidum metallicum sublimation praeparatum) is added

in parenthesis. Whereas the element is still pronounced metallic

in character, its oxide is now, not a base, but an acid.

A peculiar incongruity in spelling is found in the words arseni-

ous and arsenite. The ending ous is that of the acid with lower

oxygen content, and becomes ite for the salts thereof. The ending

ic is that of acids of higher oxygen content and becomes ate for its

salts. Hence arsenic should yield :

A. ) arsenous acid, and its salts should be arsenites; also

B. ) arsenic acid, and its salts should be arsenates.

However the former acid is commonly spelled arsenious acid

(P. L. 1851 ; B. P. 1864, 1885, 1898, 1914.). Hence the salt should

be arseniite, but almost invariably it is spelled without the second

i i j, > > 42

The English pharmacopoeias are not the only offenders in this

direction. Koscoe and Schorlemmer, in their “Treatise on Chem¬

istry”, vol. II, p. 1246 (1911) still use arsenious acid and arsenites.

Our own Pharmacopoeias, after having clung to arsenious acid

(Latin, Acidum Arseniosum) from 1820 to 1880 inclusive, in 1890

changed its spelling to Arsenous acid (Latin, Acidum Arsenosum),

only to be changed in the subsequent editions to Arsenic Trioxide

(Latin, Arseni Trioxidum) .

41 “This appelation is certainly very objectionable, as it conveys an erroneous

idea of the preparation, even admitting that the term arsenic may be used to

designate the white oxide : it should have been Liquor Arsenialis Potassae or

Liquor alcalinus Oxidi Arsenici ”, A. T. Thomson, The London Dispensatory,

4th edition, 1826.

42 The single exception observed thus far is found in the Norwegian Pharma¬

copoeia of 1913: Liquor Arseniitis Kalici.

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

153

Pharmacopoeial. Text. In as much as Fowler’s solution was

made official in the first edition of the U. S. Pharmacopoeia, was

included in both the New York and Philadelphia editions of 1830,

and has remained official up to the present time, there are eleven

written texts to be considered. Moreover, the 1820 edition and

both of the 1830 editions contain the text in both Latin and Eng¬

lish. The detailed comments on the text, whether based on the

study of the literature of the subject or on laboratory experiments

or observations, are recorded in connection with those parts of the

text to which they have reference. A better idea of this part may

be had by a mere glance at the list of text subjects commented

upon:

1. ) Titles and Synonyms.

2. ) Definition.

3. ) Preservation.

4. ) Arsenic trioxide as an ingredient.

5. ) The form in which it is used.

6. ) Potassium carbonate or bicarbonate as an ingredient.

7. ) Ratio of ingredients.

8. ) Water.

9. ) Amount of water to effect solution.

10. ) Solution of arsenic trioxide.

11. ) Alcohol and compound tincture of lavender.

12. ) Volume of finished product.

13. ) Appearance of finished product.

14. ) Qualitative tests.

15. ) Assay.

16. ) Dose.

Note. For convenient reference, the numbers representing the sub¬

jects commented upon are incorporated in the text proper.

154 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters.

LIQUOR POTASSAE ARSENIATIS1 U. S. P. 1820

Ingredients.

R. Acidi arseniosi,4 in pulverem

snbtilem redacti;5

Potassae subcarbonatis,6 utri-

usque grana sexaginta qua-

tuor.7

Aquae distillatae8 oetantem

unum.9

Arsenical

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenious acid,4 in fine

powder ;5

Subcarbonate of potass,6 each

sixty-four grains.7

Distilled water,8 one pint.9

Directions.

In vase vitreo concoque donee

acidum arseniosum omne resolva-

tor.10 Liquorem frigefaetum in

mensuram octariam infunde ; et

adde

Alcoholis fluidr'aehmas quatuor,11

Et aquae distillatae quantum

suffecerit ad mensuram complen-

dam.12

Solution1

Directions. ,

Boil them together in a glass

vessel until the arsenic is entirely

dissolved.10 When the solution is

cold, pour it into a pint measure,

and add thereto Alcohol,11 four

fluidrachms, and so much distilled

water, as shall fill up the measure.12

LIQUOR ARSENICALIS1 U. S. P. 1830 N. Y.

Ingredients.

R. Acidi arsenici4 in pulverem

subtilem redacti,5

Potassae subcarbonatis,6 utri-

usque grana sexaginta qua¬

tuor,7

Aquae distillatae8 oetantem

unum,9

Alcoholis fluidrachmas qua¬

tuor j11

Directions.

In case vitreo concoque donee

acidum arseniosum omne resolva-

tur.10

Liquorem frigefaetum in men¬

suram octariam infunde; et adde

alcohol, et aquae distillatae quant¬

um suffecerit ad mensuram comp-

lendam.

Langenkan — The Arsenical Solutions.

155

Arsenical Solution

Solution of Arsenite of Potass. Fowler’s Solution1

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenious acid,4 in fine

powder,5

Subcarbonate of potass,6 each

sixty-four grains,7

Distilled water8 one pint,9

Alcohol, four fluidrachms,11

Directions.

Boil them together in a glass

vessel, until the arsenic is entirely

dissolved.10. When the solution is

cold, pour it into a pint measure,

and add to it the alcohol and so

much distilled water, as shall fill

up the measure.12

LIQUOR POTASSAE ARSENITIS1 U. S. P. 1830 Phila.

Ingredients.

R. Acidi arseniosi4 in pulverem

subtilissimum triti,5

Potassae Carbonatis Puris-

simi,6 singulorum, grana

sexaginta quatuor;7

Aquae Destillatae8 quantum

satis sit;

Spiritus Lavandulae Compo-

siti fluidrachmas quatuor.11

Directions.

Acidum Arseniosum et Potassae

Carbonatem cum Aquae Destil¬

latae octario9 coque, in vase vitreo.

donee Acidum omnino liquetur.10

Liquori frigefacto ad j ice Spiri¬

tual Lavandulae, et postea Aquae

Destillatae quantum satis sit ut

mensuram octarii accurate im-

pleat.12

Solution of Arsenite of Potassa1

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenious Acid,4 in very

fine powder,5

Purest Carbonate of Potassa,

each,6 sixty-four grains,7

Distilled Water a sufficient

quantity ;

Compound Spirit of Lavender

four fluidrachms.11

Directions.

Boil the Arsenious Acid and

Carbonate of Potassa with a pint9

of Distilled Water, till the Acid is

entirely dissolved.10 To the solu¬

tion, when cold, add the Spirit of

Lavender, and afterwards suffi¬

cient Distilled Water to make it fill

up exactly the measure of a pint.12

156 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters .

LIQUOR POTASSAE ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1840

Solution of Arsenite of Potassa1

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenious Acid,4 in

small fragments,5

Pure Carbonate of Potassa,

each,6 sixty-four grains;7

Distilled Water8 a sufficient

quantity ;

Compound Spirit of Lavender

half a fluidounce.11

Directions.

Boil the Arsenious Acid and

Carbonate of Potassa with twelve

fluidounces9 of Distilled Water, in

a glass vessel, until the Acid is en¬

tirely dissolved.10 To the solution,

when cold, add the Spirit of Lav¬

ender, and afterwards sufficient

Distilled Water to make it fill

exactly the measure of a pint.12

LIQUOR POTASSAE ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1850

Solution of Arsenite of Potassa1

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenious Acid,4 in

small fragments,5

Pure Carbonate of Potassa,6

each, sixty-four grains ;7

Distilled Water8 a sufficient

quantity ;

Compound Spirit of Lavender

half a fluidounce.11

Directions.

Boil the Arsenious Acid and

Carbonate of Potassa, in a glass

vessel, with twelve fluidounces of

Distilled Water, till the Acid is

entirely dissolved.10 To the solu¬

tion, when cold, add the Spirit of

Lavender, and afterwards suf¬

ficient Distilled Water to make it

fill exactly the measure of a pint.12

LIQUOR POTASSAE ARSENITIS U, S. P. 1860

Solution of Arsenite of Potassa1

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenious Acid,4 in

small pieces,5

Bicarbonate of Potassa,6 each,

sixty-four grains;7

Compound Spirit of Lavender

half a fluidounce;11

Distilled Water8 a sufficient

quantity.

Directions.

Boil the Arsenious Acid and Bi¬

carbonate of Potassa, in a glass

vessel, with twelve fluidounces9 of

Distilled Water till the Acid is

entirely dissolved.10 To the solu¬

tion, when cold, add the Com¬

pound Spirit of Lavender, and

afterwards sufficient Distilled Wa¬

ter to make it measure a pint.12

Lang enhan— -The Arsenical Solutions.

157

LIQUOR POTASSII ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1870

Solution of Arsenite of Potassium1

Ingredients.

Take of Arsenions Acid,4 in

small pieces,5

Bicarbonate of Potassium,6 each,

sixty-four grains;7

Compound Spirit of Lavender

half a fluidounce ;lx

Distilled Water8 a sufficient

quantity.

Directions.

Boil the Arsenious Acid and Bi¬

carbonate of Potassium, in a glass

vessel, with half a fluidounce9 of

Distilled Water, until the Acid is

entirely dissolved,10 and add twelve

fluidounces of Distilled Water.

Then add the Compound Spirit of

Lavender, and afterwards enough

Distilled Water to make it meas¬

ure a pint.12

LIQUOR POTASSII ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1880

Solution of Arsenite of Potassium

[Fowler’s Solution.]1

Arsenious Acid,4 in small pieces,5 one part 7 . . . 1

Bicarbonate of Potassium,6 one part 7 . . . . 1

Compound Tincture of Lavender,11 three parts . . 3

Distilled Water* a sufficient quantity,

To make one hundred parts 12 . 100

Boil the Arsenious Acid and Bicarbonate of Potassium in a

glass vessel with ten (10) parts 9 of Distilled Water, until the Acid

is completely dissovled.10 Then add the Compound Tincture of

Lavender, and enough Distilled Water to make the product weigh

one hundred (100) parts. Lastly, set the mixture aside for eight

days and then filter through paper.3

If 24.7 Cm. of the Solution are boiled with 2 Gm. of bicarbonate of

sodium, the liquid, when cold, diluted with 100 C.c. of water, and some

gelatinized starch added, should require from 48.5 to 50 C.c. of the vol¬

umetric solution of iodine, before the blue color ceases to disappear on

stirring (corresponding to 1 per cent, of arsenious acid of the required

purity).15

158 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

LIQUOR POTASSI ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1890

Solution of Potassium Arsenite

[Fowler’s Solution.]1

Arsenous Acid,4 in fine powder,5 ten grammes 7 . 10 Gm.

Potassium Bicarbonate,6 twenty grammes T . 20 Gm.

Compound Tincture of Lavender,11 thirty cubic centimeters - 30 Cc.

Distilled Water,8 a sufficient quantity.

To make one thousand cubic centimeters12..- . 1000 Cc.

Boil the Arsenous Acid and Potassium1 Bicarbonate with one

hundred (100) cubic centimeters9 of Distilled Water, until solu¬

tion has been effected.10 Then add enough Distilled Water to make

the solution, when cold, measure nine hundred and seventy (970)

cubic pentimeters, and, lastly, add the Compound Tincture of Lav¬

ender. Filter through paper.

If 24.7 Cc. of the Solution be boiled for a few minutes with 2 Gm. of

sodium bicarbonate, and the liquor, when cold, diluted with water to 100

Cc., and mixed with a little starch T.S., it should require from 49.4 to 50

Cc. of decinormal iodine V.S. to produce the blue tint of iodide of starch

(corresponding to 1 Gm. of arsenous acid in 100 Cc. of the Solution).15

LIQUOR POTASSII ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1900

Solution of Potassium Arsenite1

An aqueous solution, which should contain Potassium Arsenite

corresponding in amount to 1 percent, of arsenic trioxide.2

Arsenic Trioxide,4 in fine powder,5 ten grammes'1 . 10 Gm.

Potassium Bicarbonate,6 twenty grammes 7 . . . 20 Gm.

Compound Tincture of Lavender,11 thirty grammes....- . 30 Gm.

Distilled Water,8 a sufficient quantity,

To make one thousand grammes 12 . 1000 Gm.

Boil the Arsenic Trioxide and Potassium Bicarbonate, in a

tared dish, with one hundred grammes9 of Distilled Water, until

solution has been effected.10 Then add enough Distilled Water to

make the solution weigh nine hundred and seventy grammes, and,

lastly, add the Compound Tincture of Lavender. Filter through

paper.

If 24.6 Gm. of Solution of Potassium Arsenite be diluted with water to

100 Cc., the mixture very slightly acidified with diluted hydrochloric acid,

and then made alkaline with 2 Gm. of sodium bicarbonate, it should re¬

quire not less than 50 Cc. of tenth-normal iodine V.S. to produce a perma¬

nent yellow tint (corresponding to 1 Gm. of arsenic trioxide in 100 Gm.

of the Solution.)15

Average dose. — 0.2 Cc. (3 minims).16

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

159

LIQUOR POTASSII ARSENITIS U. S. P. 1910

Solution of Potassium Arsenite

Jjiq. Pot. Arsen.— -Fowler’s Solution Liquor arsenicalis Fowleri P.I.

An aqueous solution containing potassium arsenite, correspond¬

ing in amount to not less than 0.975 per cent, nor more than 1.025

per cent, of As203 (197. 92). 2 Preserve the Solution in amber-col¬

ored bottles.3

Arsenic Trioxide,4 in fine powder,5 ten grammes 7 . . 10 Gm.

Potassium Bicarbonate,6 twenty grammes T . _.... 20 Gm.

Compound Tincture of Lavender,11 thirty grammes . _.. 30 Gm.

Distilled Water,8 a sufficient quantity ,9

To make one thousand grammes 12 . 1000 Gm.

Boil the arsenic trioxide and potassium bicarbonate in a tared

flask with one hundred grammes of distilled water, until solution

has been effected,10 and then add enough distilled water to make the

solution weigh nine hundred and seventy grammes; then add the

compound tincture of lavender and filter through paper.

Solution of Potassium Arsenite is a clear or faintly opalescent liquid

with a pink color and a slight odor of lavender.13 It is alkaline to litmus.14

Acidulate strongly 10 mils of the Solution with hydrochloric acid and

add an equal volume of hydrogen sulphide T.S.; a yellow precipitate is

produced which dissolves in ammonium carbonate T,S.14

Acidulate 4 mils of Solution of Potassium Arsenite with diluted nitric

acid, add 1 mil of silver nitrate T.S. and superimpose a layer of ammonia

water upon this liquid; no red or reddish-brown color is observed at the

line of contact (arsenate) . 14

Assay — Dilute about 20 mils of Solution of Fotassium Arsenite, accur¬

ately weighed, with 75 mils of distilled water, acidify the mixture very

slightly with diluted hydrochloric acid, then dissolve in the solution 2 Gm.

of sodium bicarbonate and titrate the resulting liquid with tenth-normal

iodine V.S., starch T.S. being used as indicator. It shows not less than

0:975 per cent, nor more than 1.025 per cent, of As203.15

Each mil of tenth-normal iodine V.S. used corresponds to 0.004948 Gm.

of As^Og. Each gramme of Solution of Potassium Arsenite corresponds

to not less than 1.97 nor more than 2.07 mils of tenth-normal iodine V.S.15

Average dose— Metric, 0.2 mil — Apothecaries, 3 minims.16

160 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

Comments on U. S. P. Text

1. ) Titles and Synonyms. See Names and Synonyms.

2. ) Definition. A definition is not given previous to 1900. The

modification in the definition for 1910 was necessitated by the Pure

Food and Drugs Act of 1906 which demanded reasonable limits

rather than an absolutely fixed standard.

3. ) Preservation. The 1910 revision is the only one that directs

that the solution be kept in amber colored bottles to protect it

against light.

Fowler ’s Solution upon standing deposits a flocculent precipi¬

tate. This precipitate has apparently introduced a problem for

comments and criticisms as to the cause, the composition and the

ways and means of eliminating this objectionable factor. Unfor¬

tunately much of the work contributed on this topic is merely theo¬

retical and not the result of experimental labor, at least no data

of an experimental type are given in the majority of papers pub¬

lished.

The causes for this precipitate as given, may be considered un¬

der three groupings :

1st. The action of certain organisms in the water, resulting in

an algaceous growth.

2nd. The action of the alkali on the glass container.

3rd. The action of the alkali on one or more of the ingredients

of the alcoholic tincture or spirit used.

Those supporting the first theory are: J. Mueller43 who sug¬

gests the addition of 0.4 p. c. of borax, as a preservative ; Perschne44

who suggests the use of glycerin for the same purpose ; Kollo45 and

Benysek46 who claim that the alcohol present acts as a preserva¬

tive;47 while Feuer48 consideres its preservative action negligible;

and Dannenberg49 who speaks of the precipitate as an algaceous

growth. Brautigam50 apparently disagrees with the above, in his

claim that the precipitate is not an algaceous growth but results

from the action of the alkali on the glass container. This is sup¬

ported in part by Neinhaus51 who calls attention also, to the U. S. P.

43 Am. Jour. Pharm., 51, p. 249; from Pharm. Ztg. (1879.)

44 Am. Journ. Pharm., 55, p. 456; from Pharm. Ztschr. f. Russland (1887.)

46 Pharm. Post. 29, p. 233 (1896.)

48 Pharm. Post., p. 157 (1896.), see also ibid. 32, p. 49.

47 Presumably the preservative action of the alcohol tends to prevent the

growth of organisms that result in the formation of a flocculent mass.

48 Pharm. Post., 25, p. 381 (1895.)

49 Pharm. Centralh., 22, p. 319 (1881.)

50 Pharm. Centralh., 33, p. 324 (1892.)

61 Pharm. Ztg., 37, p. 331 (1892.)

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

161

of 1880 which directed that the solution be filtered after standing

eight days, to remove the precipitate formed. The editor of the

Chemiker Zeitung52 calls attention to a previous custom of neutral¬

izing the excess alkali with acetic acid53 to prevent this same reac¬

tion. Evidently in a parallel line of thought Garraud54 suggests

using a standard alkali55 to avoid excess alkalinity in the finished

product.

Seemingly most writers support the third theory, viz. the action

of the alkali on the ingredient or ingredients of the alcoholic tinc¬

ture or spirit used. M. Goeldner56 suggests the use of phenol-

phthalein as coloring agent in place of such a pigment as that of

red saunders of the compound tincture of lavender, evidently as¬

suming that the alkali and the pigment from the red saunders

cause the precipitate. J. Luettke57 attributes the “ dirty color”

appearing in the P. G. solution to the action of the alkali and com¬

pound spirit of melissa58 and suggests avoiding this by neutraliz¬

ing the solution. Nienhaus51 claims that the alkali and aromatic

tinctures and even distilled spirits used in the various pharma¬

copoeias are the main causes of the precipitate. He -substitutes

melissa water for the alcoholic distillate in the P. G. solution, and

does not obtain a precipitate. The substitution of compound

spirit of melissa by melissa water is also recommended by Pascal59

and Menhaus,60 while Mueller60a suggests using the simple spirit of

melissa. An unsigned article61 states that the precipitate is due

to the action of the excess alkali on the red saunders. The “ query”

editor of the Druggists Circular 62 suggests all of the already men-

62 Chem. Zt g., 16, p. 174 (1892.)

53 To what extent the solution is neutralized is not made clear. As the alka¬

linity of the solution is supposed to be, in part, due to the hydrolysis of the

formed arsenite (see qualitative tests No. 13) a complete change to potassium

acetate might take place if sufficient acid were added, before the solution

would respond to a “neutral test.”

64 Pharm. Ztg., 39, p. 753; from Bull. Soc. Pharm. de Bordeux (1894.)

65 Here again the alkalinity due to any potassium arsenite present has been

overlooked, apparently, or it. has been assumed that the alkalinity is negligible.

KBer. d. Pharm. Gesellch., 2, p. 127 (1892.), see also p. 302.

57 Pharm. Centralh., 559 (1890.)

68 Compound Spirit of Melissa P. G. is prepared by macerating a mixture of

melissa leaves, lemon peel, nutmeg, cinnamon and cassia buds with hydro¬

alcohol and subsequently distilling until a definite amount of distillate has been

obtained. This spirit apparently contains only volatile matter as compared

with the Compound Tincture of Lavender U. S. P. which is prepared by macera¬

tion and filtration.

69 Pharm. Ztg., 50, p. 1009 (1905.), from Bull. Commercial.

60 Nat. Drug., 21, p. 22 (1893.)

6°a Ber. d. pharm. Ges., 2, p. 302 (1892).

81 Proc. A. Ph. A., 46, p. 694 (1896.) from Merck’s Report

82 Drug. Cir., 52, p. 223 (1908.)

11— S. A. L.

162 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

tioned reasons and adds the possible insoluble impurities in the ar¬

senic trioxide used. The impurities in the arsenic trioxide used

are also emphasized by Glueeksman.63 Chumaceiro64 refers to the

“International Formula”65 for preparing a clear permanent solu¬

tion. This evidently eliminates the alkalinity. Moreover this

formula directs that spirit of lavender be used in place of the tinc¬

ture. However the finished product in this case is not a solution

of an arsenite,65

The strength of Fowler ’s Solution is based on the arsenic trioxide

content. That a gradual oxidation of the trivalent arsenic to the

pentavalent arsenic takes place is generally accepted. The cause

of this oxidation however, has called forth some considerable in¬

vestigation and comment. Apparently all investigators agree that

the introduction of atmospheric oxygen, in various ways, is the

direct cause, but the conditions which accelerate or retard such

oxidation seem to offer a source of disagreement. G. Kassner66

attributes the oxidation to the introduction of atmospheric oxygen,

but does not mention any conditions influencing the rate. C.

Feuer67 claims that the oxidation due to atmospheric oxygen is

slight within a half year’s time, and that the alkalinity of the solu¬

tion accelerates this change. Fosenthaler68 merely points out that

oxidation of arsenous acid takes place. Lyons69 claims that under

like conditions the greatest amount of oxidation takes place in an

alkaline solution, the least in an acid solution, while in a solution

containing the (HC03) radicle the rate of oxidation lies between

the two. In a later publication Lyons70 claims that no oxidation

takes place in an acid solution. L. A. Brown71 suggests keeping

the solution in small well filled and closed containers to prevent

63 Pharm. Post., 29, p. 353 (1896.)

64 Ibid. 52, p. 323 (1908.)

65 According to the “International Formula” as given in this article, “spirit

of lavender (colorless distillate)” is used in place of the Compound Tincture of

Lavender U. S. P. Also some diluted hydrochloric acid is added, 3.5 grams

(13.67 p. c.) to 1 gram of potassium carbonate. This represents 0.458 grams

HC1, which requires 1.72 grams of potassium carbonate for neutralization. As

only 1 gram of potassium carbonate is used evidently the finished product is an

acid solution.

«8 Pharm. Ztg., 34, p. 419 (1889.)

« Pharm. Post., 28, p. 381 (1895.)

68 Pharm. Centralh., 47, p. 850 (1906.)

«9Proc. A. Ph. A., 56, p. 901 (1908.)

70 Proc. A. Ph. A., 57, p. 904 (1909.)

71 Ky. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 150, p. 153 (1910.)

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions. 163

oxidation. A. N. Cook72 attributes the oxidation to the atmospheric

oxygen which is introduced every time the container is opened to

remove some of the liquid. E’we and Vanderkleed73 state that,

4 ‘ One sample of liquor potassium arsenite U. S. P. suffered an oxi¬

dation of 1.9 p. c. of its As203 as arsenite to arsenate in two years

and three months. Another sample had 1.8 p. c. of As203 as ar¬

senite oxidized to arsenate in one year and five months”. Engel-

hardt and Winters,74 after determining the amounts of arsenate

and arsenite respectively during a period of 14 months conclude

that only a slight amount of oxidation takes place in the solution.

4. ) Arsenic Trioxide as an Ingredient. The original formula of

Fowler calls for arsenicum album or “ white arsenic”, in which

manner the arsenic trioxide was distinguished from the yellow and

red sulphides. The London Pharmacopoeia of 1808 calls for Ar-

senici oxidum sublimatum. The U. S. P. of 1820 adopted the desig¬

nation arsenious acid in accordance with the new antiphlogistic-

nomenclature. For other changes, see Names and Synonyms.

5. ) The Form in Which it is Used. Fowler directs the “ white

arsenic” to be used “in pulverum subtilissimum triti, i. e. “tritu¬

rated to a very fine powder”. The U. S. P. of 1820 directs that

the “arsenious acid” be used in form of a “fine powder”; the

Philadelphia edition of 1830 directs a “very fine powder”.

“Small fragments” are suggested by the New York edition of

1830, also by the editions of 1840, 1850, 1860 and 1870. From 1880

on a “fine powder” is again directed.

The explanation for this is found in the following statement made

by the editors of the U. S. Dispensatory, 13th ed. (1872), p. 1267:

“In making this preparation, care should be taken that the arseni¬

ous acid is pure. This object is best secured by using the acid in

small pieces instead of in powder. Sulphate of lime is a common

impurity in the powdered acid, and if present will remain undis¬

solved, and cause the solution to be weaker than it should be”.

Although the U. S. P. of 1870 directs a qualitative test (com¬

plete volatilization) to be made, that would bar such an impurity

as sulphate of lime, the U. S. P. of 1880 is the first to direct the

assay of “arsenious acid”. It is, no doubt, due to this difference

in the requirements of the 1880 edition and its precursors from

72 Rep. So. Dak. P. & D. Com., 1912, p. 75 (1912.)

73 Proc. Pa. Ph. Assn., 37, p. 277 '(1914.)

74 Jour. A. Ph. A., 6, p. 134 (1917.)

164 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

1840 on that the “fine powder” is again directed to be used in

1880.

6. ) Potassium Bica/rbonate or Carbonate as an Ingredient.

Fowler calls it Sal alkalinum fixum vegetabilis or “salt of fixed

vegetable alkali” to differentiate it from the fixed mineral alkali

or sodium carbonate and the volatile alkali or ammonium carbon¬

ate. The designation of the U. S. P. 1820 is in accordance with

the antiphlogistic nomenclature. The alkali used to facilitate the

solution of the “arsenious acid” varies. According to the U. S. P.

1820 and the New York edition of 1830 it is Potassae subcaxbonas

or “Subcarbonate of potass.”, which according to the 1820 edition

is the “Impure subcarbonate of potass.” or “Pearl ash”. The

Philadelphia edition of 1830 designates that “Purest Carbonate of

Potassa” or Potassae Carbonas Purissimup be used, which is to be

prepared from potassium bitartrate by ignition and lixiviation. (p.

172, not that in the Materia Medica list p. 20.) The editions of

1840, 1850 and 1860 direct that a “pure” carbonate be used. Ac¬

cording to the 1840 edition this is prepared from the bitartrate,

according to the 1850 and 1860 editions, by heating the bicarbonate.

From 1870 the bicarbonate is directed to be used in the formula.

Upon heating, as directed, the pure bicarbonate is changed to the

pure carbonate.

7. ) Ratio of Ingredients. Not only the ratio, but the exact quan¬

tities, viz. 64 grains of both the acid and alkaline ingredients, are

the same in all editions of the U. S. P. up to 1870 inclusive, as they

are in the original formula of Fowler. This would seem quite

rational but for two considerations, viz. :

1. The purity of the potassium carbonate originally employed,

no doubt, varied greatly. (For details of this see No. 6.)

2. In the 1870 edition, bicarbonate of potassium was substituted

for carbonate, but the amounts (64 grains of each) remained the

same.

Hence the ratio of acid (anhydride) to alkali (carbonate or bi¬

carbonate) fluctuated greatly in the several revisions from 1820 to

1870 inclusive. Although the U. S. P. 1880 is a relatively modern

treatise, as compared with its immediate precursors, the ratio was

not changed in 1880, but the change was made in 1890, so that

since that date the alkalinity of Fowler’s Solution was once more

what it may be supposed to have been originally, provided, how¬

ever, that the “alkaline vegetable salt” of Fowler’s formula was

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

165

pure potassium salt, which, in all probability it was not. In as

much as it is impossible to establish the purity of the potassium

carbonate used in the original formula, it would be vain to attempt

to duplicate, in this respect, the original formula.

It might be argued that the “white arsenic” of Fowler’s days

was not as pure as the present pharmacopoeial product is supposed

to be, and that the impurities in both ingredients compensated

each other. However, it is scarcely to be assumed that the “white

arsenic” or arsenic trioxide was ever as impure as the potassium

carbonate made from wood ashes, unless it was wilfully adulter¬

ated. (For table of ratios see Number 12.)

8. ) Water . According to his original formula, Fowler de¬

manded “distilled well water”. This is probably the reason why

distilled water has always been demanded by the U. S. P.75 A per¬

manently hard water might be considered as interfering with the

desired alkalinity of the finished product.76

9. ) Amount of Water Used to Effect Solution. According to

Fowler’s original formula only “a half pound” of water, neces¬

sary for the finished preparation, was used to effect the solution.

The London Pharmacopoeia of 1809, also the U. S. P. of 1820 di¬

rected “one pint” to be used, the loss resulting from evaporation

to be made up. So did both editions of 1830. The edition of 1840

reduced the amount to “twelve fluid-ounces”, as did the editions

of 1850, 1860 and 1870. In the 1880 edition, the amount was re¬

duced much more, namely to one- tenth of the volume of the finished

product. Practically the same ratio obtained in the editions of

1890, 1900 and 1910. The London Pharmacopoeia throughout

made no reduction. However, the first British Pharmacopoeia in

1864 reduced the amount, prescribing 10 ounces to be used, like¬

wise the edition of 1885. The 1898 edition directed either 10

ounces or 500 cc., depending upon whether the metric formula or

the apothecaries formula was used as both were given in this edi¬

tion. The 1914 edition prescribes 500 cc. In all B. P. formulas

the amount of water directed to be used to effect solution is equal

to one-half of the volume of the finished product.

75 The several editions of the London and British pharmacopoeias, also the

recent editions of all other pharmacopoeias consulted demand distilled water.

76 Such a water, which, however, no pharmacist would think of using, is the

public spring water of Sheboygan, Wis. It contains per liter 0.2394 Mg. equiv.

1.358 K^COg, and 1.0832 Ca. equiv. 3.448 K^COg, or a total of 4.806 K2C03. Hence

of the 13.804 KgCOg = 20.000 KHC03 used, about 9.000 K2C03 remain for the

solution of the 10 gm. As2Os and the desired surplus alkalinity.

166 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters .

It has been commonly assumed that the original amount of water

used was reduced for the purpose of accelerating the reaction be¬

tween the acid and the alkali carbonate and thus increasing the

rate of solution. Thus E. Martin77 modified the U. S. P. process

by dissolving 64 grains each of arsenic trioxide and potassium bi¬

carbonate in two or three drams of water with the aid of heat.

When solution was effected he added the remainder of the water.

This procedure he claimed decreased the time ordinarily required

to make Fowler’s solution. Gr. Hamel78 placed the arsenic trioxide

and potassium carbonate, (3 grams each) in a test tube moistened

the mixture with a few drops of water and applied heat until a

liquid mass resulted. This he then diluted with a few mils of

water and heated until solution took place, after which more water

was added, up to the required volume. P. Maysse79 modified the

‘ ‘ Codex ’ ’ method by heating one gram each of arsenic trioxide and

potassium carbonate with five drops of water, in a test tube, until

the solution took place and then diluting up to 100 cc.

In order to test the correctness of this explanation, experiments

on the rate of solution in varying concentrations were performed.

A.) One gram of arsenic trioxide and two grams of postassium

bicarbonate (the ratio of As203 and KHC03 used in the U. S. P.),

were mixed with 25 mils, 50 mils, 100 mils, and 200 mils respec¬

tively, of boiling water, and the time required to obtain a clear

solution noted. The effervescence, caused by the decomposition of

the bicarbonate, had a tendency to carry the arsenic trioxide up

the sides of the container, hence to interfere with the action of the

solvent, even though a stirrer was used and vigorously at that.

To eliminate this objectionable feature the following modification

was adopted. The potassium bicarbonate was dissolved in water,

(20 gm. in sufficient water to make 100 mils.) and the solution

boiled until no more carbon dioxide was apparently given off. This

required about 30 minutes. An aliquot portion of this solution,

representing the amount of potassium acid carbonate desired, was

diluted with water up to a definite volume and the mixture heated

to boiling. The required weight of arsenic trioxide was introduced

into a test tube of suitable capacity, the boiling solution of the

potassium salt poured on to this and the tube immediately im-

77 Am. Jour. Pharm., 44, p. 202 (1872.)

78 Pharm. Ztg., 61, p. 402 (1906.)

79 Bull, des sc. pharmacol. 13, p. 106 (1906); through Digest of Comments,

1906.

Langenhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

167

mersed into a bath of boiling water. The mixture was constantly

agitated and the time required to obtain a clear solution was re¬

corded. Three separate determinations were made for each dilu¬

tion. The results are recorded in the following table:

Table I.

A glance at the table reveals the fact that the differences for the

several dilutions are no greater than those obtained from the same

dilution, hence fall within the limits of experimental error.

B.) In the next series an attempt was made to secure more

satisfactory results by increasing the amounts of the chemical

agents acting upon each other. Ten grams of arsenic trioxide and

the equivalent 20 grams of potassium bicarbonate (as carbonate)

with varying amounts of water were used. In this series one ex¬

periment only was performed with each volume of water. The

results are herewith tabulated.

proper conditions, the rate of solution is hastened to any appre¬

ciable extent by greater concentration.

C.) A third series was made in an attempt to note the effect of

the effervescence (mentioned in the preliminary experiments),

when larger quantities of reagents were used. Ten grams of ar¬

senic trioxide and 20 grams of potassium bicarbonate were mixed

with 25 mils, 50 mils and 100 mils of boiling water, and the time

of solution determined as before. The results are again tabulated.

168 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts , and Letters.

The slight increase in time is, no doubt, due principally to the

removal of the arsenic trioxide from the solution by the escaping

carbon dioxide.

D.) In a fourth series of tests ten grams of arsenic trioxide and

11.2 grams of potassium hydroxide, the equivalent of 20 grams of

potassium acid carbonate, the latter dissolved in 25 mils, 50 mils

and 100 mils respectively, of boiling water, were mixed, and the

time required for solution noted as above. In each case the time

was not more than one minute. Apparently the arsenic trioxide

dissolved as fast as it came in contact with the solvent quite ir¬

respectively of the degree of concentration of the alkaline solvent.

10.) Solution of Arsenic Trioxide. For the chemistry of the

solution see Hydration of Arsenic trioxide.

The formula for potassium arsenite given in the U. S. P. IX is

KAs02, potassium metarsenite. Whether it is assumed that the

salt exists as the metarsenite in the official solution is not made

clear. Apparently writers differ as to the composition of the

arsenite in the solution. L. Bullock80 speaks of the “chemically

indefinite liquor arsenicalis, ” M. H. Buignet81 suggests that only

part of the arsenous acid is combined with the alkali, the remainder

being in simple solution. H. K. B amber8 2 concludes that a reac¬

tion takes place between potassium carbonate and arsenous acid in

preparing the solution, basing his conclusions on the fact that

carbon dioxide was given off during the process. This drew forth

a number of comments by Redwood, Garrod, Attfield and others as

to its correctness, the main criticism being that the concentrations

of Bamber’s experiments were not comparable to the pharma¬

copoeia! conditions. A. F. Haselden83 refers to the controversy

relating to the correctness of the title “arsenite of potash” or

80 Pharm. Jour., 10, p. 357 (1850.)

81 Jour, de Pharm. et de Chim., 59, p. 439 (1856.)

82 Pharm. Jour., 17, p. 481 (1858.)

83 Pharm. Jour., 16, p. 541 (1857.)

Lange.nhan — The Arsenical Solutions.

169

“ Liquor Arsenicalis. ’ ’ 0. Olberg84 offers a formula for the solu¬

tion in which he substitutes potassium hydroxide for the potassium

bicarbonate. In this solution he claims that the arsenite exists as

the di-potassium-mono-hydrogen-ortho-arsenite, K2HAs03. After

determining the amount of potassium arsenite formed when 5

grams each of arsenous acid and potassium carbonate were heated

in the presence of water, for varying intervals, C. Lonnes85 con¬

cludes that the title “ Liquor Kali Arsenicosi” is a misnomer, and

that “Liquor arsenicalis” is more correct. L. H. Bernegau86

states that the metarsenite is formed when arsenic trioxide and po¬

tassium bicarbonate are heated gently in the presence of water,

(presumably as in the U. S. P. process), but that the dry salt has

the formula, (according to Schmidt), of KAs02, HAs02 + H20.

L. H. Bernegau87 also reports that the dry salt always contains

some uncombined potassium carbonate. Stocker88 in his discussion

on the P. Gr. solution points out that the amount of potassium

carbonate prescribed is insufficient to saturate all of the arsenic

trioxide. J. Zieghr89 disagrees with Stocker on this point as does

Schenk.90 The Comment or zum D. A.-B. V .91 states that the

alkalinity of Fowler’s solution is due in part to the excess of potas¬

sium carbonate present. This would also tend to agree with Zieghr

towards invalidating Stocker’s claim.

In an attempt to determine whether a reaction takes place,

towards the formation of an arsenite in Fowler’s solution, the fol¬

lowing experiments were performed.

I.) The solutions resulting from the rate of solution experiments

were reserved for further observations. Twenty-four hours after

their preparation a deposit of crystals was noticed in the solution

representing the greatest concentration. These crystals were sep¬

arated from the mother liquor by means of a force filter and freed

from adhering liquid as much as possible by pressing between

bibulous paper. Both crystals and mother liquor were assayed for

84 The Apothecary, 2, p. 1 (1892.)

85 Pharm. Ztg., 39, p. 90 (1894.)

88 Am. Jour. Phar., 79, p. 553 (1907.)

87 Proc. Pa. Ph. Ass’n., 33, p. 145 (1910.)

88 Apoth. Ztg., 26, p. 335 (1911.)

89 Apoth. Ztg., 26, p. 40 (1911.)

80 Apoth. Ztg., 26, p. 379 (1911.)

91 Kommentar zum Deutchen Arzneibuch, 5 Ausgabe, 1910, p. 64 by O. Ansel-

mino and Ernst Gilg.

170 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.

potassium acid carbonate and arsenic trioxide, using N/l acid and

N/10 iodine respectively. The following results were obtained: —

Wt.

Crystals 7.6 gm. 67. p. c. KHC03 4.5 p. c. As203

Liquid 24.0 gm. 39.4 p. c. K2C 03 35.5 p. C. As2Q3

II.) The experiment was repeated using 200 grams of potassium

acid carbonate dissolved in 250 mils of water, and boiled for about

thirty minutes. While boiling, this solution was added to 100

grams of arsenic trioxide contained in a flask and the whole im¬

mersed in a bath of boiling water until a clear solution resulted.

The solution was allowed to stand over night when the crystals

were collected and assayed as before. A duplicate experiment was

made. The following results were obtained: —

Crystals

Liquid