Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-ljdsm Total loading time: 1.399 Render date: 2021-08-04T00:48:09.816Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2017

Alanna Ropchock Tierno
Shenandoah University
E-mail address:
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]


In sixteenth-century Germany, both Catholics and Lutherans circulated and performed Josquin’s Missa Pange lingua, even though its model, the hymn Pange lingua, was associated with Eucharistic practices that were exclusively Catholic. This source-based study reveals how Lutherans selected the Missa Pange lingua for performance over other available masses and adapted it for their liturgical and pedagogical needs. Two printed sources of the mass offer perspectives on how Lutherans might have negotiated the polemical rituals and theology associated with the Missa Pange lingua alongside an aesthetic interest in the work. The intention of this study is not to de-emphasise the connection between the Missa Pange lingua and its borrowed melody or the initial Catholic identity of the mass. Rather, the Lutheran identity of the Missa Pange lingua provides an additional layer to the early reception history of this work and a case study of the Lutheran appropriation of Catholic music.

Research Article
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

A borrowed melody in a polyphonic Mass Ordinary setting is fundamental to the identity of that composition. Masses are often labelled in manuscripts and prints by that melody and pre-existing melodies often dictated the liturgical and performance contexts of a given mass. Due to the borrowed melody in Josquin’s Missa Pange lingua, the existing literature on this work associates it with the Catholic liturgical context of that melody: Corpus Christi, Eucharistic votive masses and other forms of devotion to the Blessed Sacrament.Footnote 1 The Pange lingua hymn itself is also intrinsically Catholic: Thomas Aquinas (1225–74) used the incipit and melody of an earlier hymn by Venantius Fortunatus (c. 535–610) to create a Vespers hymn for Corpus Christi.Footnote 2 This feast developed in the midst of a new theological understanding of the Eucharist defined as transubstantiation – a dogma unique to the Catholic Church that uses Aristotelian-based reasoning to explain how the bread and wine change in substance at the moment of consecration to become the body and blood of Christ, but the physical properties or ‘accidents’ remain. Several early sources of the Missa Pange lingua confirm its association with the Eucharist through iconography and the title Missa de venerabili sacramento, but these manuscripts are outnumbered by sources from the mid- to later sixteenth century that come from an institution that was in direct opposition to nearly everything associated with Pange lingua: the Lutheran church.Footnote 3

The intention of this study is not to de-emphasise the connection between the Missa Pange lingua and its borrowed melody or the initial Catholic identity of the mass. Rather, the Lutheran identity of the Missa Pange lingua provides a deeper understanding of how this work was initially received. By tracing the mass through extant sources from its initial circulation among Catholics to a solidified place in the Latin repertory of the Lutheran church, I will argue that this mass, previously confined to its Catholic roots and performance context in musicological studies, should also be considered a Lutheran work. If a mass with such polemical overtones – Luther associated Corpus Christi with hypocrisy and promiscuity – was able to be repurposed by Lutherans, then perhaps other Renaissance compositions should be re-evaluated for potential bi-confessional identities.

The substantial Lutheran engagement with the Missa Pange lingua transcends established facts common to sixteenth-century music narratives: the mass was a technically accessible work composed in the late style of Josquin des Prez, Martin Luther’s favourite composer, who experienced a posthumous ‘Renaissance’ in Germany.Footnote 4 Reformation studies focused on imagery and ritual consistently demonstrate that aesthetics was only one of many factors when reformers decided whether a Catholic object or ritual should be retained or abandoned.Footnote 5 For instance, the teachings of several Protestant leaders on the evils of idolatry resulted in acts of iconoclasm throughout Europe.Footnote 6 This destruction of art works was motivated by theological sentiment rather than aesthetic preferences; Protestants did not break statues because they preferred a different artistic style. Furthermore, a growing body of Reformation scholarship across humanities disciplines demonstrates that confessional boundaries between Catholicism, Lutheranism and Calvinism were less distinct than previously thought.Footnote 7 The ritual and theological contexts of the Missa Pange lingua reveal a blurred but indeed distinct border between the Catholic and Lutheran confessions.

As a polyphonic Latin Mass Ordinary setting, the Missa Pange lingua easily fits into the early Lutheran liturgy. Martin Luther had many criticisms of the Catholic liturgy but found value in the Latin Mass Ordinary texts.Footnote 8 In the preface to the Deutsche Messe, published in 1526 following his Latin Formula missae in 1523, Luther articulated his desire for the vernacular liturgy to exist alongside the Latin rather than replace it.Footnote 9 The Kirchenordnungen (church orders) for newly formed Lutheran communities confirm that Luther’s followers shared this sentiment and prescribed the singing of the Mass Ordinary texts in Latin, German and occasionally both languages in succession.Footnote 10 As a composition associated with Corpus Christi and Eucharistic veneration, the Missa Pange lingua initially appears to have had almost no place in Lutheran devotional life and represents one of the most polemical issues of the Reformation. However, closer examination of Martin Luther’s Eucharistic beliefs reveals a theology much closer to Catholic dogma than those of other Reformers, but not completely in accordance with the Roman Church. Luther believed that Christ was physically – not spiritually – present in the consecrated bread and wine: he often cited the Gospel account of the Last Supper in which Christ says ‘this is my body’ rather than ‘this represents my body’.Footnote 11

In the realm of sixteenth-century source analysis, Lutherans contributed to a unique dissemination pattern surrounding the Missa Pange lingua. While the mass appears in two important prints associated with the German Josquin Renaissance, it is the only Mass Ordinary firmly attributed to Josquin not included in Ottaviano Petrucci’s three volumes of Josquin masses.Footnote 12 In fact, the work is not found in printed form until the Missae tredecim in 1539. Although this print plays a significant role in the German circulation of the Missa Pange lingua, the lack of early printed sources – particularly from Petrucci and Andrea Antico – implies a different circulation pattern from other Josquin masses. Furthermore, the Missa Pange lingua survives in an unusual number of manuscript sources that post-date Missae tredecim, two of which are indicative of an eastern extension of the German Josquin Renaissance in the Czecho-Slovak region.

Finally, a focused study on the two confessional identities of Missa Pange lingua is warranted in the realm of Josquin scholarship. Amidst the watershed of Josquin authenticity studies from the last several decades, the Missa Pange lingua has enjoyed one of the most secure positions in Josquin’s oeuvre.Footnote 13 In a seminal essay on Josquin reception, Jessie Ann Owens offers the following observation:

[T]he patterns of dissemination of [Josquin’s] music and the records of the actual repertories performed in a given time and place reveal that the Josquin we know from the modern edition was not the Josquin experienced in various parts of Europe. . . . [T]o understand his place in history requires replacing the composite picture of modern historiography with a series of images specific to particular times and places.Footnote 14

The German reception history of the Missa Pange lingua provides two contrasting, yet intriguing, ‘images’ of Josquin: the ordained priest who composed a mass for Corpus Christi and Eucharistic votive masses, and Martin Luther’s ‘Noten Meister’, who posthumously supplied music for the faith communities that broke away from the Roman Church that he had served for most of his life.


The Missa Pange lingua is regarded as one of Josquin’s last works due to its omission from Ottaviano Petrucci’s three Josquin mass volumes, particularly the final one published in 1514. While the mass is usually dated sometime after 1514 as a consequence, David Fallows recently suggested a slightly earlier composition date of approximately 1510.Footnote 15 His reasoning is based on seven early Missa Pange lingua sources that date from around 1515 and have secure provenances far from Condé, where Josquin spent the final years of his life (1504–21) and probably composed the Missa Pange lingua (see Table 1).Footnote 16 The Catholic provenances of the complete sources that Fallows identifies, along with additional early sources from the Petrus Alamire workshop at the Habsburg-Burgundian court, confirm the liturgical context given to the mass in most modern scholarship: a setting of the Ordinary text for a Catholic Mass, particularly one for Corpus Christi or some other occasion with a special emphasis on the Eucharist.

Table 1 Early Missa Pange lingua sources

As Western Christian teaching on the Eucharist became more concrete with the establishment of transubstantiation as doctrine at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, the devout took a greater interest in the sacrament. The Elevation of the Host became the highlight of every Mass, and people began reporting Eucharistic miracles such as bleeding and inexplicably mobile Hosts. Simply gazing at a consecrated Host became immensely popular and resulted in the development of Benediction services, periods of adoration during which a Host was displayed in a monstrance, and outdoor processions with a Host.Footnote 17 Corpus Christi was part of this rapidly growing Eucharistic cult and quickly became a major solemnity. The feast was first celebrated in 1246 in the diocese of Liège after a beguine there named Juliana had a vision consisting of a full moon with a dark blemish; she interpreted the dark blemish as a symbol for a new feast that Christ wanted the Church to celebrate.Footnote 18 The idea of a joyful feast dedicated to the Eucharist, as opposed to the sombre commemoration of the Last Supper on Holy Thursday, spread throughout Europe, and in 1389 Pope Urban VI placed Corpus Christi on the same level as Christmas, Easter, Pentecost and the Assumption by granting indulgences and suspending interdicts on the feast day.Footnote 19

There are three early versions of the Corpus Christi liturgy; Juliana and her confessor wrote the first, and Thomas Aquinas wrote the other two. Pange lingua was a Vespers hymn from the second Aquinas liturgy, which became the official Corpus Christi liturgy for the Roman Church. Aquinas’s Pange lingua quickly acquired other functions beyond Vespers in connection with the emphasis placed on seeing a consecrated Host. Pange lingua and other items from the Corpus Christi liturgy like the sequence Lauda Sion became the music performed during the various processions with the Host and Benediction services.Footnote 20 Eucharistic votive masses also developed out of this effort to extend the moment of Elevation when people could gaze upon the real presence of Christ under the physical form of bread. A unique feature of these votive masses is that a consecrated Host was displayed on an altar throughout the duration of the service. They usually occurred on Thursdays at a side altar and were endowed by the local Corpus Christi fraternity. Although Eucharistic votive masses developed relatively late in the medieval votive mass tradition, they were popular in both the Germanic region and the Low Countries by the turn of the sixteenth century.Footnote 21 Certainly the Missa Pange lingua would have been appropriate for votive masses for the Eucharist along with masses in conjunction with Corpus Christi.

The three Alamire choirbooks with complete versions of the Missa Pange lingua explicitly convey a connection to Eucharistic votive masses.Footnote 22 The mass is labelled ‘Missa de venerabili sacramento’ in JenaU 21 and VienNB 4809, where it was given a prominent position as the opening mass. It is labelled ‘Missa Pange lingua’ in the Occo Codex (BrusBR IV. 922), but that is probably due to the presence of a second ‘mass of the venerable sacrament’, Hotinet Barra’s Missa Ecce panis angelorum, in the manuscript. The Missa Pange lingua is also accompanied by Eucharistic iconography in all three manuscripts: a monstrance and chalice in the Occo Codex, an angel holding a monstrance in JenaU 21 (Figure 1), and a monstrance on an altar in VienNB 4809 (Figure 2).

Figure 1 Jena, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, MS 21, fol. 1v

Figure 2 Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, MS 4809, fol. 1v

While VienNB 4809 was prepared for Raimund Fugger the Elder and probably remained in his private music collection, the other two choirbooks went to patrons who could have facilitated the performance of the Missa Pange lingua in its intended liturgical context. The Occo Codex was commissioned by the Dutch merchant Pompeius Occo (1480–1537) for the Heilige Stede (holy place) chapel in Amsterdam, where Occo served as church warden from 1513 until 1518.Footnote 23 The chapel was built on the site of a Eucharistic miracle that occurred in 1347, in which a Host continuously returned to that location. Occo apparently requested repertory focused on the Eucharist when he commissioned the choirbook, as it contains several settings of texts from the Corpus Christi liturgy such as O salutaris hostia and Tantum ergo, the fifth verse of Pange lingua.

JenaU 21 was used either at the Elector Frederick the Wise’s Castle Church in Wittenberg or by his own court choir, although there are no personal indicators such as a coat of arms closely connecting the manuscript to Frederick himself.Footnote 24 Eucharistic votive masses were celebrated in the Castle Church following Martin Luther’s release of the 95 theses in 1517 and leading up to the years when JenaU 21 was produced. The Verzeichnis aller Chorlichen Ambt in Aller Heyligen Stifftkyrchen zw Wittenberg, compiled around 1520, lists all the choral Masses and Offices throughout the liturgical year, including a weekly Corpus Christi Mass that was celebrated every Thursday.Footnote 25 Much less is known about the musical and liturgical scene at Frederick’s court, but his secretary Georg Spalatin recorded that Frederick heard Mass almost every day and took his Hofkapelle on at least some of his journeys.Footnote 26

VatS 16 and the other Vatican sources do not contain any Eucharistic iconography, but the Missa Pange lingua could have been performed during a Eucharist-centred liturgy such as the Mass for Corpus Christi. In sixteenth-century Rome, the feast was important enough to require the presence of the entire papal chapel, including the Pope.Footnote 27 Four of the five Vatican Missa Pange lingua sources are associated with a member of the Medici family. Claudius Gellandi copied VatS 16 for the Sistine Chapel choir of Pope Leo X (r. 1513–21), a music connoisseur who owned several Alamire manuscripts and has been criticised by both contemporaries and modern historians for neglecting the growing problem of the Reformation in favour of other concerns at the Vatican, including the cultivation of music and the arts.Footnote 28 The Missa Pange lingua is also found in VatG XII.2, a manuscript copied for the Cappella Giulia, and in two sets of partbooks that bear the Medici coat of arms.Footnote 29 The fifth and final Vatican source, VatSM 26, was probably used at Santa Maria Maggiore and may have been copied by a scribe from the French region.Footnote 30 The Vatican Missa Pange lingua sources contain mostly masses but also some motets and other liturgical pieces. This repertory, together with the physical characteristics of these sources, suggests they were utilitarian as opposed to being presentation or display manuscripts.

The Missa Pange lingua was probably not performed at all from MunBS 510 because the choirbook was never finished. It is dedicated to the cardinal Matthäus Lang von Wellenburg (1469–1540), whose portrait and coat of arms on the opening folios are only sketched. In addition to the unpainted miniatures, there are empty spaces where initials should be at the beginnings of the subsequent masses. Close study of the script reveals an increasing sense of urgency in the later masses, as if a scribe were hurrying to complete the manuscript for some reason, possibly so a painter could begin work on the opening pages. The sketched coat of arms (Figure 3) lacks the processional cross of an archbishop or papal legate, a detail that indicates the choirbook pre-dates Lang’s promotion to archbishop of Salzburg in June 1519.Footnote 31 Martin Bente originally associated the choirbook with the Bavarian ducal chapel, but, especially considering recent doubts on this claim raised by Birgit Lodes, the unfinished state of MunBS 510 suggests a connection to Maximilian I.Footnote 32 Throughout his political career, the emperor sought to enhance his reputation and legacy through the arts by dedicating projects to family and political colleagues, but often these endeavours remained unfinished, particularly around the time of his death in January 1519.Footnote 33

Figure 3 Lang coat of arms in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS 510, fol. 2r

While powerful political figures in Rome and elsewhere were enjoying the Missa Pange lingua and exchanging choirbooks amongst themselves, a young Martin Luther was becoming increasingly sceptical of various practices within the Roman Church, including the cult of the Eucharist that was flourishing in Germany. During a Corpus Christi procession in Eisleben in 1515, Luther experienced a frightening epiphany that may have shaped his perception of processions and the feast. Upon seeing the consecrated Host carried by his mentor Johann Staupitz, Luther was overcome by a vision of Christ as judge, an image that would permeate his thoughts and provoke questions concerning such phenomena as the achievement of salvation by grace or works.Footnote 34 Luther later voiced his disapproval of excessive Eucharistic veneration because he believed the Blessed Sacrament was too sacred to be constantly on display and paraded through the streets. After returning to Wittenberg from the Wartburg Castle in 1522, Luther strongly criticised Corpus Christi and its procession, which undoubtedly led to the omission of Corpus Christi in Wittenberg beginning in 1524.

In a sermon delivered in Kemberg on Trinity Sunday in 1524, Luther spoke against Corpus Christi in both Latin and German, describing the feast as a great disgrace (ignominia magna) that resulted in the evil commercialisation (boslich gehandlet) of the Blessed Sacrament.Footnote 35 He noted that while Kemberg would still observe Corpus Christi the following week, the feast had been discontinued in Wittenberg. The church leaders there chose to ‘hide’ or ‘conceal’ the Host rather than process with it through town, as was customary in German communities on Corpus Christi. Luther associated excessive public veneration of the Eucharist with public fornication (scortator publicus) and stated that a Scripture reading was better than ten feast days.Footnote 36 In the coming decades, other Lutheran communities removed Corpus Christi from their liturgical calendars as they established worship practices.Footnote 37 Given the widespread abolition of Corpus Christi in conjunction with Martin Luther’s condemnation of both the feast and endowed votive masses, Lutherans could easily have omitted the Missa Pange lingua from their musical repertories, despite its technical accessibility and authorship by Josquin.


In addition to an association with seemingly polemical liturgical practices and theology, the Missa Pange lingua faced another challenge in terms of further circulation. While many other masses attributed to Josquin enjoyed widespread distribution courtesy of Petrucci and other Italian printers, the Missa Pange lingua did not appear in print until 1539. In that year, a Nuremberg bookseller named Johannes Ott included the mass in his anthology of thirteen Mass Ordinary settings entitled Missae tredecim quatuor vocum (see Table 3 below for a complete contents list).Footnote 38 Inclusion in Ott’s print allowed the Missa Pange lingua to become part of the German Josquin Renaissance; furthermore, the mass experienced its own rebirth within that larger phenomenon.

The lack of earlier printed Missa Pange lingua sources makes the presence of the mass in Missae tredecim all the more crucial in the further circulation in the sixteenth century following Josquin’s death. A copy of the work landed in the hands of a printer and, as a result, it could finally be distributed throughout Europe – twenty-five years after Petrucci’s third Josquin mass anthology. The print debut of the Missa Pange lingua is even more remarkable, considering Johannes Ott’s profession. He worked in the publishing and bookselling industry – he was not a singer at a church or political court where he would have had constant contact with other singers and composers.Footnote 39 Unlike professional musicians who travelled extensively and had many opportunities to obtain music, Ott’s avenues for music exchange were relatively limited. How, then, did Ott obtain the repertory published in Missae tredecim and his other volumes of Latin polyphony?

The Missa Pange lingua probably reached Johannes Ott through an underground Lutheran network that extended from Bavaria to Wittenberg and included two Lutherans in Nuremberg who were attempting to restore Latin polyphony in their churches. Hieronymous Baumgartner (1498–1565) became the first Kirchenpfleger (church administrator) of Nuremberg in 1533, and Veit Dietrich (1506–49) was a Nuremberg native who accepted a position as preacher at St. Sebald in December 1535 after studying in Wittenberg and serving as Martin Luther’s secretary.Footnote 40 Although no direct evidence of dealings between the church leaders and printers in Nuremberg survives, Baumgartner and Dietrich probably knew they could turn to Ott, Petreius, or the printer Hieronymus Formschneider for any music printing needs.

Following Nuremberg’s official conversion to Lutheranism in 1525, church leaders replaced Latin polyphony with vernacular hymns.Footnote 41 However, the dominance of vernacular liturgical music in Nuremberg would not last for long – it could not, given the positive stance on Latin sacred music taken by both Luther and Philipp Melanchthon, who were influential in shaping Lutheran practices in Nuremberg.Footnote 42 Dietrich and Baumgartner recognised the need for traditional liturgical music and used their leadership positions to mount a restoration of Latin polyphony in Nuremberg. Their efforts coincide with several printed anthologies of Latin polyphony published in Nuremberg between 1537 and 1539, when both Ott and Petreius suddenly turned from printing secular music and focused on older liturgical repertory (Table 2). Veit Dietrich was almost certainly involved with the production of Novum et insigne opus musicum in some capacity, as he received a copy immediately after publication and presented it to his deacons at St. Sebald.Footnote 43

Table 2 Latin polyphony printed by Ott and Petreius, 1537–1539

Unlike Johannes Ott, Dietrich and Baumgartner had the connections to obtain older Latin liturgical music – including the Missa Pange lingua – from Wittenberg and Munich. Both church leaders corresponded with their counterparts in Wittenberg, and Baumgartner maintained a friendship with Ludwig Senfl, who worked for the Catholic Bavarian ducal court after being dismissed from the Imperial court in 1520. Senfl and Lutherans in Saxony and Prussia used Baumgartner as an intermediary to exchange letters, gifts and music.Footnote 44 The Nuremberg churchmen delivered at least one Johannes Ott publication to Saxony, as Dietrich gave Martin Luther a copy of the Magnificat octo tonorum, an anthology of Senfl’s Magnificats published in 1537.Footnote 45

Connections exist between Ludwig Senfl and most of the Latin repertory that Ott printed. In addition to the Magnificat Octo Tonorum, Schlagel names Senfl’s Liber selectarum cantionum and sources that were ‘very closely’ related to the Bavarian court, as were also two of Ott’s sources for the motets found in Novum et insigne opus musicum.Footnote 46 Ott also had plans to publish Heinrich Isaac’s polyphonic Mass Propers (in the possession of Senfl, a student of Isaac) but died before he was able to do so.Footnote 47 Given Senfl’s involvement with all other Latin polyphony collections published by Ott, it is plausible that he also supplied at least a few of the thirteen masses in Missae tredecim. Senfl had access to at least one copy of the Missa Pange lingua with MunBS 510, the unfinished choirbook for Cardinal Lang.Footnote 48 The Nuremberg Lutherans also could have obtained a copy of the Missa Pange lingua from Wittenberg, as it is one of eight Missae tredecim masses preserved among the Electoral Library choirbooks.

Comparative analysis between the Missa Pange lingua readings in Missae tredecim and the earlier extant sources does not yield a precise connection between a specific earlier manuscript and Ott’s edition, but an indirect relationship exists between Missae tredecim and the earlier pool of sources that includes JenaU 21 and MunBS 510.Footnote 49 Moreover, Ott seems to have consulted manuscripts rather than printed exemplars when editing Missae tredecim, which could account for the lack of a direct relationship due to inevitable variants that occur as a result of the transfer from manuscript to print.Footnote 50 In a comparison of Missae tredecim and Liber quindecim missarum, Schlagel observes that while Petreius relied on earlier printed sources (namely Petrucci’s first volume of Josquin masses) when editing his polyphonic mass anthology, Ott ‘seems to have been unaware of, or lacked access to, or purposely eschewed, printed editions’.Footnote 51

According to Ott’s dedicatory preface of Missae tredecim, his motivation for publishing the Missa Pange lingua (and the other masses) was driven primarily by aesthetics and a desire to preserve the works of revered past composers.Footnote 52 Ott does mention the liturgy near the end of the preface and indirectly expresses his desire for Latin polyphony to return to the Nuremberg churches: he hopes the Nuremberg city council will embrace his current endeavour, as the pieces were appropriate not only for leisure activities but also for ‘adorning the sacred’.Footnote 53 It is not surprising that Ott avoided discussing issues of liturgy and doctrine in his preface addressed to the city council. For both marketing and diplomatic purposes, it was in his best interest to present Missae tredecim as a neutral product in terms of confession.Footnote 54

Nevertheless, Missae tredecim marks a significant turning point in the confessional orientation of the Missa Pange lingua; Ott probably obtained the mass through a network of Lutheran leaders, printed it in a Lutheran city and dedicated the edition to a Lutheran town council. It is also through Missae tredecim that the Missa Pange lingua became a commercial product rather than a private gift exchanged between family members and political colleagues.Footnote 55 The Missae tredecim allowed the work to cross a confessional boundary and acquire new performance contexts in early Lutheran communities, where both seasoned aristocrats and young school children could experience the mass.

There are nineteen extant exemplars of Missae tredecim (along with four other documented exemplars that are currently lost) scattered throughout Europe.Footnote 56 The known copies of Missae tredecim (a complete listing is provided in the appendix) reveal that the Missa Pange lingua reached nearly every region of Germany and, although Ott did not attach a confessional label to the book, the publication was primarily popular among Lutherans.Footnote 57 Several exemplars can be traced to Lutheran Gymnasiums, where students probably performed the masses during music classes, liturgical services, or recreational time. Two copies from the Regensburg Gymnasium Poeticum are currently at the Regensburg Bischöfliche Zentralbibliothek, and the Zerbst exemplar is held today at the Gymnasium Francisceum where it was originally used.Footnote 58 Other Missae tredecim copies that were probably used in Lutheran schools include the Heilbronn, Rostock and Zwickau exemplars, along with a documented copy from the Thomaskirche in Leipzig that is currently lost.Footnote 59

The handwritten markings in Missae tredecim exemplars offer insight into where the owners might have used the edition and which masses they performed. A closer examination of the handwritten annotations in conjunction with the provenances of two Missae tredecim exemplars held at the Kassel Universitätsbibliothek and the Heilbronn Stadtarchiv provides convincing evidence that Lutherans used the masses in this print – including the Missa Pange lingua – for both liturgical and pedagogical purposes. The exemplar from the Kassel Universitätsbibliothek almost certainly came from the Hofkapelle of Philipp der Großmütige (1504–67); it is listed in a 1613 inventory of his chapel repertory, along with the Rhau and Petreius editions found in the same bound volume.Footnote 60 In the final Agnus Dei of the Missa Pange lingua, the entire text is written by hand underneath the notes (Figure 4), a few notes are corrected in the cadence of the final Agnus of the Missa O gloriosa, and there is one annotation that suggests liturgical use: the Credo of the Missa Sub tuum praesidium contains a handwritten caesura after the phrase ‘descendit de coelis’ in each partbook (Figure 5). In Lutheran sources that contain polyphonic masses, including RegB C 100, a Missa Pange lingua source discussed below, the Credo movements sometimes end before the ‘Et incarnatus’ section. Liturgical instructions in multiple Lutheran Kirchenordnungen specify that during a Sunday service the Creed would be sung first in Latin by the choir and then the congregation would sing it in German, usually in the form of the chorale Wir glauben all in einem Gott. An abbreviation of the Latin Credo is not articulated in the Kirchenordnungen, but such a decision would make sense given the length of the polyphonic Credos and the Lutherans’ flexible approach towards liturgy.Footnote 61

Figure 4 Agnus Dei III, Missa Pange lingua, Tenor partbook, 4o Mus. 63 b kk2v, Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel. Photo: Author

Figure 5 Credo, Missa Sub tuum praesidium, Tenor partbook, 4o Mus. 63 b, NN Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel. Photo: Author

The Heilbronn Missae tredecim, bound with a copy of Novum et insigne opus musicum II, was probably bequeathed to the Heilbronn Gymnasium and used between the years 1576 and 1612.Footnote 62 An important indicator of liturgical use is the one-page insert found at the beginning of each partbook (Figure 6). These pages contain handwritten polyphonic responses to the Preface in both Latin (‘et cum spiritu tuo’) and German (‘und mit deinem geist’).Footnote 63 This exemplar contains several practical handwritten annotations that were intended to aid singers during a rehearsal or church service.Footnote 64 Several masses have tiny numbers written above groups of rests that indicate how many beats the singer should pause before beginning the next phrase. There are rest numbers in the Missa Pange lingua (Figure 7) and mensuration signs are added before the ‘et vitam venturi’ section at the end of the Credo.

Figure 6 Preface insert in tenor partbook, Heilbronn Stadtarchiv. Photo: Author

Figure 7 Kyrie and Gloria, Missa Pange lingua, Contratenor partbook, Heilbronn Stadtarchiv. Photo: Author

Whereas multiple Lutheran communities owned Missae tredecim exemplars, there is no direct evidence that the figure most central to the Lutheran movement – Martin Luther himself – possessed a copy of the publication. However, Luther’s physician provides an invaluable account of the theologian and amateur musician singing from similar music prints in a recreational setting and making handwritten corrections to the prints. The oft-cited passage written by Matthäus Ratzeberger reads: ‘Luther was also accustomed immediately after the evening meal to fetch from his study his partbooks and with his table companions, who delighted in music, made music together with them.’ Ratzeberger continues: ‘It is noteworthy that from time to time when he [Luther] found false notation in a new song [they were singing], he immediately took it away and saw that it was correctly set and rectified.’Footnote 65 Luther himself may or may not have sung from Missae tredecim, but copies of the edition can be traced to two of Luther’s political colleagues. Duke Albrecht of Prussia obtained at least one copy of Missae tredecim along with the two Novum et insigne opus musicum volumes, the Magnificat octo tonorum, and Petreius’s Liber quindecim missarum and Trium vocum cantiones.Footnote 66 The Missae tredecim exemplar currently held at the Jena Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek was probably purchased for the library of Elector Johann Friedrich (1503–54), nephew of Frederick the Wise.Footnote 67


Lutheran owners of the Missae tredecim had the opportunity to perform the Missa Pange lingua, but they were not obligated to act on that opportunity. Evidence in both printed and manuscript sources, however, reveals that Lutherans specifically chose Josquin’s Corpus Christi mass for performance and further dissemination. In the nineteen extant Missae tredecim exemplars, fifteen contain at least one handwritten marking that appears to be from the mid- to late sixteenth century, when Lutheran liturgical practices stabilised. The Missa Pange lingua is one of the masses with the most handwritten annotations among these fifteen exemplars (Table 3). The Missae tredecim copies from Heilbronn, Kassel, Rostock, Zwickau, Paris, Regensburg (both A.R. 91 and C 62a), and the tenor partbook from Vienna all have at least one discernable handwritten marking in the Missa Pange lingua. Footnote 68

Table 3 Missae tredecim contents and handwritten markings in extant copies

The Missa Pange lingua also appears in more extant post-1540 manuscripts than any of the other twelve masses in Missae tredecim (Table 4). The six manuscript sources are concretely linked to Lutherans and date from approximately 1550, about a decade after the publication of Missae tredecim, when liturgical practices of many Lutheran communities began to crystallise (Table 5). Missae tredecim continued to be a catalyst for the Lutheran transmission of the Missa Pange lingua, as readings of the mass in three of the German manuscripts (RosU 49, LeipU 49/50 and RegB C 100) indicate that their scribes used the Nuremberg print as their copying exemplar.Footnote 69 However, the scribes of these manuscripts did not mindlessly copy the Missa Pange lingua as part of a series of works from Missae tredecim or in an attempt to copy all available Josquin-attributed masses. The Missa Pange lingua is the sole Missae tredecim mass copied in four manuscripts, and only one other mass from Ott’s collection appears in the other two manuscripts.Footnote 70

Table 4 Manuscript sources and pre-existent melodic material for Missae tredecim masses

Table 5 Lutheran manuscript sources of Missa Pange lingua

Three Missa Pange lingua manuscripts do not bespeak a direct relationship to Missae tredecim, but they are separated from the earlier pool of sources from the Vatican and Alamire workshop because they lack the second Agnus Dei section. In addition to RosU 49 and a Missae tredecim exemplar, Duke Johann Albrecht I of Mecklenburg-Schwerin owned a third copy of the Missa Pange lingua. RosU 71/3 is one of five worn, utilitarian sets of paper partbooks held at the Rostock Universitätsbibliothek with the shelfmark 71 (Table 6).Footnote 71 The partbooks must have survived as a group, although various folios and some entire voice partbooks are missing; in the case of RosU 71/3, only the discantus and bassus partbooks survive. An entry in the ducal library catalogue indicates that these ‘Rostock 71’ partbooks were in the possession of Duke Johann Albrecht I, an advocate for both Lutheranism and music.Footnote 72 While Johann Albrecht’s three Missa Pange lingua copies may seem to be an anomaly, this source situation is probably indicative of the music holdings in other wealthy churches and courts: printed editions were purchased, choirbooks were given as gifts, and utilitarian partbooks were copied, but only fragmented evidence of these actions survive today in the form of extant prints and manuscripts.Footnote 73

Table 6 Overview of the Rostock Universitätsbibliothek Mus. Saec. 71 Manuscripts

Lutheran interest in the Missa Pange lingua extended into the Czecho-Slovak region. BrnoAM 15/4 and a second choirbook containing Latin polyphony, BrnoAM 14/5, belonged to the German-speaking Lutheran community associated with the church of St James in Brno.Footnote 74 BudOS MS 8 is one of nearly fifty sets of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century music prints and manuscripts from the church of St Aegidius in Bardejov, a city in eastern Slovakia.Footnote 75 The repertory in BrnoAM 15/4 and BudOS MS 8 suggests a Saxon origin for the exemplars of these pieces and possibly the manuscripts themselves, as many of the pieces are also found in sources from Leipzig and the Electoral Library.Footnote 76

All six later manuscript readings of the Missa Pange lingua were suitable for use in the Lutheran liturgy.Footnote 77 In the case of RosU 49, Lothar Hoffmann-Erbrecht observed that the repertory therein was representative of Lutheran music in Saxony and could have provided a foundation of liturgical music for Duke Johann Albrecht as he promoted Lutheranism in the Mecklenburg region.Footnote 78 In the dedicatory letter of RegB C 100 addressed to the Lutheran city council of Regensburg, the scribe Johannes Buechmaier – a cantor at the Regensburg Gymnasium Poeticum – explicitly states that he copied the following masses and introits ‘for your church’.Footnote 79 Four manuscripts (LeipU 49/50, RosU 49, RosU 71/3, BudOS MS 8) contain the purely functional polyphonic Preface responses similar to those found in the Heilbronn Missae tredecim. Footnote 80

Two manuscripts contain altered versions of the Missa Pange lingua that reflect the choices Lutherans made when performing it. The Missa Pange lingua readings in the sources directly related to Missae tredecim – RosU 49, LeipU 49/50 and RegB C 100 – all differ from the print to some degree. The reading in RosU 49 is the most similar to Missae tredecim, with only a handful of minute differences across all mass movements and voice parts.Footnote 81 The differences between LeipU 49/50 and Missae tredecim seem to be the result of hurried or careless copying; in addition to a few stray variants, several brief passages are omitted in each voice.Footnote 82 In contrast, the Missa Pange lingua in RegB C 100 deviates from Missae tredecim in a more purposeful way. Buechmaier indicated in both the preface and the index that the masses he did not compose contained his own ‘resoluta’, alterations which include a nearly universal use of the cut-C signature and occasionally rewriting technically complex passages.Footnote 83 These changes reflect Buechmaier’s attempt to make older polyphony technically accessible to musicians living in the later sixteenth century and, therefore, his expectation that the masses in RegB C 100 would be performed.

The Missa Pange lingua reading in BudOS MS 8 lacks the middle section between ‘et homo factus est’ and ‘Confiteor unum baptisma’ in the Credo, another example of an abridged movement alongside the Missa Sub tuum praesidium Credo in the Kassel Missae tredecim exemplar (described above and pictured in Figure 5). The masses in RegB C 100 suggest that this phenomenon of abbreviated Mass Ordinary sections was a deliberate performance practice choice made by early Lutherans. Many of the Mass Ordinary settings in RegB C 100 contain similar omitted sections, including the masses composed by Buechmaier himself (Table 7). Since it is impossible that Buechmaier did not have access to sections of his own compositions, it stands to reason that at least some of the omissions in RegB C 100 as well as other Lutheran manuscripts were deliberate choices made by the copyists and not the result of lacking access to complete copying exemplars of these masses.

Table 7 Mass Ordinary settings in RegB C 100

Although they discontinued the original performance contexts of the Missa Pange lingua – Corpus Christi and votive masses – Lutherans throughout Germany and the Czecho-Slovak region selected the mass for performance in their schools and churches and for preservation in manuscripts created specifically for their communities. The sources discussed above may appear to be ordinary sixteenth-century prints and manuscripts – even the handwritten annotations found in the Missae tredecim exemplars are normal editorial markings – but they serve as evidence that Lutherans actively engaged with the Missa Pange lingua. They marked up the mass in their copies of Missae tredecim, they copied the mass into manuscripts created specifically for their communities, and in some cases they altered the Missa Pange lingua to make it more suitable for their performance needs.


The Missae tredecim edition and subsequent manuscript sources firmly establish the interest Lutherans took in the Missa Pange lingua and solidify its place in the early Lutheran repertory. Nevertheless, these sources do not reveal Lutherans’ perception of this mass in terms of its association with multiple polemical topics of the Reformation beyond the inclusion of ‘Pange lingua’ in the title in five of the six manuscripts.Footnote 84 There are two printed Lutheran sources of the Missa Pange lingua from the mid-sixteenth century that offer some insight into how Lutherans perceived its earlier Catholic identity. It seems that Lutherans were aware of the earlier context of the Missa Pange lingua but at least in these two cases were comfortable with the mass, despite its borrowed melody and the allusions to controversial theology and liturgical practices. One print implies an emphasis of aesthetics and educational value over objectionable doctrine, while the other directly engages with multiple aspects of the Missa Pange lingua’s former life as a work associated with Corpus Christi and Eucharistic devotion.

In 1545, the Wittenberg printer Georg Rhau included the Pleni sunt and Agnus II sections from the Missa Pange lingua in his Bicinia gallica, latina, germanica (RISM 15456), a printed collection of duet sections extracted from larger compositions. The Missa Pange lingua duets, like other works in the collection, appear as contrafacta: the Pleni sunt section is entitled Quis separabit nos and contains text from Romans 8 (35; 38–9), while the Agnus II is entitled Exaudi Domine and contains text from Psalm 26 (7, 9, 11, 14).Footnote 85 In another music print from 1542 titled Sacrorum hymnorum liber primus, Rhau compiled a collection of 134 hymns for Vespers services held at Lutheran schools.Footnote 86 He organised the hymns according to the liturgical calendar with pieces from the Proper of the Time followed by the Proper of the Saints. Most feasts have between two and four pieces whereas the solemn feasts have more: there are eight hymns for Christmas (including the vigil and Christmas Day), ten for Easter (including the vigil), six for Pentecost, and six for the Assumption of Mary. Corpus Christi dominates the list with thirteen items, nine of which are settings of Pange lingua stanzas that paraphrase the chant melody. Sacrorum hymnorum also contains music for five Marian feasts and feasts of non-biblical saints.

Rhau was aware that some of the hymns in Sacrorum hymnorum conflicted with Lutheran beliefs and liturgical practices. In both the preface and the dedicatory letter to the Lutheran town of Joachimsthal, he states that some of the hymn texts contain false doctrine and explains that he included the questionable hymns in his collection because of their aesthetic and educational value.Footnote 87 Rhau does not specifically mention Corpus Christi, but his sentiments on ‘false doctrine’ are applicable to the feast; he was probably aware of Martin Luther’s objection to associated rituals such as processions, Benediction services and Corpus Christi itself, not to mention the Eucharist debates in sixteenth-century confessional discourse. Given that Sacrorum hymnorum was published three years before Bicinia gallica, Rhau probably held this attitude towards similar pieces with controversial liturgical and theological topics found in these other publications, although presenting the pieces as contrafacta as he did in Bicinia gallica masks their original identities and associated liturgical functions.Footnote 88

Georg Rhau does not speak for every Lutheran, but he was an influential music publisher working in Wittenberg alongside Luther, Melanchthon and their students. He marketed his prints to Lutherans and would have avoided controversial statements and musical material that conflicted with the views of his colleagues. Lutheran leaders from Germany and regions further east studied in Wittenberg and returned to their communities with education, values and liturgical and educational materials for their churches, including music. Thus, it is reasonable to believe that Reformers educated in Wittenberg might have adopted Rhau’s sentiments towards music and accepted the older Latin repertory without reservation.

Whereas Rhau accepted the Missa Pange lingua and other potentially polemical Catholic works for aesthetic and educational reasons, the final Missa Pange lingua source addressed in this study reveals an intimate engagement with the borrowed Corpus Christi melody. This single print of the mass contains added text and images not found in any other Missa Pange lingua source – Catholic or Lutheran. It is one of seven single prints of four-voice Mass Ordinary settings held today in a bound volume at the Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek RheinMain in Wiesbaden.Footnote 89 The prints are in choirbook format and no printer or publisher is indicated, but they contain the coat of arms and motto of Anton von Isenburg, count of Büdingen (1501–60). Unlike the products of Johannes Ott and Georg Rhau, these prints do not have a commercial purpose and it is quite possible that the seven prints are unica. They were intended for private use by Isenburg and did not circulate in mass quantities across Europe, but they make a significant contribution to the primary question concerning the Lutheran use of Missa Pange lingua: to what extent did Lutherans associate this polyphonic mass with Eucharistic devotion and the Corpus Christi hymn penned by Thomas Aquinas?

Anton von Isenburg embraced Lutheranism as early as 1529 and eventually set up a print shop in his castle, known as the Ronneburg.Footnote 90 Along with the seven Mass Ordinary prints, two other items were produced in the count’s print shop: the title page of his account books for 1557 and an edition of the Confessio Augustana (Augsburg Confession), also from 1557.Footnote 91 Both items have title-page ornaments similar to those on the mass prints, and the Confessio Augustana bears Isenburg’s coat of arms and motto: ‘Armut und Überflus gibt zeitlich Betrübnis’ (poverty and abundance give timely sorrow).

The Ronneburg Missa Pange lingua print contains all movements of the mass, including the Agnus II duet that is missing from Missae tredecim and other Lutheran sources.Footnote 92 The opening Kyrie folios of each printed Ronneburg mass contain two simple engraved images: Isenburg’s coat of arms next to the discantus voice and another object adjacent to the bassus voice that varies with each mass. The opening page of the Missa Pange lingua is adorned with a family of swans (Figure 8), which may hold a symbolic meaning relevant to both Catholic and Lutheran Eucharistic theology. In his study of the Confessio Augustana edition from the Ronneburg, Josef Benzing briefly mentions the various images in the Ronneburg mass prints and states it is probable that the swan image was originally printed in a ‘Volksbuch’ or fairy-tale book.Footnote 93 It appears that the image was cut and pasted into the book prior to the printing of the music, as the C-clef overlaps the image with the bottom of the clef almost touching the larger swan. Among the many legends and symbolism concerning swans in classical and medieval animal lore, the most likely symbolic connection between the swans and the Missa Pange lingua comes from German folklore.Footnote 94

Figure 8 Kyrie, Ronneburg Missa Pange lingua, Wiesbaden, Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek RheinMain, Sig. gr. 2 Qt 31

Swans in medieval German legends bear symbolic meanings pertinent to a Eucharistic tenet shared by Catholics and Lutherans: transformation and the concealment of a spirit or human under another form.Footnote 95 In Germanic myths and legends, humans, angels and other spirits were often concealed under the form of the elegant white bird.Footnote 96 In the legend of the Swan Knight, preserved in numerous medieval literary works and made famous by Richard Wagner’s Lohengrin, Lohengrin the ‘Swan Knight’ arrives and departs from the princess Elsa in a boat driven by a swan. Elsa later discovers that the swan is actually her brother Gottfried, who was transformed into a swan by a sorceress and is eventually changed back into a human.Footnote 97 The Swan Knight legend is sometimes associated with the Swan Children fairy tale recorded by the Brothers Grimm in which a group of siblings is transformed into swans; the parent swan and two younger swans in the Ronneburg edition could very well allude to this legend. The Catholic and Lutheran confessions both subscribe to the belief that bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ during the celebration of the Eucharist. While Martin Luther and his followers did not accept transubstantiation – the rationalised explanation for this transformation – they still acknowledged a physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist and, therefore, the transformation and supernatural concealment of a person within a non-human form.

In addition to the swans, the Ronneburg Missa Pange lingua features an explicit reference to the Pange lingua hymn not found any other source: the discantus voice of the final Agnus Dei contains the text of the first verse of Aquinas’s Pange lingua printed above the standard Agnus Dei text (Figure 9).Footnote 98 This is not only unusual for a Lutheran source, but for mid-sixteenth century Mass Ordinary sources in general.Footnote 99 The added text in the superius voice of the Agnus Dei in the Missa Pange lingua is relatively simple to explain in terms of the music itself. This voice contains a long-note paraphrase of the chant melody while the lower voices provide a supporting texture. Moreover, in a Mass Ordinary setting, the final Agnus typically contains a unique feature that unifies the entire work or provides a contextual commentary. When the liturgical functions of the Agnus Dei and Pange lingua are considered together, however, the added hymn text in this source represents a climactic point in the polemical side of Catholic–Lutheran Eucharistic theology.

Figure 9 Superius voice of Agnus Dei III, Missa Pange lingua, Wiesbaden, Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek RheinMain, Sig. gr. 2 Qt 31

In the Catholic Mass, the Agnus Dei was sung at the conclusion of the Pax Domini and coincided with the fraction, which is the breaking of the consecrated Host by the priest. The fraction was originally an Eastern practice that symbolised the Passion and death of Christ, a meaning held in the Western church as well.Footnote 100 The prominent mention of a (sacrificial) lamb in the Agnus Dei text reinforces the idea that the Mass itself was a sacrifice, a concept that Luther passionately refuted. The Pange lingua text contributes an additional layer of controversial symbolism to this movement of the mass. Charles Riepe explains that the period of time between the consecration of the Host and Communion ‘represents a reverential and, at the same time, humble greeting of Him who has been made present under the form of bread’, and describes how the silence during this interval was replaced by hymns which ‘were engendered not only by their Latin genius but by a new attitude towards the Sacrament – hymns like Ave verum corpus and O Salutaris hostia’.Footnote 101 Martin Luther may have defended the idea of Christ’s physical presence in the Eucharist against his fellow Reformers, but he did not believe that the systematic theory of transubstantiation (the ‘new attitude’ to which Riepe refers) should be a binding dogma, nor did he accept the teaching that the Mass was a sacrifice.

Whether it was Anton von Isenburg himself or his printer, someone permitted the Pange lingua text to appear in the Ronneburg edition.Footnote 102 Despite the theological differences and Lutheran abolition of Corpus Christi, this should not surprise us. Lutherans wanted to silence the context of Pange lingua rather than the text and melody. Although they suppressed the Eucharistic rituals during which Pange lingua was sung, they circulated both Latin and German versions of the hymn. Along with the many Pange lingua settings in Rhau’s Sacrorum hymnorum, polyphonic versions of the hymn survive in Lutheran manuscript sources, including LeipU 49/50 and RosU 71/3.Footnote 103 Moreover, a German version of the hymn, Mein Zung erkling und frölich sing, appeared in multiple editions of hymnals titled Enchiridion. Footnote 104 Two rival publishers in Erfurt, Johannes Loersfelt and Mathes Maler, printed the first Enchiridion hymnals in 1524, the Nuremberg publisher Hans Hergott produced an Enchiridion based on the Erfurt model in 1525, and numerous other Lutheran cities followed suit with their own reprinted and expanded Enchiridia.Footnote 105 Although Mein Zung erkling did not become one of the canonical Lutheran chorales later set by Johann Sebastian Bach, it circulated in these popular vernacular hymn collections. For example, Bartlett Butler identified the hymn in fourteen sixteenth-century Nuremberg hymnals beginning with Hergott’s 1525 edition.Footnote 106

When stripped of its original performance contexts – Corpus Christi Vespers, processions with the Eucharist and periods of Eucharistic adoration – most of the Pange lingua text itself does not present any explicitly objectionable concepts and actually highlights the similarities between Catholic and Lutheran Eucharistic theology rather than the differences (Table 8).Footnote 107 The first stanza is essentially a summary of the hymn itself and the Christian salvation narrative. The second and third verses follow with a description of Christ’s life from his birth to the Last Supper, an appropriate event to highlight in a Eucharistic hymn. The fifth verse describes the adoration of the Host as a new form of worship that replaced Old Testament rituals and the final verse is a concluding doxology.

Table 8 Pange lingua text – Latin and English

The first part of the fourth stanza would have been the most objectionable to Martin Luther and his followers because it references transubstantiation in the first two lines.Footnote 108 Most Lutheran polyphonic Pange lingua settings avoid the fourth stanza – Georg Rhau’s Sacrorum hymnorum includes settings of all Pange lingua stanzas except the fourth – but the early Enchiridion hymnals from Erfurt and Nuremberg reveal an intriguing engagement with this verse. Butler observed that the Nuremberg Enchiridia retained a very close translation of the fourth verse, including the reference to transubstantiation, but the Erfurt Enchiridia contained an altered version of Mein Zung erkling as early as 1527.Footnote 109 In fact, these hymnals contain two versions of Mein Zung erkling: the original with the transubstantiation reference and the corresponding Latin incipits above each verse, and the second version with a more liberal translation of Aquinas’s hymn (see Figure 10 for a page from the hymnal and Table 9 for the two complete texts).

Figure 10 Melody and opening verse of Mein Zung erkling. Enchiridion (Erfurt: Maler, 1527), fol. 33v. Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek

Table 9 Two versions of the German Pange lingua from the 1527 Erfurt Enchiridion

Whereas the original Mein Zung erkling retains the ‘word made flesh turning true bread into flesh’ line, the ‘noch eynmal’ version aligns more precisely with Lutheran Eucharistic theology. Unlike fellow reformers such as Huldrych Zwingli, who rejected any physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist, Martin Luther consistently argued in favour of a physical presence in the bread and wine.Footnote 110 However, Luther taught that this physical presence must be accepted based on faith alone as opposed to a rationalised explanation such as transubstantiation. Thus, the differences between Catholic and Lutheran Eucharistic beliefs are distinct, but subtle. In place of the bread/flesh/word lines, the initial lines in the fourth verse of the ‘noch eynmal’ version discuss the power of God’s word and how it can accomplish whatever God wills. The most specific reference to the Eucharist in the ‘noch eynmal’ version is found in the third verse, which describes how Christ, ‘with a great miracle’ (grossem wunder), left his Testament under ‘extraordinary’ bread and wine (brodt vnnd wein besonder). This wording conveys that the bread and wine underwent a miraculous change rather than being a mere symbol, but does not specify what that miracle is or how the change happens. It is also noteworthy that the fourth and fifth stanzas of the original Latin Pange lingua emphasise a tenet of Luther’s theology in regards to the Eucharist as well as the salvation of one’s soul: faith alone is sufficient. Immediately after the transubstantiation reference in the fourth stanza, Aquinas writes (emphasis mine), ‘et, si sensus deficit, ad firmandum cor sincerum, sola fides sufficit’. Likewise, the fifth stanza concludes with the line ‘praestet fides supplementum, sensuum defectui’.

Returning to the Missa Pange lingua, the Rhau and Ronneburg publications demonstrate two different ways that Lutherans could negotiate the controversial aspects of the mass, assuming that the people involved with its performance and distribution were cognisant of sixteenth-century Eucharistic polemics and the intricate theology behind those polemics. While educated members of the Lutheran community probably were aware of the ongoing discussions involving the Eucharist within liturgy and theology, the crowds of common people witnessing the Reformation from the church naves were not. Given this disparity in liturgical and theological knowledge, it may seem that the controversial contexts of the Missa Pange lingua would not be significant in the greater picture of the Reformation, but quite the opposite is true for this particular mass. Because Pange lingua was a popular hymn for Corpus Christi processions, people of all classes and education levels would have heard it in the streets and associated it with the lavish festival focused on the Blessed Sacrament.Footnote 111 It may be more difficult to discern whether the average churchgoer would have understood liturgical meanings behind less common borrowed melodies in masses, but listeners of the Missa Pange lingua in the mid-sixteenth century undoubtedly would have recognised the melody from the Corpus Christi festivities.Footnote 112

Sixteenth-century Christians had access to the Catholic context of Pange lingua via processions, and those who could afford printed books also had access to Pange lingua within a Lutheran context through the Enchiridion hymnals. These music books were intended for private, individual use in order for people to learn the words of Latin hymns and to practise singing them in their native language.Footnote 113 Melodies for the hymns did not always accompany the text, but in the case of Mein Zung erkling in Maler’s 1527 Enchiridion, the Gregorian Pange lingua melody is provided (see Figure 10 above). The wide circulation of Enchiridion hymnals exposed the general Lutheran population to at least some version of Pange lingua, even if the people were not educated enough to understand the complex and polemical Eucharistic theologies, or were not old enough to remember Corpus Christi processions and other Catholic rituals involving Pange lingua and the Eucharist.

There is remarkable evidence that both the German and Latin versions of Pange lingua were part of Lutheran musical life, despite the original liturgical contexts of the hymn being quite polemical in the sixteenth century. It stands to reason that if Lutherans did not take issue with the hymn, they should not take issue with a mass setting based on that hymn. Nevertheless, it is worth pausing to consider once again the relationship between a polyphonic work and its borrowed melody. It may have been easy for Lutherans to silence the context of Pange lingua (Corpus Christi, Eucharistic processions, etc.) and continue singing the hymn text and melody for their own devotional and pedagogical purposes, but the hymn acquired further problematic contextual overtones when fused with the text of the Mass Ordinary. In the case of the Missa Pange lingua, Lutherans had to negotiate not only the Gregorian melody originally associated with Corpus Christi and transubstantiation, but the objectionable practice of votive masses and the general tenet of the Mass as a sacrifice, although Martin Luther’s endorsement of the Mass Ordinary texts certainly helped with the final point.


Although the Missa Pange lingua began its life as a Catholic work associated with Corpus Christi and the trend of Eucharistic devotion rooted in medieval thought and ritual, the mass became part of the Lutheran Latin repertory throughout Germany and central Europe. The Lutheran interest in the Missa Pange lingua caused the mass to be distributed more widely and resulted in new performance contexts that were liturgical, pedagogical and recreational. An ironic aspect of the sixteenth-century transmission of the Missa Pange lingua – along with other Latin polyphonic repertory – is that the two institutions that vehemently fought the spread of Lutheranism, the Holy Roman Empire and the Vatican, also inadvertently cultivated music for the movement. Given the theories involving Johannes Ott’s acquisition of the Missae tredecim repertory from the former Imperial court musician Ludwig Senfl and the Wittenberg Electoral Library, the Holy Roman Empire was probably a direct supplier of liturgical music for the Lutheran movement.

We cannot know the sentiments of every individual Lutheran who transmitted or performed the Missa Pange lingua and why they chose to do so. Nevertheless, there is no evidence of Lutherans aligning the mass – or its borrowed material – with negative opinions of Corpus Christi such as those expressed by Martin Luther in his Kemberg sermon. Instead, Lutherans were indeed comfortable incorporating the text and melody of Pange lingua into their repertory, whether they chose to do so because they found the mass aesthetically pleasing or because they interpreted the hymn in a way that conformed to their own Eucharistic theology. Meanwhile, Catholics in Germany continued to observe Corpus Christi throughout the sixteenth century. In fact, the Eucharist became a powerful rhetorical device for the Counter-Reformation effort of the Catholic Church; Alexander Fisher referred to the Eucharist as ‘arguably the most powerful and controversial symbol in the Catholic arsenal’.Footnote 114 Nevertheless, there are no extant Germanic Missa Pange lingua sources associated with the Counter-Reformation efforts of the Catholic Church.Footnote 115

The Lutheran reception of the Missa Pange lingua is a striking example of how Christians who broke away from the Roman Church still utilised its music for their own purposes, but it is also significant in the current reception of the mass. Editors of the two earliest modern editions of the mass, Otto Kade and Friedrich Blume, both consulted Missae tredecim as their primary source.Footnote 116 At the International Josquin Festival-Conference in 1971, Blume described how he and his students studied the mass in 1927 after a student discovered Kade’s edition in the Prussian State Library.Footnote 117 Had the Missa Pange lingua not appeared in Missae tredecim and experienced a ‘Renaissance’ in the early Lutheran church, its life in the twentieth century might have been very different. Finally, the sixteenth-century Germanic reception of the Missa Pange lingua reveals that a borrowed melody in a mass may only be a single layer in the initial performance and reception history of that mass, thus warranting consideration of this mass – and perhaps many others – within the musical histories of both the Catholic and Lutheran confessions.


Known Copies of Missae tredecim


Portions of this study were presented at the 80th Annual Meeting of the American Musicological Society in Milwaukee (November 2014), the Medieval and Renaissance Music Conference in Birmingham, UK (July 2014), at Case Western Reserve University, and at Masarykova univerzita (Brno, Czech Republic). Much of the research presented here also appears in my Ph.D. dissertation, ‘The Body of Christ Divided: Reception of Josquin’s Missa Pange lingua in Reformation Germany’ (Case Western Reserve University, 2015). For their crucial comments and feedback, I thank Peter Bennett, Franz Körndle, Susan McClary and Laura Youens. I also thank the two anonymous reviewers for Early Music History for their insight and helpful suggestions. Finally, I am especially grateful to David Rothenberg, who offered invaluable advice on this project from the earliest dissertation drafts to the present work.

Photographs by the author where noted. Other images are courtesy of the Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek (Jena, Figure 1), Österreichische Nationalbibliothek (Vienna, Figure 2), Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (Munich, Figure 3), Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek RheinMain (Wiesbaden, Figures 8 and 9), and the Württembergische Landesbibliothek (Stuttgart, Figure 10).

Manuscript sigla are taken from C. Hamm and H. Kellman, Census-Catalogue of Manuscript Sources of Polyphonic Music, 1400–1550, Renaissance Manuscript Studies, 1 (Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1979–88). RISM sigla are provided for printed sources.

The following abbreviations are also used:

BrnoAM Brno, archiv města fond V 2 Svatojakubská knihovna sign

BrusBR Brussels, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique/Koninklijke Bibliotheek van België

BudOS Országos Széchényi Könyvtár

ChiN Chicago, Newberry Library

DresSL Dresden, Sächische Landesbibliothek

EK Die Evangelische Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. E. Sehling (Leipzig, 1902–)

ErlU Erlangen, Universitätsbibliothek

HerdF Herdringen, Schloss Fürstenberg, Bibliothek

JenaU Jena, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek

LeipU Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek

MunBS Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek

MunU Munich, Universitätsbibliothek der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität

NJE New Josquin Edition (Utrecht, 1987–) (all references are to the critical commentary volumes)

RegB Regensburg, Bischöfliche Zentralbibliothek

RosU Rostock, Bibliothek der Wilhelm-Pieck-Universität

StuttL Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek

ToleBC Toledo, Biblioteca Capitular de la Catedral Metropolitana

VatG Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Cappella Giulia

VatP Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Palatini latini

VatS Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Cappella Sistina

VatSM Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Santa Maria Maggiore

VienNB Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek

WA D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe, 4th ser. (Weimar, 1883–)

1 Rosenthal, Katalog 86: Alte Musik 1500–1850, p. 51. The Munich antiquarian Jacques Rosenthal (1854–1937) lists a single tenor partbook of Missae tredecim. He notes that the cover bears the year 1545, and that half of the page CC2 is torn off. In 1995, the Cambridge University Library acquired a tenor partbook of Missae tredecim with 1545 on the cover, and with that exact page torn.

2 A bookplate in these partbooks indicates that they belonged to the banker and music historian Daniel F. Scheurleer (1855–1927). For more on Scheurleer and his other music books currently held at the Nederlands Muziek Instituut, see Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott’, pp. 738–40. Gustavson (p. 747) suggests Lutheran Saxony as a provenance for this collection of music books due to a handwritten reference to Elector Augustus of Saxony in a Novum et insigne opus musicum exemplar from Scheurleer’s collection.

3 Gustavson (‘Hans Ott’, pp. 750–1) suggests a provenance of Saxony or Anhalt, but currently nothing definite is known about the partbooks until they reached the university library at Halle. Based on a previous shelfmark (Nd.22.I [1-4]), the partbooks were in the university collection prior to when a catalogue with those shelfmarks was prepared by Otto Hartwig between 1876 and 1882.

4 Cited in Müller-Blattau, ‘Die musikalischen Schätze’, pp. 220–1.

5 These partbooks were lost during the Second World War. Gustavson (‘Hans Ott’, p. 387, n. 36) placed inquiries at the Kaliningrad State University Library and the Foreign Literature Library in Moscow in an attempt to find them, but neither library has them. He believes these partbooks may still resurface with further inquiry.

6 In 1929, the Nuremberg Stadtbibliothek purchased this convolute at the auction of Werner Wolffheim’s music collection. Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott’, pp. 800–1.

7 Around the year 1840, the Regensburg cleric Carl Proske (1794–1861) purchased at least one, if not two Missae tredecim copies from the Augsburg bookseller Fidelis Butsch that are currently held at the Regensburg Bischöfliche Zentralbibliothek. Proske was a passionate proponent of earlier liturgical music, particularly chant, and devoted time and money to restoring sacred medieval and Renaissance music in Regensburg liturgies. He amassed a considerable collection of this music, which is now part of the diocesan library in Regensburg.

8 An inscription in the discantus partbook of Missae tredecim indicates that the partbooks were donated to the collection by Matthäus Schwandrisius of Stetten, who served as cantor in Neustadt from Michaelmas 1573 until Michaelmas 1576. Only the discantus and bassus partbooks survive, and neither partbook contains any distinct handwritten annotations. For more on this source and others from Neustadt an der Orla, see Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott’, pp. 792–6, and Ute Omonsky, Untersuchungen zur Musiksammelhandschrift signatur N. 22 aus dem Pfarrarchiv Neustadt (Orla): Ein Beitrag zur Musikgeschichte Thüringens der 1. Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts, Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen: Sonderreihe Monographien, 1 (Bad Köstritz, 1993).

9 In addition to the two copies sold to Carl Proske, Butsch listed the contratenor and bassus Missae tredecim partbooks for sale in 1846, but no other trace of these partbooks has surfaced – there are no known exemplars that consist of only these two partbooks. See Fidelis Butsch, Catalog einer Sammlung seltener Notendrucke des XVI. und XVII. Jahrhunderts . . . zu haben in der Birett’schen Antiquariats-Buchlandlung F. Butsch in Augsburg (Augsburg, 1846), p. 26.


1 Information on earlier editions and sources of the Missa Pange lingua can be found in Masses Based on Gregorian Chants 2, ed. W. Elders, NJE 4. See also Allende-Blin, J., ‘Beobachtungen über die “Missa Pange lingua”’, in H. K. Metzger and R. Riehn (eds.), Josquin des Pres, Musik-Konzepte, 26/27 (Munich, 1982), pp. 7084 Google Scholar; Fallows, D., Josquin (Turnhout, 2009), pp. 320323 ; Osthoff, H., Josquin Desprez (Tutzing, 1962–5), i, pp. 191196 ; Planchart, A. E., ‘Masses on Plainsong Cantus Firmi’, in R. Sherr (ed.), The Josquin Companion (Oxford, 2000), pp. 130150 ; and Sherr, R., ‘Josquin’s “Missa Pange Lingua”: A Note on Agnus Dei III’, Early Music, 18 (1990), pp. 271273, 275Google Scholar. The most contextual treatment of the Missa Pange lingua is found in Michael Long’s article on the Missa Di dadi, which focuses on Eucharistic devotion: Long, M., ‘Symbol and Ritual in Josquin’s Missa Di Dadi, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 42 (1989), pp. 122 Google Scholar.

2 Current scholarship accepts Pange lingua as being the work of Aquinas. See Rubin, M., Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval Culture (Cambridge, 1991), pp. 185188 Google Scholar, and Walters, B., V. Corrigan and P. T. Ricketts, Feast of Corpus Christi (University Park, Pa., 2006), pp. 3436 Google Scholar. Fortunatus composed Pange lingua and several other hymns to commemorate the arrival of a relic of the True Cross in Poitiers. His hymn begins with the line ‘Pange lingua gloriosi praelium certaminis’ and focuses on the cross and its role in Christ’s sacrifice for the redemption of the human race, with references to the tree from which Adam and Eve took the forbidden fruit and the life of Christ leading up to his crucifixion. Pange lingua is in trochaic tetrameter catalectic, the metre of Roman military marching chants, which made the hymn practical for use during processions with the relic. In time, Fortunatus’s Pange lingua attained a place in the Good Friday liturgy during the veneration of the cross; see Norberg, D., ‘Le “Pange lingua” de Fortunat pour la Croix’, La Maison-Dieu, 173 (1988), pp. 7179 Google Scholar. See also George, J. W., Venatius Fortunatus: A Latin Poet in Merovingian Gaul (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar, and Roberts, M., The Humblest Sparrow: The Poetry of Venantius Fortunatus (Ann Arbor, 2009)Google Scholar. Evidence of Aquinas’s use of the Fortunatus Pange lingua as a melodic and textual model is found in the manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1143, which dates from the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century and contains a complete version of the Corpus Christi Office. Marginal notes in this manuscript provide the sources of the Corpus Christi Office items. A note adjacent to Pange lingua reads ‘Contra. Pange lingua gloriosi praellum [sic] certaminis, in Passione Domini.’ A complete chart of the Corpus Christi Office items and marginalia can be found in Mathiesen, T. J., ‘The Office of the New Feast of Corpus Christi in the Regimen Animarum at Brigham Young University’, Journal of Musicology, 2 (1983), pp. 1344 Google Scholar, at 24–5. Walters et al., Feast of Corpus Christi, provides in-depth information on the early Corpus Christi liturgies.

3 There are twenty-seven known sources of the Missa Pange lingua. Nineteen have complete or nearly complete readings of the mass that would have been suitable for liturgical use, while the rest transmit only certain sections in a variety of forms: duet anthologies known as bicinia intended for pedagogical purposes, lute intabulations and Heinrich Glarean’s Dodekachordon treatise. Of the nineteen ‘liturgical’ sources, eight are concretely linked to Lutherans, a number that expands upon further consideration. JenaU 21, not counted among the eight, belonged to Frederick the Wise of Saxony (1463–1525), who protected Martin Luther and allowed the Reformation to flourish in Wittenberg, while maintaining personal and professional ties to the Catholic Church. Duet sections from the Missa Pange lingua are included in a bicinia collection compiled by Georg Rhau (1488–1548), a printer based in Wittenberg who published the bicinia and numerous other music publications for Lutheran churches and schools. Finally, one of the eight liturgical Lutheran sources is a printed mass anthology titled Missae tredecim quatuor vocum. When the original owners of the extant or otherwise documented Missae tredecim copies are considered, the number of Lutheran Missa Pange lingua sources doubles.

4 Osthoff (Josquin Desprez, p. 90) coined the term ‘German Josquin Renaissance’ to describe the unprecedented popularity of Josquin compositions in the Germanic region in the mid- to late sixteenth century. While previous studies on this phenomenon note the posthumous circulation of Josquin Mass Ordinary settings in Germany, the primary focus has been on the motet genre; see Crook, D., ‘The Exegetical Motet’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 68 (2015), pp. 255316 Google Scholar; W. Kirsch, ‘Josquin’s Motets in the German Tradition’, in Josquin des Prez: Proceedings of the International Josquin Festival-Conference, ed. E. E. Lowinsky (London, 1976), pp. 261–78; Oettinger, R. W., ‘Ludwig Senfl and the Judas Trope: Composition and Religious Toleration at the Bavarian Court’, Early Music History, 20 (2001), pp. 199225 Google Scholar; and Schlagel, S. P., ‘The Liber selectarum cantionum and the “German Josquin Renaissance”’, Journal of Musicology, 19 (2002), pp. 564615 Google Scholar. Studies on the German reception of Mass Ordinaries often gravitate to a specific source. See e.g. Haar, J., ‘Josquin as Interpreted by a Mid-Sixteenth-Century German Musician’, in S. Hörner and B. Schmid (eds.), Festschrift für Horst Leuchtmann zum 65. Geburtstag (Tutzing, 1993), pp. 179205 Google Scholar; Rodin, J., ‘A Josquin Substitution’, Early Music, 35 (2006), pp. 249258 ; and Schlagel, S. P., ‘Fortune’s Fate: Josquin and the Nürnberg Mass Prints of 1539’, in A. Clement and E. Jas (eds.), Josquin and the Sublime: Proceedings from the International Josquin Symposium at Roosevelt Academy Middelburg, 12–15 July 2009 (Turnhout, 2011), pp. 191209 Google Scholar. The favouring of motet over mass can be traced back to the work of A. W. Ambros in the 1860s; see Kirkman, A., The Cultural Life of the Early Polyphonic Mass: Medieval Context to Modern Revival (Cambridge, 2010), p. 6 Google Scholar.

5 See Heal, B., The Cult of the Virgin Mary in Early Modern Germany: Protestant and Catholic Piety, 1500–1648 (Cambridge, 2007); J. L. Koerner, The Reformation of the Image (Chicago, 2004)Google Scholar; and Spicer, A. (ed.), Lutheran Churches in Early Modern Europe (Farnham, 2012)Google Scholar.

6 Although other Protestant sects such as those led by Zwingli and Calvin took a stronger, more destructive stance against religious art than the Lutheran movement, Martin Luther and his colleagues still had to negotiate their position on the role of images in theology and practice. Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, a theologian at the University of Wittenberg, took the strongest stance against images and incited iconoclastic acts in Wittenberg in the 1520s. Shortly thereafter, Martin Luther denounced Karlstadt’s teachings on images and other matters; see Eire, C. M. N., War against the Idols: The Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to Calvin (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 5473 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 For examples of this new approach to Reformation studies, see Heal, B., ‘“Better Papist than Calvinist”: Art and Identity in Later Lutheran Germany’, German History, 29 (2011), pp. 584609 Google Scholar; Frandsen, M., Crossing Confessional Boundaries: The Patronage of Italian Sacred Music in Seventeenth-Century Dresden (Oxford, 2006); and Kaufmann, T., ‘Einleitung: Transkonfessionalität, Interkonfessionalität, binnenkonfessionelle Pluralität – Neue Forschungen zur Konfessionalisierungsthese’, in K. von Greyerz et al. (eds.), Interkonfessionalität – Transkonfessionalität – binnenkonfessionelle Pluralität: Neue Forschungen zur Konfessionalisierungsthese (Heidelberg, 2003), pp. 915 Google Scholar.

8 In Admonition concerning the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Our Lord (1530), Luther observes that the Gloria, Alleluia, Creed, Preface, Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei contain ‘nothing about a sacrifice but only praise and thanks’ and notes that, therefore, ‘we have also kept them in our Mass’ (nichtst vom opffer, Sondern eitel lob und danck, Darumb wir sie auch jnn unser Messen behalten). The English translation and Luther’s original German text of this section can be found in Leaver, R., Luther’s Liturgical Music (Grand Rapids, Mich., 2007), p. 9 Google Scholar.

9 WA 19, pp. 73–4. Also see R. Leaver, Luther’s Liturgical Music, pp. 293–4.

10 Kirchenordnungen were legal documents that contain information on a variety of topics pertinent to a town or church that recently broke away from Rome, such as tenets of basic governance, the organisation and curriculum of schools, special rites such as baptism and marriage, and the structure of liturgical services. The most comprehensive collection of edited Kirchenordnungen is the series Emil Sehling began over a century ago, Die Evangelische Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts. The Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften has been in charge of the series since 2002.

11 Luther’s belief in the ‘Real (i.e. physical) Presence’ of Christ in the Eucharist became a cornerstone of his theology and a primary point of disagreement with both Huldrych Zwingli and Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt. For general information on Luther’s beliefs regarding the Eucharist, see Wandel, L. P., The Eucharist in the Reformation: Incarnation and Liturgy (Cambridge, 2006), pp. 94138 Google Scholar. For more on Zwingli’s Eucharistic theology, see pp. 139–207. Throughout her recent biography of Luther, Lyndal Roper emphasises Luther’s belief in the Real Presence; see Roper, L., Martin Luther: Renegade and Prophet (London, 2016), esp. pp. 290294, 318–19, 326–8 and 354–5Google Scholar.

12 The three Petrucci volumes are as follows: Misse Josquin (RISM J 666–8), Missarum Josquin Liber secundus (J 671–2) and Missarum Josquin Liber tertius (J 673–4). For more on printed Josquin repertory and historiography, see van Orden, K., ‘Josquin des Prez, Renaissance Historiography, and the Cultures of Print’, in J. F. Fulcher (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the New Cultural History of Music (Oxford, 2011), pp. 354380 Google Scholar.

13 Josquin’s authorship of the mass is uncontested in the New Grove Dictionary of Music, NJE 4, p. 85, and Planchart’s essay in The Josquin Companion. Fallows (Josquin, p. 323) refers to the idea of Josquin not composing Missa Pange lingua as ‘absurd’. Joshua Rifkin is possibly the only scholar to suggest in writing that the mass may not be Josquin’s, but the remark was made to illustrate a broader point about Josquin authenticity studies and was not based on any specific evidence: J. Rifkin, ‘Problems of Authorship in Josquin: Some Impolitic Observations with a Postscript on Absalon, fili mi’, in W. Elders with F. de Haen (eds.), Proceedings of the International Josquin Symposium Utrecht 1986 (Utrecht, 1991), pp. 46–7.

14 Owens, J. A., ‘How Josquin Became Josquin: Reflections on Historiography and Reception’, in Owens and A. M. Cummings (eds.), Music in Renaissance Cities and Courts: Studies in Honor of Lewis Lockwood (Warren, MI, 1997), p. 275 Google Scholar.

15 Fallows, Josquin, p. 323.

16 All the early Missa Pange lingua sources on this table are considered complete (and therefore suitable for liturgical use) except for two: ChiN C25, which contains two sections of the Gloria arranged for lute, and VienNB 18832, a collection of duet sections that contains the Pleni sunt and Agnus II sections of the mass. Because they only contain a few sections of the mass and thus had practically no impact on its dissemination among Lutherans, these sources are considered peripheral in the present study. Nevertheless, they serve as important evidence that the mass was included in lute and bicinia collections in the first quarter of the sixteenth century, possibly while Josquin was still alive.

17 Because the elevation was the most important moment in the Mass, it also became the most important point in cyclic musical settings of the Mass Ordinary as they developed in the fifteenth century. See Kirkman, The Cultural Life, pp. 177–207.

18 See chapters 1–3 of Rubin, Corpus Christi, for a detailed discussion of early Eucharistic theology, the rise of medieval Eucharistic devotion, and the development and spread of Corpus Christi.

19 Zika, C., ‘Hosts, Processions, and Pilgrimages: Controlling the Sacred in Fifteenth-Century Germany’, Past and Present, no. 118 (Feb. 1988), pp. 2564 Google Scholar, at 37–8.

20 Germanic processional books that contain Pange lingua include the following manuscripts, for which RISM sigla are given: A-Gu, MS 1459, fol. 89r (sixteenth century, Abbey of St. Lambrecht in Austria); GB-Lbl, Add. MS 31386, fol. 57 (sixteenth century, Cologne); and D-KNd, MS 1064, fol. 51v (fifteenth century, owned by St. Nicolas de Brauweiler) and MS 1163, fol. 48v (fifteenth century, Cologne). Germanic books for the Office that contain Pange lingua include D-AAm, G 20 (fols. 205r, 399r, 402v); D-KNd, MS 1157 (fol. 24r); A-Gu, MSS 114 (fol. 234r), 204 (fol. 194r), 387 (fol. 241v); D-Mbs Clm 17010 (fol. 113v); GB-Ob, MS Laud Misc. 284 (fol. 269r); D-W Cod. Guelf 170 Helmst (fol. 13r).

21 B. Haggh, ‘Music, Liturgy, and Ceremony in Brussels, 1350–1500’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois, 1988), pp. 383–94; and Browe, P., Die Verehrung der Eucharistie im Mittelalter (Munich, 1933), pp. 141154 Google Scholar.

22 See Kellman, H. (ed.), The Treasury of Petrus Alamire: Music and Art in Flemish Court Manuscripts 1500–1535 (Ghent, 1999)Google Scholar for a catalogue of all known Alamire manuscripts.

23 Although Occo was a bibliophile and took an interest in the arts, it seems more likely that he wanted the choirbook for the Heilige Stede rather than for his own use, especially since he did not have an ensemble at his disposal; see Boorman, S., ‘Purpose of the Gift’, in B. Bouckaert and E. Schreurs (eds.), The Burgundian-Habsburg Court Complex of Music Manuscripts (1500–1535) and the Workshop of Petrus Alamire (Leuven and Neerpelt, 2003), p. 114 Google Scholar. Literature on the Occo Codex includes the online edition with commentary, Jaap van Benthem et al., ‘The Occo Codex’, Computerized Mensural Music Editing Project (; a facsimile edition, B. Huys and S. A. C. Dudok van Heel (eds.), Occo Codex (Brussels, Royal Library Albert I, Ms. IV 922), Facsimilia Musica Neerlandica, 1 (Buren, 1979); Huys, ‘An Unknown Alamire-Choirbook (‘Occo Codex’) Recently Acquired by the Royal Library of Belgium’, Tijdschrift van de Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 24 (1974), pp. 1–19; and F. A. Warmington, review of Occo Codex (Brussels, Royal Library Albert I, MS. IV. 922) by Bernard Huys and Sebastien A. C. Dudok van Heel, Notes, 2nd ser., 38 (1981), pp. 406–9.

24 Detailed studies of Frederick’s choirbooks include K. P. Duffy, ‘The Jena Choirbooks: Music and Liturgy at the Castle Church in Wittenberg under Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1995), and J. Heidrich, Die deutschen Chorbücher aus der Hofkapelle Friedrichs des Weisen: Ein Beitrag zur mitteldeutschen geistlichen Musikpraxis um 1500, Sammlung Musikwissenschaftlicher Abhandlungen, 84 (Baden-Baden, 1993). For more on the music at Frederick’s court, see Duffy, ‘Netherlands Manuscripts at a Saxon Court’, in Bouckaert and Schreurs (eds.), The Burgundian-Habsburg Court Complex, pp. 218–19.

25 Weimar, Staatsarchiv, Ernestinisches Gesamtarchiv Reg. O. 201 (Reg. O. pag. 91 AAa 41), fols. 1–9; as cited in Duffy, ‘The Jena Choirbooks’, pp. 163–8.

26 In his catalogue entry, Jas concludes that JenaU 21 must have been for the Hofkapelle: see Kellman (ed.), The Treasury of Petrus Alamire, p. 103.

27 Sherr, R., ‘The Singers of the Papal Chapel and Liturgical Ceremonies in the Early Sixteenth Century: Some Documentary Evidence’, in P. A. Ramsey (ed.), Rome in the Renaissance, the City and the Myth (Binghamton, 1982), p. 253 Google Scholar. The Missa Pange lingua Credo would have been particularly useful for the papal Corpus Christi Mass, as the pope’s presence presented a logistical challenge even if he was not the celebrant. During the Et incarnatus section, the celebrant had to kneel, listen for the pope to say the words, and bow towards the altar when the words were sung by the choir. The congregation also had to listen for the words to be sung and kneel at that point. The Et incarnatus section needed to be very clear for everyone to hear, and although many Renaissance masses do have pointed breaks between the words ‘descendit de caelis’ and ‘et incarnatus’, Josquin provides a particularly clear cadential point at ‘descendit de caelis’ in the Missa Pange lingua and the Et incarnatus section is one of Josquin’s signature homophonic passages to emphasise an important phrase of text. See Sherr, ‘Speculations on Repertory, Performance Practice, and Ceremony in the Papal Chapel in the Early Sixteenth Century’, in B. Janz (ed.), Studien zur Geschichte der päpstlichen Kapelle: Tagungsbericht Heidelberg 1989 (Vatican City, 1994), pp. 114–16.

28 Lockwood, L., ‘A Virtuoso Singer at Ferrara and Rome’, in R. Sherr (ed.), Papal Music and Musicians in Late Medieval and Renaissance Rome (Oxford, 1998), p. 228 Google Scholar. Jeffrey Dean estimates that Gellandi copied the Missa Pange lingua into VatS 16 between 1515 and 1516 with the title added c. 1517–19; see J. Dean, ‘The Scribes of the Sistine Chapel 1501–1527’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1984), pp. 226–7.

29 The NJE critical commentary on the Missa Pange lingua lists VatP 1980–81 and VatP 1982 as probably being copied for Giulio de’ Medici, but Anthony Cummings points out that there is nothing in the Medici coat of arms on the partbooks connecting them to Giulio or any other member of the Medici family; see Cummings, A., ‘Giulio de Medici’s Music Books’, Early Music History, 10 (1991), pp. 65122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at pp. 74–5. The Missa Pange lingua in VatG XII.2 was copied by the ‘Medici scribe’ probably around 1518, according to Dean (‘Scribes of the Sistine Chapel’, p. 113). Because the readings in VatS 16 and VatG XII.2 are nearly identical, Jaap van Benthem states in the online Occo Codex critical commentary that VatG XII.2 was copied from VatS 16.

30 See Hudson, B., ‘A Neglected Source of Renaissance Polyphony: Rome, Santa Maria Maggiore JJ.III.4’, Acta Musicologica, 48 (1976), pp. 166180 Google Scholar.

31 We know that Lang added a processional cross upon his promotion because his coat of arms in the Liber Selectarum Cantionum, published in 1520 (Augsburg: Grimm and Wirsung), contains a processional cross; see Giselbrecht, Elisabeth and L. Elizabeth Upper, ‘Glittering Woodcuts and Moveable Music: Decoding the Elaborate Printing Techniques, Purpose, and Patronage of the Liber Selectarum Cantionum ’, in S. Gasch, B. Lodes and S. Tröster (eds.), Senfl-Studien I (Tutzing, 2012), pp. 1768 Google Scholar.

32 Bente, M., Neue Wege der Quellenkritik und die Biographie Ludwig Senfls (Wiesbaden, 1968), pp. 206207 Google Scholar. When describing Helmut Hell’s belief that MunBS 510 and two related choirbooks represented Senfl’s mature work as a scribe, Birgit Lodes states that ‘in any event, [these sources] were probably not prepared in Munich for the court chapel’. See Lodes, B., ‘Ludwig Senfl and the Munich Choirbooks: The Emperor’s or the Duke’s?’, in T. Göllner, B. Schmid and S. Putz (eds.), Die Münchner Hofkapelle des 16. Jahrunderts im europäischen Kontext (Munich, 2006), p. 232 Google Scholar. See also Hell, H., ‘Senfls Hand in den Chorbüchern der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek’, Augsburger Jahrbuch für Musikwissenschaft, 4 (1987), pp. 65137 Google Scholar.

33 For further discussion of Maximilian’s tendency to leave projects unfinished, see Rothenberg, D. J., ‘The Most Prudent Virgin and the Wise King: Isaac’s Virgo prudentissima Compositions in the Imperial Ideology of Maximilian I’, Journal of Musicology, 28 (2011), pp. 3480 Google Scholar, at 36; and Silver, L., Marketing Maximilian: The Visual Ideology of a Holy Roman Emperor (Princeton, 2008), p. ix Google Scholar.

34 Brecht, M., Martin Luther, trans. J. Shaaf (Philadelphia, 1985–93), i, p. 75 Google Scholar.

35 ‘Ego huic festo bin nit gut, quod sacramentum wirt boslich gehandlet et ignomia magna datur.’ WA 11, p. 125.

36 ‘In nostra civitate tantum effecimus, spero, quod nullus sit scortator publicus, occultos commendamus deo. Vos celebrabitis corpus Christi, nos non, hec opus est, imo una lectio melior est quam 10 feriae.’ WA 15, p. 567. Luther was implying that public veneration of the Eucharist (processions, Eucharistic adoration, etc.) was comparable to public acts of adultery. At that time in Germany, sexual promiscuity was both deplorable and often associated with Rome. See Puff, H., Sodomy in Reformation Germany and Switzerland 1400–1600 (Chicago, 2003), esp. pp. 126127 and pp. 140–66Google Scholar.

37 The most familiar exception of German Lutherans retaining Corpus Christi is found in Brandenburg; see Nischan, B., Prince, People, and Confession: The Second Reformation in Brandenburg (Philadelphia, 1994)Google Scholar. A second exception occurred in Fraustadt near the Polish/Silesian boarder, where Lutherans voluntarily celebrated Corpus Christi in order not to offend their ‘neighbors’; see Zeeden, E. W., Faith and Act: The Survival of Medieval Ceremonies in the Lutheran Reformation, trans. K. G. Walker (St. Louis, Mo., 2012), p. 57 Google Scholar.Ducal Saxony also came very close to retaining Corpus Christi through the Leipzig Interim, an alternative to the Augsburg Interim produced at the Diet of Augsburg on 15 May 1548. Philipp Melanchthon was dissatisfied with the Leipzig document and it was never revised or instituted.

38 Ott first appears in extant records as a bookseller in Regensburg from 1516. He lost his Regensburg citizenship in 1524 (due to a crackdown on book publishers in the city in order to hinder the Reformation) and moved to Nuremberg, where he worked as a bookseller on the Herrnmarkt from 1525 until his death in 1546. See R. Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott, Hieronymus Formschneider, and the Novum et insigne opus musicum (Nuremberg, 1537–1538)’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Melbourne, 1998), pp. 3–5 for the little available biographical information on Ott.

39 According to Gustavson, (ibid., p. 67), the prefaces and dedications that Ott wrote for his editions indicate that he had ‘nothing . . . more than a rudimentary knowledge of music’.

40 Upon the arrival of the Reformation, town councils rather than individuals were charged with the upkeep and administration of a church. The church administrator, or Kirchenpfleger, however, was responsible for carrying out policies, dealing with personnel and handling any related problems as they arose.

41 In his extensive study of the Nuremberg Lutheran liturgy, Bartlett Butler states that there is no direct evidence for the use of liturgical polyphony in Nuremberg between 1525 and 1535 in the liturgical and Council documents that he examined. He reported that there are no records of choirbooks being purchased or copied, and there are no extant choirbooks from these years (or earlier); see B. Butler, ‘Liturgical Music in Sixteenth-Century Nürnberg: A Socio-Musical Study’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1970), p. 405.

42 Melanchthon had connections to Nuremberg and disagreed with the removal of polyphony from the liturgy (‘Ich will auch hiemit die kunstlichen oder figurirten gesang nit verworfen haben’). He wrote that if each person can propose his favourite tune then dissention will surely result (‘jetzt aber dieweil ein jeder eine besondere Weise vornimmt, und einem jeden sein Gesang am besten gefällt erheben sich zwietracht’); see Melanchthon, P., Corpus Reformatorum: Philippi Melanchthonis Opera, i, ed. Carolus G. Bretschneider and H. E. Bindseil (Halle an der Saale, 1834), col. 719 Google Scholar.

43 Butler, ‘Liturgical Music’, p. 453.

44 Ibid., pp. 255–6. While studying in Wittenberg and working as Luther’s secretary, Dietrich wrote a letter to Baumgartner asking if he would persuade Senfl to send his Missa Nisi Dominus to Luther: Senfl must have promised to send Luther this mass but had not yet done so. ‘Senflius aliquando promisit Luthero missam “Nisi Dominus” Fuccharo cuidam compositam. Sed promisit tantum, non misit, nescio an admonendus sit ea de re.’ Quoted in Albrecht, O. and P. Flemming, ‘Das sogenannte Manuscriptum Thomasianum’, Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, 12 (1915), pp. 205235 Google Scholar, 241–84, at 244. For detailed information on the friendship between Senfl, the Munich humanists and Baumgartner, see G. MacDonald, ‘The Metrical “Harmoniae” of Wolfgang Gräfinger and Ludwig Senfl in the Conjunction of Humanism, Neoplatonism, and Nicodemism’, in Gasch, Lodes and Tröster (eds.), Senfl-Studien I, pp. 69–148, esp. pp. 84–106. This line of communication was in place before the printing of Ott’s Latin polyphony: in a cover letter dated 1 October 1530, Martin Luther asks Baumgartner if he would deliver an enclosed letter to Senfl, the text of which can be found in WA Briefe V, 639. An English translation and discussion of the letter is in Buszin, W. E., ‘Luther on Music’, Musical Quarterly, 32 (1946), pp. 8097, at 83–5Google Scholar.

45 This exemplar, BrusBR Fétis 1783, once belonged to Martin Luther and is signed by Veit Dietrich; see Charteris, R., ‘Newly Identified Music Editions from the Private Library of Martin Luther’, Monte Artium, 6 (2013), pp. 4195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Schlagel, S., ‘A Credible (Mis)Attribution to Josquin in Hans Ott’s Novum et insigne opus musicum: Contemporary Perceptions, Modern Conceptions, and the Case of Veni sancte Spiritus ’, Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 56 (2006), pp. 97126 Google Scholar, at pp. 104–5. The lack of a dedication in the Magnificat octo tonorum led Butler (‘Liturgical Music’, pp. 451–2, 456) to postulate that Baumgartner might have convinced Senfl to publish his Magnificats with Ott in Nuremberg since the lack of a dedication could indicate a private endeavour rather than a project that Ott initiated independently.

47 Ott obtained an Imperial privilege to print the repertory in 1545, which suggests that he had what became known as the Choralis Constantinus in his possession before his death the following year. Ott’s wife, Elsbet, published the first volume of Mass Propers in 1550 before selling the other two volumes to the Augsburg bookseller Georg Willer. For a summary of the Nuremberg publication of Choralis Constantinus, see Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott’, pp. 37–46.

48 I have argued above that Maximilian I commissioned this manuscript, but regardless of whether MunBS 510 was commissioned by the Imperial court or the ducal court, Senfl would have had access to the abandoned choirbook and possibly its copying exemplar.

49 In the critical commentaries for the NJE (4, p. 78) and online Occo Codex edition, the editors do not discuss potential relationships between Missae tredecim and earlier manuscripts other than observing that the print contains a large number of variants. My own analysis of these sources revealed that the Missae tredecim reading does indeed contain the seven pitch errors pointed out by Elders in the NJE, but most of the variants between the Missae tredecim and the earlier sources are not major, and some could have been deliberate editorial decisions by Ott. These are primarily variations in ligatures and several cadences that are simplified in Ott’s edition, as well as a few rhythmic variants. VatS 16, the Occo Codex and JenaU 21 have about the same number of variants, with 117, 120 and 119 respectively. MunBS 510 contains several instances of a dotted minim being replaced by a coloured semibreve, which is not found in any of the other earlier sources or in Missae tredecim and generally belongs in the category of a copyist’s or printer’s prerogative. When those coloration variants are discounted, MunBS 510 actually contains the fewest variants with Missae tredecim: 108. It is also worth noting that eleven of the thirteen Missae tredecim masses are found in at least one source from the Alamire workshop, although Ott most likely did not obtain exemplars of the masses directly from Alamire, who died in June 1536; see E. Schreurs, ‘Petrus Alamire: Music Calligrapher, Musician, Composer, Spy’, in Kellman (ed.), The Treasury of Petrus Alamire, p. 22.

50 However, when considering Schlagel’s comments on the transfer of music notation from manuscript to print form, such variants are to be expected; see Schlagel, ‘A Credible (Mis)Attribution’, pp. 105–6.

51 Schlagel, ‘Fortune’s Fate’, p. 195.

52 One aspect of the masses that Ott especially valued is the mensural and rhythmic variation of the unifying cantus-firmus material throughout a five-movement mass; see Kirkman, The Cultural Life, pp. 34–5. Facsimiles and English translations for all of Ott’s prefaces can be found in the appendix to Gustavson’s dissertation, pp. 557–606 (the Missae tredecim preface is on pp. 576–80).

53 ‘etiam ad sacra ornanda uti licet’. Ott, Missae tredecim, sig. AA 3v. Ott implies that he had more to say about the liturgical use of this repertory by stating that the matter would be discussed further in forthcoming volumes of masses (Missarum Tomos; there is no evidence that Ott actually published this second volume of masses). In the prefaces to both motet volumes, Ott refers to the ‘barbarous’ act of removing Latin polyphony from the liturgy. The Novum et insigne opus musicum was the safer place to make such comments, since Ott was writing the prefaces to a Catholic monarch rather than a Lutheran town council. These sporadic references to the liturgy do not brand the prints as solely intended for church services, but certainly hint at the potential of liturgical use and express Ott’s (and Dietrich’s and Baumgartner’s) desire to hear this repertory in church once again.

54 Due to the delicate situation with the Holy Roman Emperor, Nuremberg adopted what Bartlett Butler called a ‘policy of appearances’ (the Nuremberg Council often used the word Schein when describing their actions). Essentially, the city and its Council attempted to appear loyal to the Catholic Holy Roman Empire while quietly allowing the Reformation to blossom. See Butler, ‘Liturgical Music’, esp. pp. 79–88 and 149–54.

55 For more on how sources of Renaissance music were used for different purposes, see Schmidt-Beste, T., ‘Private or Institutional – Small or Big? Towards a Typology of Polyphonic Sources of Renaissance Music’, Journal of the Alamire Foundation, 1 (2009), pp. 1326 Google Scholar. On the significance of manuscript-to-print transitions of sixteenth-century repertory, see Cumming, J. E., ‘From Chapel Choirbook to Print Partbook and Back Again’, in F. Piperno, G. B. Ravenni and A. Chegai (eds.), Capelle musicali fra corte, stato e chiesa nell’Italia del Rinascimento: Atti del Convegno internazionale Camaiore, 21–23 ottobre 2005, Historiae Musicae Cultores, 108 (Florence, 2007), pp. 373403 Google Scholar.

56 As dedicatee of Missae tredecim, the Nuremberg council received a copy of the print sometime before 28 February 1539: ‘12 fl Hannsen Ottel puchfürer zur vererung, dass er eim erbarn rat vier gesangpüchlein, darin etlich mess, geschenckt hat.’ Nuremberg, Bayerisches Staatsarchiv, Stadtrechnungen Nr. 183 [Jahresregister Nr. 71], fol. 68v, 28 February, 1539, as cited in Butler, ‘Liturgical Music’, p. 465, n. 179. Since no later evidence exists to associate the description of the council’s copy with any of the other extant exemplars, I have chosen to omit this initial documented copy from my list of Missae tredecim exemplars. Sixteenth-century music prints were generally produced in runs of 500 or 1000. Gustavson (‘Hans Ott’, pp. 310–12) suggests that the Novum et insigne opus musicum volumes were printed in runs of 500; also see chapter 4 of Bernstein, J. A., Print Culture and Music in Sixteenth-Century Venice (New York, 2001)Google Scholar for more on the distribution of printed music in the sixteenth century. Although twenty-three may seem like a small percentage compared to Gustavson’s estimated print runs, it is a relatively high number of extant sources for a given sixteenth-century print, and the known Missae tredecim copies provide an idea of where the print circulated, who obtained copies of it, and how it was used.

57 Only two exemplars with traceable provenances belonged to Catholics. The exemplar currently at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich belonged to Hans Heinrich Herwart (1520–83), an Augsburg patrician known for his extensive music collection; see Taricani, J., ‘A Renaissance Bibliophile as Musical Patron: The Evidence of the Herwart Sketchbooks’, Notes, 49 (June 1993), pp. 13571389 Google Scholar, at 1363. For more on Herwart’s life and music collection, see also Slim, H. C., ‘The Music Library of the Augsburg Patrician, Hans Heinrich Herwart (1520–1583)’, Annales musicologiques, 7 (19641977), pp. 67109 Google Scholar.The other ‘Catholic’ exemplar is held at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna. Three of the four partbooks at this library – the discantus, contratenor and bassus – bear the Fugger crest on the cover. However, Missae tredecim is not explicitly listed in Raimund Fugger’s music catalogue; see Schaal, R., ‘Die Musikbibliothek von Raimund Fugger d. J.: Ein Beitrag zu Musiküberlieferung des 16. Jahrhunderts’, Acta Musicologica, 29 (1957), pp. 126137 Google Scholar. Neither of these exemplars contains handwritten markings or signs of heavy use, which is to be expected of music prints belonging to music collectors or bibliophiles. However, while the three Fugger partbooks from Vienna do not contain any markings, the tenor partbook has a completely different cover and contains a few editorial markings, which indicates that it existed separately from the other three for a period of time and was used in some sort of performance context.

58 The Regensburg Gymnasium partbooks have a few stray annotations indicating use while the Zerbst partbooks are devoid of handwritten markings. A single annotation in the Zerbst Novum et insigne opus musicum II exemplar, which is bound together with Missae tredecim, indicates Lutheran use: in the Isaac motet Christus filius Dei, a contrafactum of his famous Virgo prudentissima, the words ‘sacro imperio pro Carolo caesare romano’ are replaced with the Lutheran-friendly phrase ‘sancta ecclesia fideli gubernatione’. Gustavson (‘Hans Ott’, p. 828) also notes that in the discantus part of Senfl’s Anima mea liquefacta est, there is a brown ink stain that completely covers a note stem in the Zerbst copy.

59 The Rostock Universitätsbibliothek exemplar bears the coat of arms of Duke Johann Albrecht I of Mecklenberg-Schwerin (1525–76), who established a Latin school and had a library constructed in his Schweriner Schloss in 1553. A copy of the print is listed in a 1573 inventory of the ducal library holdings; see Krüger, N., Die Bibliothek Herzog Johann Albrechts I. von Mecklenburg (1525–1576), ii (Wiesbaden, 2013), p. 961 Google Scholar. Handwritten markings in this copy appear in a few selected masses including the Missa Pange lingua and suggest that the book was used at least for pedagogical and possibly liturgical purposes. The Zwickau Ratsschulbibliothek exemplar is bound with Petreius’s Liber quindecim missarum with the year 1540 stamped on the partbook covers; this volume appears in a 1670 catalogue (Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek Hs. 17.12.18, Abteilung ‘Libri Musici’, p. 739, col. b) for the library of Christian Daum (1612–87), who was rector of the Latin school in Zwickau from 1662 until his death; I am grateful to Gregor Hermann of the Ratsschulbibliothek for bringing this catalogue to my attention. It is possible that Daum acquired the prints from another schoolmaster, but any earlier theories are speculative. The Zwickau exemplar is nearly devoid of handwritten markings, but one clear exception is a mensuration adjustment in the Credo of the Missa Pange lingua. Regarding the lost Leipzig exemplar, Orf identified the print in Thomaskirche music inventories from 1551 and 1564; see Orf, W., Die Musikhandschriften Thomaskirche Mss. 49/50 und 51 in der Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig (Leipzig, 1977), pp. 171 and 173Google Scholar.

60 Zulauf, E., ‘Beträge zur Geschichte der Landgräflich-Hessischen Hofkapelle zu Cassel bis auf die zeit Moritz des Gelehrten’, Zeitschrift des Vereins für hessische Geschichte und Landeskunde, ns 26 (1903), p. 103 Google Scholar.

61 In some instances, Lutherans may have abbreviated the Latin Creed if it directly preceded the performance of the entire German Creed. There is no obvious doctrinal reason for the abbreviation of the Nicene Creed; Luther permitted recitation in its entirety and in fact embraced this Creed as a refutation of earlier Christian heresies in order to convey his ecclesiastical authority; see Brecht, Martin Luther, iii, p. 190. Nevertheless, he did not strictly enforce the performance of the entire Latin Creed, thereby permitting Lutheran communities to abbreviate it as they saw fit.

62 The partbook covers reveal that the original owner probably had the initials I.S.S., and the prints were bound in 1551. This volume is first identified in the 1628 catalogue of that library; see Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott’, pp. 755–8. In Isaac’s Christus filius Dei the name of Emperor Charles is updated with the name Rudolpho, who reigned as Holy Roman Emperor from 1576 until 1612.

63 The Preface is a brief prayer that precedes the Canon in the Catholic Mass. Although Martin Luther eliminated the Canon in the Lutheran liturgy because it emphasises the concept of the Mass as a sacrifice, he retained the Preface and other Lutheran communities followed suit.

64 A mass (or mass movement) will either have markings in all four partbooks or none at all, which suggests only the following masses and movements from Missae tredecim were performed in Heilbronn: the Missa Pange lingua, Missa Da pacem, Missa Sub tuum praesidium (markings in all five movements), Missa L’homme armé (Agnus only) and Missa O gloriosa (Credo only). There are also several handwritten markings in the Novum et insigne opus musicum II, which Gustavson (‘Hans Ott’, pp. 756–7) discusses in great detail.

65 Ratzeberger, M., Die handschriftliche Geschichte Ratzeberger’s über Luther und seine Zeit, ed. C. G. Neudecker (Jena, 1850), p. 59 Google Scholar. Quoted and translated in Charteris, ‘Newly Identified Music Editions’, p. 77; Leaver, Luther’s Liturgical Music, p. 47; and Nettl, P., Luther and Music (Philadelphia, 1948), p. 61 Google Scholar. In the Jena Missae tredecim exemplar, there are a few sporadic markings, most of which appear to be editorial rather than performance-based. In the tenor partbook, the Josquin misattribution of the Missa Sub tuum praesidium is corrected with ‘petri de la rue’ written in black ink, a vertical line crosses out an extra ‘i’ in the word ‘tollis’ in the discantus part of the Missa Salva nos Gloria, and there is a clef correction at the beginning of the first Agnus Dei of the Missa L’homme armé in the contratenor part. The most substantial annotations appear in the Missa de Sancto Antonio in two partbooks; both the discantus and the bassus partbooks have notational corrections in the Sanctus. Given Ratzeberger’s account, it is tempting to imagine Luther himself correcting the misspelling of ‘tollis’ and adding La Rue’s name in the Missae tredecim exemplar from the Electoral Library in Wittenberg (now held in Jena). Nevertheless, there is no firm evidence connecting the Jena Missae tredecim or any other extant copy to Martin Luther.

66 Müller-Blattau, J., ‘Die musikalischen Schätze der Staats-und Universitätsbibliothek zu Königsberg i. Pr.’, Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft, 6 (1924), pp. 215259 Google Scholar, at 220–1. A second Missae tredecim exemplar existed at the Königlichen- und Universitäts-Bibliothek zu Königsberg, but was lost during the Second World War. Gustavson (‘Hans Ott’, p. 387, n. 36) attempted to track down the partbooks into Russia without success, but believes the partbooks are still extant in an unknown location.

67 The Jena Missae tredecim is identified in a catalogue of the Electoral Library that dates from the first half of the sixteenth century; Jena, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, MS Appendix 22B (4D), olim App. Ms. f. 22, fol. 4v, as cited in Gustavson, ‘Hans Ott’, p. 772.

68 The annotations in the Missa Pange lingua are similar to those found in other masses and suggest a practical, perhaps pedagogical use for the partbooks. Text is written into the final Agnus Dei in the copies from Kassel, Vienna, and RegB C 62a. Other annotations include mensuration lines, numbers above rests to indicate the number of beats, and some slight rhythmic and mensuration alterations near the end of the Credo. These are not significant alterations to the mass, but they strongly suggest that the Missa Pange lingua was performed from the print somewhere by Lutherans, even if it was only in music classrooms. Four of the eight exemplars with markings in the Missa Pange lingua (Heilbronn, Rostock, Zwickau, RegB A.R. 91) have at least an indirect connection to a Lutheran school. The Kassel exemplar was most likely used for liturgical functions as part of Philipp der Großmütige’s chapel music collection. The original provenances of the remaining three exemplars, however, are not clear. RegB C 62a and the Paris Missae tredecim can only be traced to the nineteenth century, while the history of the tenor partbook held in Vienna is even more enigmatic. It is clearly different from the other three Fugger partbooks in Vienna with the presence of handwritten markings and a different cover; thus it is difficult to ascertain exactly when the four partbooks became a unit. I am grateful to John Romey for providing me with detailed information on the Paris Missae tredecim exemplar.

69 NJE 4, pp. 78–9. Elders states that LeipU 49/50 and RosU 49 both ‘derive’ from Missae tredecim, and that RegB C 100 was ‘almost certainly’ copied from that Nuremberg publication. My analysis of these three manuscripts corroborates his findings. Van Benthem names Missae tredecim as the model for LeipU 49/50, RegB C 100 and RosU 71/3 in his critical commentary for the online edition of the Occo Codex repertory. My comparison of Missae tredecim and RosU 71/3 revealed enough discrepancies to hesitate connecting the two sources directly. In the commentary on the Occo Codex edition, van Benthem does not mention RosU 49 at all in his discussion of the Missa Pange lingua transmission, so it is possible that he mistakenly switched the two sources. Moreover, there is an established link between a Missae tredecim copy and all three of these manuscripts and their compilers.

70 Josquin’s Missa l’homme armé super voces musicales appears in RegB C 100 and Isaac’s Missa Salva nos appears in Brno 15/4.

71 Scholarship focused on RosU 71/3 is scarce; most source catalogues and editions refer to the following article as the sole secondary literature: Gaehtgens, W. T., ‘Die alten Musikalien der Universitätsbibliothek und die Kirchenmusik in Alt-Rostock’, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Stadt Rostock, 22 (1940–1), pp. 164181 Google Scholar, at 169 and 171.

72 The catalogue entry describes a set of music manuscripts as ‘Cantiones Ecclesiasticae, et aliae variae pluribus et diversis partibus’ (church songs and many other various and diverse pieces). Below this title, a brief description of each partbook follows with the opening piece and number of voice partbooks: ‘und mit deinem Gaist’ (DATB), ‘et honor tibi sit’ (DATBV), ‘et cum spiritu tuo’ (DATB), ‘sit nomen domini benedictum’ (DATB), ‘Passion’ (DATB) and ‘Kyrie eleison’ (DATBQ). The opening pieces of RosU 71/1, 71/2 and 71/4 correspond precisely with the second and fourth manuscript descriptions in the catalogue. Given these two matches, it is plausible that the modern shelfmarks of the other Rostock 71 partbook sets correspond with the order of the manuscript descriptions in the ducal catalogue. RosU 71/3 – the partbook set containing the Missa Pange lingua – begins with Clemens non Papa’s Missa Ecce quam bonum. Although a Mass Ordinary matches the ‘Kyrie’ catalogue description of the sixth partbook set, it is entirely possible that the two extant 71/3 partbooks correspond with the third catalogue entry and the Preface responses described in this entry were lost at some point. Moreover, a correspondence of RosU 71/3 with the sixth entry is dubious, as a quintus partbook for RosU 71/3 does not survive and both the Missa Pange lingua and Clemens non Papa’s Missa Ecce quam bonum are in only four parts (although there is one section of the Sanctus in which a second tenor sings a canon at the unison). RosU 71/5 is by far the most difficult partbook set to evaluate since only a few pages of one partbook survive. The fragmented state of the extant manuscripts makes it easy to accept that there was a sixth set of partbooks that is completely lost. It should also be noted that the extant Rostock 71 partbooks were copied by the same scribe who also copied other manuscripts that Kongsted identifies as having belonged to Duke Johann Albrecht. Although the five Rostock 71 partbook sets are not specified in Krüger’s index of music manuscripts from the ducal library catalogue, Ole Kongsted includes them in a list of music manuscripts belonging to the ducal court; see Krüger, Die Bibliothek, p. 2059, and Kongsted, O., ‘Die Musikaliensammlung des Herzogs Johann Albrecht I: Stadt und Hof. Schwerin als Residenzstadt im 16. Jahrhundert’, in Schriften zur Stadt-und Regionalgeschichte, 3 (Schwerin, 1995), p. 131 Google Scholar.

73 Duke Johann Albrecht made a special effort to ensure that his court had high-quality music, which is evidenced by the number of foreign musicians he employed. Clemens Meyer identifies Johann Albrecht’s court musicians as comprising the earliest forerunner of the later Mecklenburg Hofkapelle. See Meyer, C., Geschichte der Mecklenburg-Schweriner Hofkapelle (Schwerin, 1913), pp. 3 Google Scholar and 20.

74 The choirbooks remained at St James until they were deposited in the Brno City Archive in 1931; see Horyna, M. and V. Maňas, ‘Two Mid-Sixteenth-Century Manuscripts of Polyphonic Music from Brno’, Early Music, 40 (2013), pp. 553575 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 555. I thank David Burn for bringing this manuscript to my attention.

75 In the musicological literature, these sources are typically labelled as coming from ‘Bártfa’, the Hungarian name for this town, and its German name, Bartfeld, is also used occasionally. However, I prefer to use Bardejov, its Slovak name. Gombosi examined the collection shortly after the Hungarian National Library purchased it in 1914; see Gombosi, O., ‘Die Musikalien der Pfarrkirche zu St. Aegidi in Bártfa: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Musik in Oberungarn’, in W. Lott, H. Osthoff and W. Wolffheim (eds.), Festschrift für Johannes Wolf (Berlin, 1929), pp. 3847 Google Scholar. Recent literature on these sources includes M. B. Fox, ‘A Liturgical-Repertorial Study of Renaissance Polyphony in Bártfa Mus. Pr. 6 (a-d), National Széchényi Library, Budapest’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1977), and R. Muránji, Thematisches Verzeichnis der Musiksammlung von Bartfeld (Bonn, 1972). The Slovak region experienced a moderate and peaceful period of Reformation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries before the region was re-Catholicised in the 1680s under the rule of Leopold I. Many Slovaks interested in Lutheranism studied in Wittenberg, including Leonard Stöckel from Bardejov, who returned there to organise a Latin school and lead Reformation efforts in the surrounding area; see Part I of Fox, ‘A Liturgical-Repertorial Study’ for a detailed description of the Lutheran Reformation in Slovakia and Stöckel’s career.

76 German composers such as Heinrich Finck and Thomas Stoltzer are represented alongside Josquin, Isaac and La Rue. Mattheus Pipelare’s Missa Mi mi is found in only two sources: BrnoAM 15/4 and JenaU 21 from the Electoral Library. For complete inventories of both BrnoAM 15/4 and 14/5, see Horyna and Maňas, ‘Two Mid-Sixteenth-Century Manuscripts’, pp. 564–73. Earlier scholarship on BudOS MS 8 focused on Isaac’s Mass Propers contained therein and proposed a date (after 1555) and provenance (Bavaria) based on the Nuremberg Choralis Constantinus print without considering the circulation of the Mass Propers in the Saxon region, where Stöckel studied; see K. Huncik, ‘A Liturgical-Repertorial Study of 16th-Century Polyphonic Music in Bártfa MS 8’ (MA thesis, University of Ottawa, 2005), pp. 47–8; and Murányi, R., ‘Die Isaac-Offizien der Bartfelder Sammlung’, Studia Musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 17 (1975), pp. 315318 Google Scholar.

77 Contemporaneous Kirchenordnungen from Leipzig, Mecklenburg and Regensburg call for use of Latin Mass Ordinary movements during Sunday liturgies. The 1539 Kirchenordnung for Leipzig prescribed Latin for all Mass Ordinary sections except for the Credo, which was to be replaced with the chorale Wir glauben. The liturgy was revised the following year to include the Latin Credo followed by the German chorale (EK 1, p. 271). A revised Kirchenordnung for Mecklenburg ordered by Duke Johann Albrecht indicated the Ordinary texts could be performed in Latin, German or both (EK 5, pp. 198–9). The earliest Regensburg Kirchenordnung in 1542 permits all five Ordinary sections in Latin. The language of the Creed alternates between Latin and German in subsequent documents before a later Kirchenordnung created around 1560 called for flexibility with the Mass Ordinary language. This Kirchenordnung is found in EK 13, pp. 452–89 and the other Regensburg Kirchenordnungen are found in this volume as well.

78 Hoffman-Erbrecht, L., ‘Das Opus musicum des Jacob Praetorius von 1566’, Acta Musicologica, 28 (1956), pp. 96121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at p. 97.

79 ‘Pro vostro templo’.

80 Additionally, BrnoAM 15/4 does not contain any preface responses, but its partner choirbook from St James, BrnoAM 14/5, does.

81 According to a dedicatory inscription, RosU 49 was compiled and copied in 1566 by Jacob Praetorius and dedicated to Duke Johann Albrecht I of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, who, as mentioned above, possessed a copy of Missae tredecim. Hoffman-Erbrecht (‘Das Opus musicum’, 97) suggested that the duke might have ordered the manuscript from Praetorius, but believes it is more probable that Praetorius created the manuscript independently and presented it to the duke in the hope of receiving a monetary gift. Praetorius probably consulted a different Missae tredecim exemplar while working as an organist in Hamburg, but in case he was working closely with the duke and needed access to the print, the exemplar from the ducal library catalogue probably would have been available.

82 There is no pattern to the length of the omitted sections – they vary from two notes to several bars of music – and the sections are not consistent with each voice part. For instance, there are omissions in the Gloria, Pleni sunt and Hosanna sections of the Contratenor, while the Bassus has omissions near the end of the Kyrie I and the end of the Credo. Along with these errors in the Missa Pange lingua, there is inconsistent ordering of the two hundred pieces in LeipU 49/50 and several were copied into the partbooks twice. See L. Youens, ‘Music for the Lutheran Mass in Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, MS. Thomaskirche 49/50’ (Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1978), pp. 323–5, for a list. LeipU 49/50 was copied in 1558, probably under the direction of Thomaskirche cantor Melchior Heger, and both the 1551 and 1564 music inventories indicate the Thomaskirche possessed a Missae tredecim copy.

83 The term resoluta comes from the work of music theorist Sebald Heyden, a fellow Nuremberg resident. Heyden defines resoluta in his 1540 treatise De Arte Canendi as the transcription of complex note values into another colloquial, more familiar form; see Heyden, De arte canendi, Monuments of Music and Music Literature in Facsimile, II/139 (New York, 1969), pp. vii and 18. For a more detailed description of the resoluta in RegB C 100, see F. Brusniak, ‘Der Kodex A.R. 773 (C 100) von Johann Buchmayer in der Proske-Bibliothek zu Regensburg: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Vokalpolyphonie in Deutschland um 1560’, Bericht über den Internationalen Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress, Bayreuth 1981 (Kassel, 1984), pp. 290–2; and Haar, ‘Josquin as Interpreted by a Sixteenth-Century Musician’. Regarding the connection between RegB C 100 and Missae tredecim, Buechmaier previously worked as cantor at the Heilige Geist school in Nuremberg and was almost certainly familiar with Missae tredecim and the other Nuremberg prints. Regardless, the Gymnasium Poeticum possessed at least two copies of Missae tredecim (A.R. 91 and 92c) that Buechmaier could have consulted. The most detailed account of Buechmaier’s life is in Brennecke, W., Die Handschrift A.R. 940/41 der Proske-Bibliothek zu Regensburg (Kassel, 1953), pp. 104114 Google Scholar.

84 BudOS MS 8 is the one exception; the mass in this manuscript lacks both a title and composer attribution whereas the five other manuscripts label the work as a mass based on Pange lingua by Josquin. See NJE 4, pp. 56–7 and Horyna and Maňas, ‘Two Mid-Sixteenth-Century Manuscripts’, p. 565, for the exact labelling in these manuscripts.

85 Rhau’s decision not to publish a complete version of the Missa Pange lingua was most likely related to business and marketing considerations rather than theological or stylistic objections. He was probably aware of Missae tredecim – he very well could have seen the surviving copy from the Electoral Library – and would not have wanted to violate the Imperial privilege Johannes Ott received for his thirteen masses. Moreover, any demand for a printed edition of the Missa Pange lingua (and the other twelve masses) had already been met. When Rhau published his own collection of masses in 1541 entitled Opus decem missarum, he selected works not found in either of the Nuremberg mass prints. For more information on Rhau’s biography and output as a printer, see chapter 3 of Schalk, C., Music in Early Lutheranism: Shaping the Tradition (1524–1672) (St. Louis, 2001)Google Scholar; and chapter 5 of Mattfeld, V., Georg Rhaw’s Publications for Vespers (New York, 1966)Google Scholar. There is also a modern edition of the Bicinia: Bicinia gallica, latina, germanica Tomus I, II, ed. B. Bellingham, Georg Rhau: Musikdrucke aus den Jahren 1538–1545 in praktischer Neuausgabe, 6 (St. Louis, 1980).

86 A modern edition of this print is available: Georg Rhau: Sacrorum Hymnorum Liber Primus, ed. R. Gerber, Das Erbe deutscher Musik, 21, 25 (Lippstadt, 1961).

87 ‘Si qui igitur in hoc opere sunt Hymni de Sanctis ab harmonia sacrae scripturae dissonantes, eos meminerit Lector, suavis concentus et iuventutis in cantu’ (If, therefore, there are any Hymns of the Saints in this work that are dissonant from the harmony of sacred Scripture, the reader should recall [these hymns] and the sweet harmony of youth in song). Rhau, Sacrorum Hymnorum, preface. Translation mine.

88 In the preface to a hymnbook she published for Protestants in Strasbourg, Katharina Schütz Zell notes their desire to still observe the traditional Catholic feasts that they had grown up with and suggests that these feasts might be remembered through the singing of corresponding hymns; see Ann McKee, Elsie, ‘Reforming Popular Piety in Sixteenth-Century Strasbourg: Katharina Schütz Zell and her Hymnbook’, Studies in Reformed Theology and History, 2/4 (Fall 1994), esp. pp. 3435 Google Scholar.

89 RISM J 676, and the shelfmark for the bound volume is sig. gr. 2 Qt 31. The most significant study on the group of prints is Moser, H. J., ‘Eine Musikaliendruckerei auf einer deutschen Ritterburg’, Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft, 17 (1935), pp. 97102 Google Scholar. The prints were recently addressed in R. Gustavson, ‘Senfl in Print: The Einzeldrucke’, in S. Gasch and S. Tröster (eds.), Senfl-Studien II, Wiener Forum für Ältere Musikgeschichte, 7 (Tutzing, 2013), pp. 257–308, at pp. 290–7.

90 Nieß lists a ‘druckerei’ among an inventory of rooms in the castle from the sixteenth century, and Moser identified an invoice dated 26 November 1557 for glazing the windows in the print shop. See Nieß, P., Die Ronneburg: Eine Fürstlich Ysenburgische Burg und ihre Baugeschichte (Braubach am Rhein, 1936), p. 115 Google Scholar; and Moser, ‘Eine Musikaliendruckerei’, p. 99.

91 For more on the Confessio Augustana edition, see Benzing, J., Eine unbekannte Ausgabe der Confessio Augustana vom Jahre 1557 (Wiesbaden, 1956)Google Scholar. I am focusing on the seven mass prints in a forthcoming article.

92 It is unlikely that the Ronneburg printer would have supplemented an exemplar lacking the second Agnus with a bicinia collection in order to ensure that the mass was truly complete; therefore an exemplar must have been used that included the Agnus II along with the other sections. More detailed analysis of the Ronneburg reading also points to an exemplar that pre-dates Missae tredecim. Elders (NJE 4, p. 79) observes that Isenburg’s print provides a ‘remarkably faithful transmission’ in comparison to the earliest sources but does not commit to any direct relationships. Likewise, in the online Occo Codex edition, Theodor Dumitrescu postulates that the print descended from an earlier source because it shares variants with JenaU 21 and MunBS 510, despite being ‘slightly edited’. My own analysis of the sources corroborates these statements.

93 Benzing, Eine unbekannte Ausgabe, p. 10. Anton von Isenburg’s coat of arms is adjacent to the discantus voice. The letters stand for both his name (Anton von Ysenburg, Graf zu Büdingen) and his motto, ‘Poverty and abundance give timely sorrow’ (Armut vnd Yberflus gibt zeitlich Betrübnus). ‘1557’ refers to the year of publication.

94 Swans were sacred to Apollo and often associated with singing, particularly at the time of death. Although refuted by Pliny, the legend of a swan singing upon imminent death lived on through the centuries and came to be associated with the praise of God through song before dying; see Cohen, S., Animals Disguised as Symbols in Renaissance Art (Leiden, 2008), p. 48 Google Scholar; Hulme, F. E., The History, Principles, and Practice of Symbolism in Christian Art, 2nd edn (London, 1892), p. 192 ; and Impelluso, L., Nature and its Symbols, trans. S. Sartarelli (Los Angeles, 2004), p. 304 Google Scholar. Swans also possessed some negative connotations relevant to Lutherans and their perception of the Eucharist. Due to the contrast between its white plumage and underlying black flesh, as well as its limited flying abilities despite having beautiful wings, some medieval moralists associated the swan with hypocrisy, which is how Martin Luther described Corpus Christi processions in a 1523 letter to the Bohemian Brethren: as hypocritical (heuchley) and mocking (spott): ‘Tzuvor sollt man abethun die Sacrament heusser und die procession auss des heyligen leychnams tag, wehl der keyns nott noch nutze ist und groß heuchley und spott dem sacrament widderferet.’ WA 11, p. 445. The swan also came to represent Martin Luther himself due to the prophetic statement allegedly made by the Czech reformer Jan Hus before being executed for heresy on 6 July 1415: ‘Today you burn a goose [Hus means goose in Czech]; however, a hundred years from now, you will be able to hear a swan sing, you will not burn it, you will have to listen to him.’ As a result, the swan became associated with Luther in Reformation iconography. On Hus, see Fudge, T. A., Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution in Bohemia (London, 2010), pp. 195199 Google Scholar.

95 I am grateful to Catherine Scallen and Rachel McNellis for their helpful comments on the material in this section.

96 For examples, see Frey, A. L., The Swan-knight Legend: Its Background, Early Development, and Treatment in the German Poems (George Peabody College for Teachers, 1931), p. 4 Google Scholar.

97 The earliest Germanic sources of this legend include a late thirteenth-century poem titled Der Schwan-Ritter by Konrad von Würzburg, and Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parsifal, which was expanded into longer romances by the thirteenth-century poet Nouhuwius and an anonymous poet in the fifteenth century. See Cramer, T., Lohengrin: Edition und Untersuchungen (Munich, 1971), esp. pp. 46129 Google Scholar; Frey, The Swan-knight Legend; and Kinghorn, A. M., ‘The Swan in Legend and Literature’, Neophilologus, 78 (1994), pp. 509520 Google Scholar.

98 In JenaU 21 and VienNB 4809, the incipit ‘Pange lingua’ is written in red alongside the Kyrie text of each voice part, but that was probably a scribal attempt to identify the pre-existing material since the mass is labelled according to its function in these manuscripts, as no further hymn text is present. The incipits are not present in the Occo Codex, where the mass is labelled Missa Pange lingua.

99 Polytextual masses are typically found among the works of earlier composers such as Dufay, Regis and Ockeghem, all of whom composed a polytextual mass based on Ecce ancilla Domini. See Planchart, A. E., ‘Parts with Words and without Words: The Evidence for Multiple Texts in Fifteenth-Century Masses’, in Stanley Boorman (ed.), Studies in the Performance of Late-Medieval Music (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 242251 Google Scholar; and Kirkman, The Cultural Life, pp. 136–7. For a description of the three Ecce ancilla domini masses, see D. J. Rothenberg, ‘Marian Feasts, Seasons, and Songs in Medieval Polyphony: Studies in Musical Symbolism’ (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 2004), pp. 121–36. In the Alamire manuscripts, the name of the cantus firmus is often provided in red text in the tenor part, but no further text is given. The Missa Pange lingua, for example, contains the words ‘Pange lingua’ in the voice parts of the first Kyrie, but no additional hymn text.

100 Jungmann, J. A., The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development, trans. F. A. Brunner, rev. C. K. Riepe, New Revised and Abridged Edition in One Volume (New York, 1961), p. 485 Google Scholar. For another example of the Agnus Dei emphasised in music, see Wright, C., ‘Dufay’s Motet Balsamus et munda cera and the Papal Ceremony of the Agnus Dei’, in J. Haines and R. Rosenfeld (eds.), Music and Medieval Manuscripts: Paleography and Performance (Burlington, Vt., 2004), pp. 325348 Google Scholar.

101 Jungmann, The Mass, p. 486.

102 It is possible that the text was present in the now-lost exemplar used to create the Ronneburg print, which descends from an earlier ‘Catholic’ source group, and the printer simply copied it along with the other notes and text.

103 Other sources of Lutheran Pange lingua settings from the later sixteenth century include RegB A.R. 844–848 and 863–870 from the Regensburg Gymnasium Poeticum, and RosU 71/2 from the Mecklenburg-Schwerin ducal court.

104 The term is a Greek word meaning ‘handbook’. For an overview of these hymnals and their purpose, see Herl, J., Worship Wars in Early Lutheranism: Choir, Congregation, and Three Centuries of Conflict (Oxford, 2004), pp. 9296 Google Scholar. German translations of Pange lingua date from before the Reformation; see Wackernagel, Philipp, Das deutsche Kirchenlied von der ältesten Zeit bis zu Anfang des XVII. Jahrhunderts, ii (Leipzig, 1867), pp. 433435 Google Scholar.

105 Breslau, Strassburg, Zwickau, Wittenberg, Rostock, Leipzig, Magdeburg, Lübeck, Parchim, Hamburg and Wesel were among the cities to print their own Enchiridion hymnals; Herl, Worship Wars, p. 96. Full titles of the two Erfurt Enchiridia and Hergott’s edition are as follows: Loersfelt, Enchiridion Geystliche gesenge vnd psalme[n] so man itzt (Got zu lob) yn[n] der kirchen singet, gezoge[n] auß d’heilige[n] schrift Gemehrt, gebessert vnd mit fleys corrigirt, mit eyner schönen vorrede Martini Luther (RISM 15256); Maler, Enchiridion Geystlicher Gesenge, So man ytzt (Got zu lob) in der kyrchen singt Gezogen auß der heyligen schryfft des waren vnd heyligen Euangelions, welchs ytzt von gottes gnaden wyder auffgangen ist, vnd mitt etzlichenn gesengen Gemehrtt, Gebessert, vnnd mitt fleyß Corrigyrt durch Doctor Martini Luther (RISM 15257); and Hergott, Enchiridion oder handbüchleyn geystlicher gesenge vn Psalmen einem yeglichen Christen fast nützlich bey sich zu habe[n] in steter übung vnd trachtung auffs new Corrigirt vnnd gebessert auch etliche geseng die bey den vorigen nicht gedruckt sind wie du hinde[n] jm Register dises buchleyns findest (RISM 15259). According to Herl (Worship Wars, p. 92), Hergott actually used an Erfurt hymnal published in 1524 (RISM 15245) as a model for his Enchiridion.

106 Butler, ‘Liturgical Music’, p. 360, n. 302.

107 Translation from One Hundred Latin Hymns: Ambrose to Aquinas, ed. and trans. P. G. Walsh with C. Husch (Cambridge, 2012), pp. 363–5. There are numerous translations of Pange lingua, but this translation is among the most recent and it provides the most accurate rendering of the original Latin, particularly in the fourth and final stanzas.

108 Grabmann, M., ‘Die Theologie der eucharistischen Hymnen des heiligen Thomas von Aquin’, in Der Katholik. Zeitschrift für katholische Wissenschaft und kirchliches Leben, 3, ed. J. M. Raich (Mainz, 1902), 392393 Google Scholar.

109 Butler, ‘Liturgical Music’, p. 360, n. 302.

110 For the evolution of Martin Luther’s Eucharistic theology in his writings and sermons see Lohse, B., Martin Luther’s Theology: Its Historical and Systematic Development, trans. and ed. R. A. Harrisville (Minneapolis, 1999), pp. 127136 Google Scholar, 169–77 and 306–13.

111 According to Robert Scribner, festivals were ‘one of the most common kinds of religious experience to which everyone, high and low, learned and unlearned, clerical and lay had access’; Scribner, R., ‘Ritual and Popular Religion in Catholic Germany at the Time of the Reformation’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 35 (1984), pp. 4777 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at p. 48.

112 As discussed above, Luther spoke out against Corpus Christi processions in the early 1520s and Lutheran communities gradually ceased to observe the feast. Given this date, a person between thirty and forty years old in 1550 would still have experienced Corpus Christi as a child. Moreover, this does not take into consideration that the abolition of Corpus Christi did not happen instantaneously, and cities that adhered to Catholicism would have continued observing the feast.

113 See Herl, Worship Wars, pp. 95–6, for more information on the use and intention of the Enchirdion hymnals.

114 Fisher, A. J., Music, Piety, and Propaganda: The Soundscapes of Counter-Reformation Bavaria (Oxford, 2014), p. 249 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more on the confessional implications of processions with an emphasis on Corpus Christi, see chapter 5 of Fisher’s other book, Music and Religious Identity in Counter-Reformation Augsburg, 1580–1630 (Burlington, Vt., 2004).

115 The single extant Catholic liturgical source of the mass from the later sixteenth century is ToleBC 16, copied in 1542 for the choir at the Toledo cathedral. Although a comprehensive investigation of late sixteenth-century Catholic repertorial tendencies is beyond the scope of the present study, a general explanation could be a turn towards the newer polyphonic style by composers affiliated with Catholic strongholds, namely Palestrina in Rome and Orlando di Lasso in Bavaria. Although Glarean’s Dodekachordon contains only the Pleni sunt section of the Missa Pange lingua and was not intended for liturgical use, it could have confessional implications as the work of a Catholic humanist living in Protestant Basel; see Fuller, S., ‘Defending the Dodecachordon: Ideological Currents in Glarean’s Modal Theory’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 49 (1996), pp. 191224 Google Scholar; and Part III of Judd, C. C., Reading Renaissance Music Theory: Hearing with the Eyes (Cambridge, 2000)Google Scholar.

116 Blume, F., Das Chorwerk, 1 (Wolfenbüttel, 1938)Google Scholar. Kade’s edition is found in Ambros, A. W., Geschichte der Musik, v, ed. O. Kade (Leipzig, 1911), pp. 80124 Google Scholar. The New Josquin Edition was the primary modern edition consulted for this study.

117 F. Blume, ‘Josquin des Prez: The Man and the Music’, in Josquin des Prez: Proceedings, ed. Lowinsky, p. 18.

Figure 0

Table 1 Early Missa Pange lingua sources

Figure 1

Figure 1 Jena, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, MS 21, fol. 1v

Figure 2

Figure 2 Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, MS 4809, fol. 1v

Figure 3

Figure 3 Lang coat of arms in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS 510, fol. 2r

Figure 4

Table 2 Latin polyphony printed by Ott and Petreius, 1537–1539

Figure 5

Figure 4 Agnus Dei III, Missa Pange lingua, Tenor partbook, 4o Mus. 63 b kk2v, Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel. Photo: Author

Figure 6

Figure 5 Credo, Missa Sub tuum praesidium, Tenor partbook, 4o Mus. 63 b, NN Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek der Stadt Kassel. Photo: Author

Figure 7

Figure 6 Preface insert in tenor partbook, Heilbronn Stadtarchiv. Photo: Author

Figure 8

Figure 7 Kyrie and Gloria, Missa Pange lingua, Contratenor partbook, Heilbronn Stadtarchiv. Photo: Author

Figure 9

Table 3 Missae tredecim contents and handwritten markings in extant copies

Figure 10

Table 4 Manuscript sources and pre-existent melodic material for Missae tredecim masses

Figure 11

Table 5 Lutheran manuscript sources of Missa Pange lingua

Figure 12

Table 6 Overview of the Rostock Universitätsbibliothek Mus. Saec. 71 Manuscripts

Figure 13

Table 7 Mass Ordinary settings in RegB C 100

Figure 14

Figure 8 Kyrie, Ronneburg Missa Pange lingua, Wiesbaden, Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek RheinMain, Sig. gr. 2 Qt 31

Figure 15

Figure 9 Superius voice of Agnus Dei III, Missa Pange lingua, Wiesbaden, Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek RheinMain, Sig. gr. 2 Qt 31

Figure 16

Table 8 Pange lingua text – Latin and English

Figure 17

Figure 10 Melody and opening verse of Mein Zung erkling. Enchiridion (Erfurt: Maler, 1527), fol. 33v. Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek

Figure 18

Table 9 Two versions of the German Pange lingua from the 1527 Erfurt Enchiridion

You have Access