No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Prosas for Saint Thomas Becket
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 September 2008
Extract
Two decades ago Thomas Forrest Kelly remarked in a footnote to an article concerning responsory prosas that the extent of the repertoire of these additions to the Office can be seen only by surveying large numbers of medieval Office books. In the haystack of a faded thousand-page breviary, he remarked, the needle of a single small prosula can be a real joy! The foundation of this essay is just such a needle, and I hope to employ it to add a few threads to the ever-developing tapestry woven by practitioners of the sister disciplines of history and musicology. My purpose is to present an analysis of a liturgical portrait of Thomas Becket, focusing upon the texts and musical settings of two prosas unique to the British Library manuscript Add.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999
References
1 Forrest Kelly, Thomas, New Music from Old: The Structuring of Responsory Prosas, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 30 (1977), 36690CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A version of this essay was presented at the meeting of the International Musicological Society in London, August, 1997.
2 The prosa from the British source is not printed as part of Analecta Hymnica 92, nor in Hughes, Andrew, Late Medieval Liturgical Offices, 2 vols. (Toronto, 1994 1996)Google Scholar. I would like to express my gratitude to Ruth Steiner, director of the Cantus chant database project at the Catholic University of America, who conducted a search for evidence of these prosas, to Andrew Hughes and to Richard Crocker for their advice and encouragement in the preparation of this paper, and to Sherry Reames, Professor of English at the University of Wisconsin, who has shared with me the fruits of her labours on Becket Office manuscripts. Professor Reames, who has studied saints lives in more than seventy-five English breviaries, believes that the prosas in the Penwortham Breviary are unique to that manuscript. I am also grateful to Joseph Dyer and the anonymous reader of this article for their extremely helpful suggestions in the process of final preparation.
The bibliography concerning Thomas Becket is vast, and considerations of space dictate the mention of only some of the works which have established the foundation of musical scholarship. The most important of these are the articles and volumes by Andrew Hughes, including, in addition to those mentioned above: Chants in the Offices of Thomas of Canterbury and Stanislaus of Poland, Musica Antiaua, 6 (Bydgoszcz, 1982), 26777Google Scholar; Modal Order and Disorder in the Rhymed Office, Musica Disciplina, 37 (1983), 2952Google Scholar; Late Medieval Rhymed Offices, Journal of the Plainsong and Medieval Music Society, 8 (1985), 3349Google Scholar; Chants in the Rhymed Office of St Thomas of Canterbury, Early Music, 16 (1988), 185201Google Scholar; British Rhymed Offices: A Catalogue and Commentary, in Hiley, David and Rankin, Susan, eds., Music in the Medieval English Liturgy (Oxford, 1993), 23984Google Scholar; Rhymed Offices, in Strayer, Joseph, ed., Dictionary of the Middle Ages (New York, 1988), 36677Google Scholar. Other scholarship concerning the music for Becket includes the work of Stevens, Denis, Music in Honor of St Thomas of Canterbury, Musical Quarterly, 56 (1970), 31148Google Scholar, and Thomas Becket et la musique mdivale, in Foreville, Raymonde, ed., Thomas Becket, Actes du Colloque International de Sdires (Paris, 1975), 27784.Google Scholar
3 The italic entries in Table 1 indicate specific Offices, identified, as is customary, by the incipit of the first antiphon of First Vespers, the first Matins responsory and the first antiphon of Lauds.
4 For a comprehensive description of the manuscript see Turner, D. H., The Penwortham Breviary, The British Museum Quarterly, 28 34 (August 1964), 857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 ibid., 87.
6 Although Jesu bone is R9 in the Sarum Office and most other secular Offices, it is R12 in the original monastic Office. See Andrew Hughes, Chants in the Rhymed Office of St Thomas of Canterbury.
7 Bailey, Terence, The Processions of Sarum and the Western Church (Toronto, 1971), 19.Google Scholar
8 In Chant Transference in Rhymed Offices, International Musicological Society Study Group Cantus Planus Fourth Meeting, 38 September 1990 (Budapest, 1992), 50319,Google Scholar Edwards points to the fact that Jesu bone, R9 in the Thomas Office, provided the model for the ninth responsory in the Office of St David. This responsory also has a prosa Panis arctus, which is notated and set to the Sospitati tune. Because Pectus lumbos exists as an appendage to the responsory Jesu bone which served as the model, Edwards convincingly suggests that Sospitati provided the melody for Pectus lumbos. See also National Library of Wales MS. 20541 E, The Penpont Antiphonal, Introduction and indices prepared by Owain Tudor Edwards (Ottawa, 1997).Google Scholar The prose Pectus lumbos is on fol. 23rv.
9 As noted above, the Penpont Antiphonal does not include a melody for the prosa text.
10 Kelly remarks in discussing the prosas of Paris, Bibliothque Nationale, f. lat. 12044 in Table 2 of his article New Music from Old, that Sospitati dedit was very widely disseminated and often imitated. As Kelly indicates, facsimiles and transcriptions may be found in Frere, Antiphonale Sarisburiense (London, 1901), IV: 35960Google Scholar; Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart XIV: Tafel 89; Pothier, J., Ex ejus rumba, Revue du chant grgorien, 9 (1900 1901), 4952.Google Scholar See also Hofmann-Brandt, Helma, Die Tropen zu den Responsorien des Officiums (Inaugural-Diss., Erlangen-Nrnberg, 1971), I: 127 (polyphonic)Google Scholar; and Edwards, , Penpont Antiphonal, fols. 184v185r.Google Scholar
11 I am grateful to Vincent Corrigan, Professor of Musicology at Bowling Green State University, for sharing this information with me.
12 See the discussion by Crocker, Richard in The New Oxford History of Music: The Early Middle Ages to 1300, 2nd edn (Oxford, 1990), II: 2578.Google Scholar
13 Edwards, Owain Tudor, Matins, Lauds and Vespers for St David's Day (Cambridge, 1990), 92.Google Scholar Regarding the popularity of Sospitati see also Harrison, F. LI., Music in Medieval Britain (London, 1958), 395.Google Scholar
14 Tolhurst, J. B. L., ed., The Ordinale and Customary of the Benedictine Nuns of Barking Abbey. Henry Bradshaw Society 656, 2 vols. (London, 1926 1927), II: 167, cited in Kelly, New Music from Old388.Google Scholar
15 Kelly, , New Music from Old and Melisma and Prosula: The Performance of Responsory Tropes in Silagi, Gabriel, ed., Mnchener Beitrge zur Medivistik und Renaissance-Forschung 36 (Munich, 1985), 16380.Google Scholar
16 Hiley, David, Western Plainchant (Oxford, 1992), 205.Google Scholar
17 This prosula is found in two sources of the eleventh to twelfth centuries from Saint-Maur-les-Fosss, near Paris (Paris, BN lat. 12044 and 12584). See Hiley, , Western Plainchant, 205.Google Scholar
18 In the eighth line the manuscript reading pecte has been expanded to pectore. (This suits the meaning and the syllable count, but still leaves unexplained the feminine tua sancta.) The musical setting accommodates this by placing two notes (g and a) over the single syllable pec-.
19 See the discussion by Crocker, Richard in the New Oxford History of Music, II: 28893.Google Scholar
20 Lines 5 and 6 of Pectus lumbos have an internal rhyme (-os) on the eighth syllable, and internal rhyme is present in lines 2 and 3 (-is) and 4 and 5 (-i) of Potestati reddit.
21 The spacing of the text indicates the diaeresis, which is identified by brackets above the notes in the musical transcription of Thomas victor.
22 This line probably refers to the miracle concerning Eilward of Westoning, described by Benedict of Peterborough and William of Canterbury in their collections of Becket's miracles. Eilward's case was heard by a secular court; thus, the charges against him were unheard by the episcopal authority. I am grateful to Peter Jeffrey for this observation. The manuscript reading a sedis has been replaced by a sede. See below, n. 41.
23 The first death is the death of the body, or temporal death. Spiritual death is the second, signifying a separation of soul and body from God's favour in this life. The third death (which is referred to as the second death in the Book of Revelation) is eternal separation of the whole person from God, with the implication of suffering the tortures of hell. I thank John V. Fleming for his clarification of this text.
24 The term ripresa has been utilized by Richard Crocker to signify the repeat of the last half of the respond. I am grateful to him for suggesting it.
25 Edwards, Owain, in Matins, Lauds and Vespers, 91, has provided a model for this sequence of events in his discussion of the responsory Lucescente nouo mane, the verse Sancte Dauid and the prosa Panis arctus.Google Scholar
26 Quoted in Edwards, , Matins, Lauds and Vespers, 91,Google Scholar from Procter, F. and Wordsworth, C., eds., Breviarium ad usum insignis ecclesiae Sarum, 3 vols. (Cambridge, 1879 1886), I: clxxvi.Google Scholar Haec prosa, scilicet, Felix Maria, et duae sequentes non cantentur ad maturinas, sed ad processionem hujus diei: ut in eadem processione ordinatum est. Et nota quod sunt aliqua festa ubi prosae notantur, de quibus altaria habenrur in Ecclesia Sarum: ideo prosae dicantur ad processionem ad vesperas, et non ad matutinas, suis locis.
27 Procter and Wordsworth, Breviarium, I: cclviii. I am most grateful to the anonymous reader of this article for providing me with this information.
28 This Office is, to my knowledge, not found in manuscripts of Sarum Use, but is, according to Andrew Hughes, most commonly transmitted in manuscripts for use in European churches, including Cambrai, Nantes, Beauvais, Toledo and Braga. See Hughes, British Rhymed Offices.
29 William and Benedict recount several miracles concerning shipwrecks; these are recorded in Robertson, James Craigie, ed., Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, 7 vols. (London, 1876 1885)Google Scholar; William, I: 3012, 31617, 3245, 37830, 4745, 526; Benedict, II: 213 and 214. This publication will hereafter be cited as Mats.
30 For miracles concerning mutilation see Abbott, Edwin A., St Thomas of Canterbury, 2 vols. (London, 1898), II: 489 and 80107.Google Scholar
31 Jones, Charles W., The Saint Nicholas Liturgy (Ninth to Twelfth Centuries) (Berkeley, 1963), 31.Google Scholar The prosa refers to some of the standard miracles associated with Nicholas, such as the rescue of sailors, the miraculous increase in grain sent to relieve a famine at Myra, and the perpetual exuding of healing myrrh from Nicholas's tomb. See Jones, ibid., 435. Many of the sainted bishop's most celebrated miracles are recounted in the Legenda aurea; see Voragine, Jacobus de, The Golden Legend: Readings on the Saints, trans. Ryan, William Granger, 2 vols. (Princeton, 1993), II, 217.Google Scholar
32 Edwards, , Matins, Lauds and Vespers, 11.Google Scholar
33 I have used the reading of the text of Pectus lumbos as published by Edwards, in Matins, Lauds and Vespers, 11.Google Scholar Renes in line 2, translated here as loins is an allusion to 1 Peter 1.13: Wherefore having the loins of your mind girt up, being sober, trust perfectly in the grace which is offered you in the revelation of Jesus Christ. Thus restrained from thoughts, affections and lusts, Thomas was able to remain intent upon spiritual work.
34 Mats., IV: p. 428. Accounts of the miracles which occurred at the time of the Translation follow immediately.
35 See Abbott, St Thomas, 474 and 771. Other miracles mentioned in the prosa echo the antiphon and lesson texts of the Office for the Translation of Becket.
36 Fassler, Margot, Gothic Song: Victorine Sequences and Augustinian Reform in Twelfth-Century Paris (Cambridge, 1993), 257.Google Scholar
37 Matthew 11.5 (DouayRheims translation).
38 As quoted in Ward, Benedicta, Miracles and the Medieval Mind: Theory, Record and Event, 10001215 (London, 1982), 35.Google Scholar
39 See Foreville, Raymonde, Les Miracula S. Thomae Cantuariensis in Foreville, Thomas Becket dans la tradition historiaue et hagiographique (London, 1981), 44367,Google Scholar which delineates types of miracles performed by the saint.
40 See Caviness, Madeline Harrison, The Early Stained Glass of Canterbury Cathedral (Princeton, 1977), 14650Google Scholar; The Windows of Christ Church Cathedral Canterbury, Corpus Vitrearum Medii Aevi 2 (London, 1981), 175214Google Scholar; and Rackham, Bernard, The Stained Glass Windows of Canterbury Cathedral (Canterbury, 1957), 83111.Google Scholar
41 Accounts of the case of Eilward may be found in Benedict's collection of miracles, Mats., II: 17382, and that of William, Mats., I: 1568. See also Abbott, St Thomas, 710. A description and discussion of the window may be found in Rackham, Stained Glass, 945.
42 In the Trinity Chapel window V, no. 20 contains the following inscription: Spes desperanti superest in sanguine sancti (Hope remains for the hopeless in the blood of the saint). See the discussion in Rackham, Stained Glass, 96. Caviness remarks that window n:V, panel 9, contains the labels aqua and sanguis, referring to the mixture of the two as a potion. (Early Stained Glass, 150, n. 84).
43 Ward, , Miracles, 103.Google Scholar