I am grateful to Channing R. Jeschke and M. Patrick Graham of Pitts Theology Library at Emory University, Gary Hauk, Secretary of the University, and James V. McMahon of the Department of German Studies, for their interest in this project and for assistance of various kinds. I also wish to thank Robin A. Leaver of Westminster Choir College (Princeton, New Jersey) for many valuable comments and suggestions. This study was supported in part by a grant from the University Research Committee of Emory University.
Wackernagel 1855.
Volz 1962.
Ameln 1964, 232
Benzing 1966, no. 3680; DKL MagdL 1536; RISM 153602; Jenny 1985, 142.
Bosinski 1986, 113.
Holtz 1980, 17.
Borchling-Claussen 1931-36 lists nearly 5000 Low German prints through the end of the eighteenth century.
Bosinski 1984, 6-7.
Wiechmann-Kadow 1858, 23-24.
Citing statistics from Max Lindow's dissertation (“Niederdeutsch als evangelische Kirchensprache im 16. und 17.Jahrhunderts” [Ph.D. diss., University of Greifswald, 1926]), Holtz ( 1980, 60,62) notes that the production of prints in Low German declined sharply beginning in the third decade of the seventeenth century and came to a standstill by the end of the century.
Brandt 1975, vi.
Blume 1975, 6.
Hertel 1899, 143. Bosinski (1971, 65) thinks that they may have been sung in Low German. A High German broadsheet of “Es wollt uns Gott genädig sein,” printed in Magdeburg in 1524 by Hans Knappe, Jr., is preserved in the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, Berlin. See WA, 376 (ß); Benzing 1966, no. 3643; DKL 1LB1 Luth 1524b ; RILM 152411; Jenny 1985, 139. A facsimile appears in the Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie 3 (1957): facing 104.
Brandt 1975, 144.
This account is based on Brandt 1975, 152-53, 158. The quotation is from p. 277.
It is one of Michael Latter's first hymnals. The only one that is older is a version of Joseph Klug's 1529 Wittenberg hymnal that appeared around 1535 and is preserved in a defective copy in Gotha (Benzing 1966, no. 3549). Lotter subsequently published other editions of Klug in 1540 (Benzing 1966, nos. 3553 and 3554 ), 1542-43 (no. 3556) and 1546 (no. 3564). See also WA, 327-29, 333-34.
Benzing 1982, 276.
Ibid., 498.
Ibid., 498, 309.
Hofmann 1914 is a reprint of this book. Volz (1962, lxxx-lxxxiii) adduces the following evidence linking the Magdeburg Enchiridion with Blum's hymnal: 1) similarity between their titles (the Leipzig volume is called “Enchiridion geistlicher gesenge vnd Psalmen fur die leien mit viel andem denn zuuor gebessert. Sampt der Vesper Mettē Comp let vnd Messe."); Lotter, however, reverses the order of Compline and Matins in the title so that they correspond to the actual order of these services within the book; 2) extensive agreement between editorial rubrics and headings of hymns in the two volumes; 3) the first thirty-seven songs are in the same order, and thereafter the differences are easily explained (e.g., Lotter rearranged a group of metrical psalms so that they would be in the correct numerical sequence). Some differences suggest, however, that Lotter made use of another source, too. Apparently he consulted Klug's 1529 hymnal (or an early reprint), since the headings for the old church hymns and the non-Wittenberg songs (which are not in Blum's hymnal) agree with the readings in this book. The Magdeburg Enchiridion contains all but two of the hymns in the Leipzig volume. The two that are missing are the pre-Reformation reworking of the Pange lingua, “Mein zung erkling, vnd frölich sing” (Lotter provides Michael Stiefel's rendering, “Minsche dyn tunge mit gesange schal geuen,” instead) and Hans Sachs's version of Psalm 58, “Wolt jr denn nicht reden ein mal.” In addition to the sixty-one songs that were taken over from Blum's hymnal, Lotter added fourteen new ones, including two from the fifteenth century, three by Sachs, five metrical psalms (by Matthäus Greiter and Wolfgang Dachstein of Strassburg, and the Riga cleric Andreas Knöpken), and two translations of Latin hymns.
In the Rostock book and its later editions the hymns are printed according to the systematic ordering of the 1529 Wittenberg hymnal (see Leaver 1991, 281-85); in the Magdeburg and Leipzig Enchiridia, on the other hand, they are given in the more or less random sequence of an earlier Wittenberg source, Johann Walter's Geystlicher gesangk Buchleyn (1524). In this connection, it is worth mentioning that the Magdeburg Enchiridion is listed incorrectly in Benzing's catalog (1966, no. 3680) under “Low German Editions of Klug's Wittenberg Hymnal.” Additional evidence that the Rostock hymnal did not serve as Latter's exemplar is provided by a list of errors that Wiechmann corrected in his reprint (Wiechmann-Kadow 1858, 61-62). Since none is found in the Magdeburg Enchiridion, either Lotter corrected them all or he did not use the Rostock volume. Given the large number of printing errors in the Magdeburg book (such misprints were common and occurred in most books printed in the sixteenth century), surely at least a few of those in Wiechmann's list would have been perpetuated had Lotter worked directly from the Rostock hymnal.
Volz 1962, 125.
Call number: Kessler 1536 Ench.
DKL MagdL 1536; RISM 153602 (p. 17).
The High German original is reprinted in WA, 474-75; an English translation is in LW, 315-16.
This core repertoire of early Lutheran hymnody apparently was taken over from Hans Lufft's Enchiridion (Wittenberg, 1526), a congregational version of the 1524 Wittenberg Chorgesangbuch. All thirty-two of the German songs in the 1524 source are in the three Enchiridia published by Lufft (Wittenberg, 1526), Blum (Leipzig, c. 1530), and Lotter (Magdeburg, 1536). The four hymns in Lufft's book that are not in the Chorgesangbuch (Agricola's “Gottes Recht und Wundertat” and “Ach Herre Gott, wie haben sich,” Stiefel's “Mensch, dein Zung 1nit Gesang soll geben,” and Jonas's “Wo Gott, der Herr, nicht bei uns hält”) are retained in the two later hymnals. The order of Luther's hymns “Gott der Yater wohn uns bei” and “Wir glauben all an einen Gott” is reversed in all three of the Enchiridia with respect to the Chorgesangbuch. Finally, Luther's “Eine feste Burg ist unser Gott,” which is found in both of the later sources, is absent from the Chorgesangbuch and Lufft's hymnal because it was not written until after they were published. See Volz 1962, lxxix; cf. also Hofmann 1914, 15-16, 25, and WA, 19-20, 29-30.
A later addition to the Magdeburg Enchiridion is a manuscript entry of the Gloria patri in the left margin of 13L; this apparently was 1neant as a supplementary stanza for Luther's “Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein.” Cf. Bosinski 1986, 49.
This is a Low German version of the small preface that Luther wrote for the Wittenberg hymnal of 1529 and 1533; English translation from Leaver 1991, 284.
This quotation is a Low German translation of Luther's High German original in Klug's hymnal (1529 and 1533 ). Cf. n. 29 above.
In the Magdeburg Enchiridion, however, they are preceded by Sachs's dialogue-hymn, “O Godt Vader du heffst gewalt,” which is not in the Leipzig book.
In the Leipzig Enchiridion, though, they are followed by a song that is absent from the Magdeburg volume, Sachs's version of Psalm 58, “Wolt jr denn nicht reden ein mal.”
“Danek segge wy alle Gade vnsem Heren Christo” (no. 62) and “Here wo lange wultu vorgeten myner” (no. 66) are both in the Leipzig Enchiridion. The latter, Sachs's version of Psalm 12, was excluded from Slüter's hymnal apparently because it contains Greiter's version (“Ach Herr wo lange vorgestu myner”) instead.
Surely this book, which appeared in Low German in Magdeburg two years before the Enchiridion, was more likely to have been Latter's source than the High German broad-sheet (Nuremberg: Kunegund Hergotin, c. 1529) mentioned by Wackernagel (W, 3:128 [no. 165]).
W, 3:565-66 (no. 615). Bosinski (1971, 45,46) suggests that the fourth stanza was penned by Slüter.
W, 3:567-68 (no. 618).
W, 3:568 (no. 619).
The last portion of the Mass (beginning after the Creed) is quite different in R as compared with L and the Magdeburg Enchiridion. In addition to the differences noted above, R includes the Nunc dimittis and several other prayers, dialogues, and declarations.
In only one case, Stiefel's “Dein armer Hauf, Herr, tut klagen” (no. 7 in Appendix 1), is a song that has a melody in Blum printed without music in Lotter. (However, the two books have different melodies for Speratus's “Hilf Gott, wie ist der Menschen Not” [no. 34].) On the other hand, six of the melodies in the Magdeburg Enchiridion (nos. 17, 25, 28, 35, 55, 57) clearly came from some other source, since they do not appear in the Leipzig hymnal.
Jenny 1985, 117; Geffcken 1857, 225; Bachmann 1881, 50. According to Lucke (WA, 281), it was dated 1541 (evidently copied from a broad sheet) in a Low German hymnal published in Lubeck in 1556 by Jürgen Richolff. Unfortunately, the book was lost in a fire in 1870.
Wackernagel 1855, 168 (no. 412).
W, 3:821-23 (nos. 968-70); Bachmann 1881, 53, 58. The version in the Magdeburg Enchiridion is quite different from the one in Rödinger's hymnal.
W, 3:86 (no. 114); DKL 1LBl Nbg um 1535; RISM 153502
Geffcken 1857, 225; Bachmann 1881, 47-48, 50.
DKL 4LB1 Straß 1527b; RISM 152713.
W, 3:505, 508.
I owe this information to Keith Boden of the Department of Germanic Languages at the University of Texas (Austin), who reports additionally that “the translator/scribe was probably trained in the Lubeck Standard of the Middle Low German heyday (mid-fourteenth century). This Lübeck Standard was characterized by a strong influence of the so-called “westliche Strömung” or “western current,” which incorporated several features of Westphalian and Dutch that were not native to the Lübeck area. On the other hand, there is not enough evidence of Westphalian features which are not typically present in the Lübeck Standard to warrant placing the hymns exclusively in the Westphalian dialect. An increase in Dutch orthographic influence was typical for Low German manuscripts of the Reformation period” (letter to the author, 22 June 1993). See also Martin Durrell, “Westphalian and Eastphalian,” in Russ 1990, 59-90; “The Low German Dialects” in Noble 1983, 89-108.
See Bosinski 1971, 45, 216-17.
Call number: Mk. 7290.
Ameln 1987-88, 127. See also Bachmann 1881, 25.
Wiechmann 1864-85, 3:121.
Bosinski 1986, 124-25. Fifteen years earlier (1971, 66) Bosinski had said that it was not necessary to assume the existence of an earlier book.
Ameln 1987-88, 127-28; Bachmann 1881, 28.
Leaver 1991, 33.
Bosinski 1986, 113; Bosinski 1984, 7; Bosinski 1983, 709. A facsimile of the 1529 hymnal is in Niels Knud Andersen, ed., Ludwig Dietz’ Salmebog 1536 (Copenhagen: Akademisk Vorlag, 1972). Bosinski raises the possibility that Dietz may have published another (lost) edition of the 1525 book around 1527, since the Danish hymnal includes two hymns (Decius's “O Lamm Gottes unschuldig” and “Heilig ist Gott der Yater”) that do not appear in Low German until 1531. See Bosinski 1986, 128, n. 3; Bosinski 1983, 709.
Call number: libr. impr. rar. Oct. 163. It was once part of the “von Meusebach” collection.
Call number: No. 5786. Bosinski (1983, 720, n. 1) mentions another copy in Uppsala. Presumably he has confused this with a copy of the church order for the city of Riga, published by the same printer less than a year before (19 July 1530). See WA, 397-98 (aa); Benzing 1966, no. 3688; DKL Ag Riga 1530; RISM 153005; Jenny 1985, 141.
Geffcken (1857, 212-13) claims credit for its discovery, since Volger was searching the collection of old hymnals at his request.
Wiechmann,Kadow 1858, 26-31; Wiechmann 1864-85, 1:152; Bachmann 1881, 38; Bosinski 1971, 176-98; Bosinski 1983; Bosinski 1984, 24-25; Jenny 1985, 46. The main dissenting voice has been Ameln, who argues that the 1533 edition of Klug's hymnal provides a more accurate indication of the content of the lost book than the Rostock volume. See Ameln 1971; Ameln 1985, 226; Ameln 1987-88, 128, n. 10.
Leaver 1991, 35.
Geffcken 1857, 212.
Bachmann 1881, 45-59; quotation from p. 45.
Leaver 1991, 79-80.
A lost Helmstedt copy is also mentioned in WA, 393, n. 1.
Formerly in Helmstedt, Universitätsbibliothek. According to WA (396), the last gathering is missing in this copy.
It is unclear whether this book is extant. The listing in Borchling-Claussen 1931-36 (no. 1425) implies that one of the authors examined it. However, Jenny (1985, 144) states that it is lost and that only a photocopy has been preserved.