# **DENKMÄLER DER TONKUNST IN ÖSTERREICH** BAND 163.1

# **NEW SENFL EDITION 1**

# LUDWIG SENFL **MOTETS FOR FOUR VOICES (A–I)**

Edited by **SCOT T L EE EDWA R DS STEFAN GASCH SONJA TRÖSTER**

# DTÖ 163.1

**DTÖ 163.1**

DENKMÄLER DER TONKUNST

IN ÖSTERREICH

PUBLIKATIONEN DER GESELLSCHAFT ZUR HERAUSGABE DER

# DENKMÄLER DER TONKUNST IN ÖSTERREICH

begründet von **GUIDO ADLER**

unter Leitung von **MARTIN EYBL** und **BIRGIT LODES**

**BAND 163** NEW SENFL EDITON

**DENKMÄLER DER TONKUNST IN ÖSTERREICH** BAND 163.1

# **NEW SENFL EDITION 1**

# LUDWIG SENFL **MOTETTEN FÜR VIER STIMMEN (A–I)**

Herausgegeben von **SCOTT LEE EDWARDS STEFAN GASCH SONJA TRÖSTER**

**DENKMÄLER DER TONKUNST IN ÖSTERREICH** VOLUME 163.1

**DENKMÄLER DER TONKUNST**

**IN ÖSTERREICH**

BAND 163.1

**NEW SENFL EDITION 1**

LUDWIG SENFL

**MOTETTEN FÜR VIER STIMMEN**

**(A–I)**

Herausgegeben von

**SCOTT LEE EDWARDS**

**STEFAN GASCH**

**SONJA TRÖSTER**

# **NEW SENFL EDITION 1**

# LUDWIG SENFL **MOTETS FOR FOUR VOICES (A–I)**

Edited by **SCOTT LEE EDWARDS STEFAN GASCH SONJA TRÖSTER**

Dieser Band wird an die beitragenden Mitglieder der Gesellschaft zur Herausgabe von Denkmälern der Tonkunst in Österreich (Subskribenten) zu wesentlich ermäßigtem Preis abgegeben. Bei Auführungen der in diesem Band veröfentlichten Werke sind die Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Österreich als Quelle auf Programmen, in Ansagen usw. zu nennen.

> Veröfentlicht mit Unterstützung des Austrian Science Fund (FWF): PUB 713-G (Forschungsergebnisse des FWF-Projektes P 27469) Leitung: Stefan Gasch

Open Access: Wo nicht anders festgehalten, ist diese Publikation lizenziert unter der Creative-Commons-Lizenz Namensnennung 4.0; siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Satz: Gabriel Fischer Notensatz: Alexander J. Eberhard, Scott Lee Edwards, Stefan Gasch, Sonja Tröster Hergestellt in der EU

© 2021 by HOLLITZER Verlag, Wien

ISMN 979-0-50270-019-5 ISBN 978-3-99012-801-5 ISSN 2616-8987

# TABLE OF CONTENTS




## CRITICAL APPARATUS


# GENER A L INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Ludwig Senf (*c.*1490–1543) can be regarded as a leading fgure in the world of German-speaking composers between Heinrich Isaac and Orlando di Lasso as well as a European composer of the frst rank, standing alongside such renowned contemporaries as Costanzo Festa, Philippe Verdelot, Nicolas Gombert, and Adrian Willaert. His extensive œuvre encompasses a broad range of vocal genres of the time and was composed in the course of his employment at two of the most important courts of the early sixteenth century: at the court of Emperor Maximilian I he launched his career as a singer and composer, and from 1523 on he worked as court composer for Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria. At Wilhelm's request, Senf built the Munich *Hofkapelle* into a professional ensemble modelled, in regard to repertoire and organisation, on the imperial chapel.

Senf's signifcance was already recognised in the nineteenth century, yet two eforts to publish his works in a modern edition were prematurely discontinued. Tese editions therefore provide only a fraction of Senf's overall compositional production and have resulted in the scholarly neglect of his œuvre, especially his motets. A new and complete edition of his works has been a desideratum for many years, a gap that the New Senf Edition seeks to fulfl.

Critical preliminary work for a complete edition of Senf's compositions involved the compilation of a catalogue raisonné, an undertaking realised through the generous funding of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) between 2008 and 2014 under the direction of Birgit Lodes. Tis publication (herein referred to as the Senf Catalogue or SC) provides an essential foundation for the documentation of works and sources in the New Senf Edition.

Te edition of the motets, which forms the beginning of the collected works, will be presented in four volumes, in which the compositions are organised according to scoring and alphabetical order. Six pieces conceived as pure canons conclude the fnal volume of motets.

Vol. 1: 26 motets à 4 (A–I) Vol. 2: 29 motets à 4 (N–V) + 1 Fragment Vol. 3: 31 motets à 5 Vol. 4: 15 motets à 6; 3 motets à 8; 6 canons

**\*\*\***

Te editors of the edition owe thanks to many colleagues and institutions for their help and support. Without the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), which provided generous fnancial assistance (P 27469), the work of the edition would not have been possible. Te Department of Musicology at the University of Vienna (Birgit Lodes) and the Department of Musicology and Performance Studies at the University of Music and Performing Arts Vienna (Nikolaus Urbanek) cordially hosted the project within their premises.

We also would like to express our thanks to the many libraries and archives that provided reproductions of sources for Senf's music. Especially important to mention are the following institutions, whose personnel greatly facilitated the work of the edition through their kind and ready responses to our inquiries:

Dresden, Sächsische Landesbibliothek – Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Dresden, SLUB (Christine Sawatzki, Andrea Hammes)

Hradec Králové, Muzeum východních Čech v Hradci Králové (Jaroslava Pospíšilová)

Klosterneuburg, Augustiner-Chorherrenstift, Bibliothek (Martin Haltrich)

Melk, Benediktinerstift, Stiftsbibliothek und Musikarchiv (Bernadette Kalteis)

München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (Veronika Giglberger, Bernhard Lutz)

Regensburg, Bischöfiche Zentralbibliothek, Proskesche Musikabteilung (Raymond Dittrich)

Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek (Arietta Ruß)

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek (Tomas Leibnitz)

Wien, Fachbereichsbibliothek Musikwissenschaft, Universitätsbibliothek Wien (Benedikt Lodes)

Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek (Gregor Hermann)

As head of publications for the Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Österreich, Martin Eybl has placed his trust in our work, accompanied the creation of the edition from its initial stages, and most graciously accepted the volumes for publication in the DTÖ series.

We have repeatedly received constructive feedback on our work through various academic exchanges that have proven invaluable for the advancement and development of the edition. Intensive discussions on editorial approaches, issues, and guidelines were held with our advisory board, in which Bonnie Blackburn, David Burn, Bernhold Schmid alongside Andrea Lindmayr-Brandl and Birgit Lodes as representatives of the editorial board of the DTÖ participated and generously gave their time. We thank them for always lending an open ear to our questions.

We were also aforded opportunities to examine the work of the edition more closely through two workshops: Jan Bilwachs, Marc Busnel, Martin Eybl, Oliver Korte, Friedrich Neubarth, and Annerose Tartler took the trouble to reconstruct fragmentary motets; Grantley McDonald, Irene Holzer, Bernhold Schmid, and Tomas Schmidt provided new insights as they addressed questions of text setting and text underlay in sources transmitting Senf's motets.

We also received generous help on a more individual level. Lenka Hlávková, Ton Oliveira, and Mateusz Zimny assisted us in gaining access to sources in the Czech Republic and Poland. Bonnie Blackburn and Leofranc Holford-Strevens provided invaluable help in linguistic and formal corrections of the volumes, and Joshua Rifkin provided critical editorial feedback in the early stages of the edition. Sabine Ladislav was always willing to assist in organising workshops and meetings, and without the technical and creative inclinations of Imke Oldewurtel, the edition would not be enhanced by clefs modelled on sixteenth-century sources.

Just as importantly, the enthusiastic members of the New Senf Choir and the ensemble Stimmwerck critically evaluated and tested our editions through numerous rehearsals and performances.

To the countless colleagues and institutions not already mentioned we also extend thanks, and last but not least to the Hollitzer Wissenschaftsverlag: Alexander Eberhard kindly took care of the proof-reading, copy editing, and the preparation of the fnal print templates; Gabriel Fischer provided an elegant layout and patiently included all our corrections; Michael Hüttler and Sigrun Müller supported the printing of the volumes with great enthusiasm and readily agreed to the funding strategy of the FWF by publishing both in traditional printed and future-oriented open access formats.

Te Editors Vienna, May 2021

# SC AT TER ED IN HISTORY: ON THE HISTOR IC A L BACKGROU ND OF THE NEW EDITION OF THE COLLECTED WORKS OF LUDWIG SENFL

Te New Senf Edition (NSE) opens with two volumes bringing together all the extant four-voice motets attributed to Ludwig Senf. With these volumes, it is now possible to address a gap in research that has persisted since the beginning of the twentieth century and resulted in the neglect of Senf as a 'motet composer'. Te need for a complete edition of the motets of Senf, a key fgure in the Central European musical world between the time of Heinrich Isaac and Orlando di Lasso, was afrmed already in 1903 by Teodor Kroyer:

Als nächste dringliche Aufgabe […] erschien die Rehabilitierung des Kirchenkomponisten, und zwar deshalb, weil man eben bisher über den Liederkomponisten den Motettenmeister fast ganz übersehen hatte, trotzdem das 16. Jahrhundert diesen letzteren sogar noch höher schätzte.1

In the inaugural (and only) volume of his unfnished edition of Senf's music for the series Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Bayern, Kroyer described the current state of research of his time, in which a strong interest in Senf's lieder contrasted with a relative lack of interest in Senf's (para-)liturgical works.2 Te concept for a complete edition of Senf's works, as laid out by Kroyer in the introduction (see Figure 1, p. XII), was intended to address this one-sided perspective: Senf's Magnifcat settings along with motets and motet-like compositions with Latin texts were to form the beginning of an edition, with the latter two being subdivided into 'allgemeine' and 'besondere' works.3 Tese were to be followed by the *Psalmodia octo tonorum*,4 the masses, and fnally the compositions with German texts (divided into sacred and secular lieder) along with Senf's ode settings. A volume of *varia* and supplements, in which Kroyer included Senf's additions to Heinrich Isaac's *Choralis Constantinus*, canons, exempla from music theory treatises, French and Italian pieces as well as doubtfully attributed works, was to complete the edition. Kroyer published the frst volume of Magnifcat settings and 'general' motets, but the rest of the edition was never realised.

Te next attempt to publish the complete works was the edition *Ludwig Senf: Sämtliche Werke* (SW), of which eleven volumes, edited by the Staatliche Institut für deutsche Musikforschung in conjunction with the Schweizerische Musikforschende Gesellschaft, were published from 1937 to 1974. While the frst four volumes were initially published as part of the Reichsdenkmale of the series Erbe der deutschen Musik (vols. 5 [= SW 1] and 10 [= SW 2] were published in 1937; vol. 13 [= SW 3] in 1939; and vol. 15 [= SW 4] in 1940), the Schweizerische Musikforschende Gesellschaft and the Schweizerische Tonkünstlerverein issued the remaining volumes — together with reprints of those already published — as an independent complete edition. But this edition, too, was interrupted after the publication of the 'Liturgische und allgemein-geistliche Motetten I' (SW 11) and thus made available only twenty-seven of a total number of 104 extant motets. Other isolated motets were published in the context of source editions such as *Georg Rhau: Musikdrucke aus den Jahren 1538–1545*5 and *Die Handschrift des Jodocus Schalreuter*,6 two volumes by Henrik Glahn,7 or Ole Kongsted's single-volume *Motets by Ludwig Senf*.8 Tese publications, however, still did not provide a coherent overview of Senf's motet œuvre due to the difering types of editions and editorial techniques.

At the same time, it was apparent that new research on Senf would be impeded without a proper list of works. Tanks to a detailed examination of Senf's overall œuvre undertaken in compiling his catalogue raisonné (hereafter SC), the New Senf Edition can now be based on the most up-to-date research. In the SC, all known sources for every individual work were compiled, and in this process many new insights were gained. Te discovery of new concordant sources, including the (tentative) identifcation of anonymously transmitted works, often put into question existing assumptions, and completion of the catalogue ofered the frst chance to place individual works in the context of his œuvre. New source evaluations relative to older editions

<sup>1</sup> 'As the next urgent task […] the rehabilitation of the church composer seemed necessary. Although the sixteenth century estimated the master of motets higher than the composer of lieder, the frst has been hitherto almost entirely forgotten.' DTB iii/2: X. (For detailed information on the literature used, see the Bibliography to this volume on pp. 165–70.)

<sup>2</sup> Many handwritten transcriptions of Senf's motets from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries kept in libraries all over Europe, however, bear witness to the lively interest in these compositions.

<sup>3</sup> DTB iii/2: XI.

<sup>4</sup> It cannot be determined what exactly Kroyer meant when he mentions the *Psalmodia*. In the SC, Senf has been identifed as the composer of three cycles of *Psalmodia*, composed of polyphonic recitation models in simple counterpoint for everyday liturgical use (see SC P 121–3).

<sup>5</sup> Rhau vi, Rhau viii, Rhau x, Rhau xi, Rhau xii.

<sup>6</sup> EdM 115/116.

<sup>7</sup> Glahn 1978; Glahn 1986.

<sup>8</sup> Kongsted 2001.

Figure 1. Teodor Kroyer's concept for a collected edition of the works by Ludwig Senf in DTB iii/2: XI.

were made that led to revaluations of the transmission of individual works, information on which the selection of principal sources for the motets in the present edition is based.

Senf's settings of sacred Latin texts pose an additional problem of classifcation: in both fragmentary editions, his settings of the mass proper were not diferentiated from his motets. It is clear, however, that the repertoire Senf composed for the mass proper forms an independent and comprehensive core of his overall compositional œuvre that should be distinguished from his motet output, while at the same time, it is apparent that boundaries between these genres were fuid in the sixteenth century, and frm generic divisions do not always apply.9 Compositions had variable functions and moved loosely between the boundaries of genres, despite modern attempts to classify works in single categories of genre. Te organisation of works in the NSE now follows decisions on classifcation made in the course of preparing the SC.

In comparison to earlier editions, the NSE ofers numerous advantages. Te repertoire to be edited — in the present case, the four-voice motets — is presented for the frst time in its entirety. It is organised systematically according to number of voices and alphabetically, and the transcriptions, structure of the edition, and critical apparatus are conceived according to uniform, up-to-date editorial guidelines (see the section 'Editorial Conventions'). Works whose authorship remains uncertain have been included in the edition along with works that survive in fragmentary form, whereas works that are unequivocally misattributed to Senf have been excluded. In cases where compositions exist in more than one clearly discernible version (such as the four- and fve-voice versions of *Nisi Dominus*), each version is transcribed and evaluated in the respective volumes of the edition.

It is the editors' hope that the fruits of this work and the comprehensiveness of the edition will serve both as an encouragement to musicians who wish to explore this diverse repertoire, and as a springboard for scholars in the production of new research.

<sup>9</sup> For example, the polyphonic sequence *Grates nunc omnes* (SC P 5c) must have been sung within the liturgical framework of the frst mass on Christmas day. Nevertheless, the setting became one of Senf's most widely disseminated, independent liturgical compositions, one that circulated in sixteenth-century anthologies of motets. Likewise, determinations as to whether and when antiphon settings, hymns, or responsorial motets were performed liturgically — the latter group often included in sources prepared for use in religious services — are often difcult to make.

# GETTING TO KNOW LUDWIG SENFL: THE MOTETS FOR FOUR VOICES

#### **Senfl Among His Contemporaries**

Now that the entire corpus of surviving four-voice motets of Ludwig Senf can be presented, we at last have the opportunity to begin properly assessing Senf's role in the development, promotion, and transmission of the motet. As a member of royal music chapels, as composer and as editor, Senf can be seen as a fgure of transition from the late medieval period to the sixteenth century, with the profound changes in the media of musical distribution and religious reform that accompanied this period. In few other genres can this transition be seen so clearly as in his approach to the motet. While some aspects of his motet corpus are clearly rooted in the musical environment of the imperial chapel of Emperor Maximilian I, other aspects of his work conform with the musical output of his contemporaries abroad. As with Pierre de la Rue, Josquin Desprez, and other composers at the start of the sixteenth century, four-voice compositions form the core of Senf's extant motet œuvre (55 à 4; 31 à 5; 15 à 6; 3 à 8);10 and like other composers of his own generation, including Adrian Willaert, Nicolas Gombert, or Jacobus Clemens non Papa, Senf devoted much more attention to the writing of motets (of 118 documented motets, 104 are extant in addition to one fragment) than he did to mass ordinary settings (10),11 which stands in direct contrast to the output of composers at the end of the ffteenth century.

From a technical point of view, Senf adapted the precedents set by Heinrich Isaac, who, as court composer of the imperial chapel, served as Senf's teacher, and by Josquin, whose music Senf viewed as a compositional benchmark. What he had learned from Isaac and Josquin, however, he turned into a lifelong creative pursuit by continuing to experiment with latent possibilities in the traditional cantus frmus motet and through his contributions to the modern genre of psalm motets. In his engagement with these motet forms, Senf distinguished himself from his contemporaries and, as a result, left behind a body of work that enriches our understanding of the variety of motet practices cultivated and performed throughout the sixteenth century in a geographic expanse stretching across Central Europe.

Senf's style in motet composition stems in part from his lifelong engagement in composing and performing music for the liturgy. Unlike Josquin, Willaert, Gombert, and Clemens non Papa, whose contributions to liturgical genres are comparatively slight, Senf — not least in order to meet the requirements of his position at the Bavarian court — continued to compose liturgical music throughout his career, above all mass proper cycles. In doing so, he brought liturgical compositions and para-liturgical motets compositionally and functionally closer to one another, a tightened relationship that is especially evident in his frequent setting of antiphon melodies.12 Although he did not limit himself to the polyphonic treatment of plainchant, having also set psalms, humanist poetry, and other non-liturgical texts, the majority of Senf's motets are elaborations of a pre-existing plainchant melody, a circumstance that points to the liturgical tradition in which he was deeply rooted, but also to the conceptual links joining his motets to his extensive work in mass proper composition and in revising and completing Isaac's *Choralis Constantinus*.

Tese compositional proclivities, coupled with Senf's unique position as the frst 'court composer' of the ducal chapel in Munich, also encourage us to rethink music histories that view motet composition of the 'post-Josquin era' as an emancipation from cantus frmus composition through the technique of pervasive imitation, as represented by such composers as Gombert.13 Tomas Crecquillon, for example, rarely composed cantus frmus motets, though occasionally a chant is either paraphrased or quoted. For Clemens non Papa, pervasive imitation is the rule and there is little use of canonic techniques. Senf consistently turned to imitative techniques and his four-voice motets amply confrm that imitation and cantus frmus were not mutually exclusive but rather coexisted fruitfully alongside one another. He adapts the evaded cadences of Gombert or Willaert to cantus frmus composition in a contrapuntal style that is largely, but not strictly, free of caesuras. Tis amalgam of techniques continued to defne the motet repertoire performed at the Munich court and enjoyed a broad public audience through the motet anthologies that brought the work of Senf and so many of these other 'post-Josquin' composers together.

At the same time that Senf builds on precedents in cantus frmus treatment set by Isaac and Josquin, he worked out diferent solutions in which the cantus frmi are hardly ever deployed as they had been in the traditional tenor motet. Voices surrounding the cantus frmus are almost always imbued with material from the cantus frmus, thus breaking down the lines between cantus frmus and imitation. He rarely composed motets with a purely 'structural' cantus frmus, but rather preferred hybrid forms in which the pre-existent tune or tunes migrate among the other voices or are transformed in the chant-carrying voice. Even in his early tenor motets, Senf does not adhere to a rigid presentation of the cantus frmus in long note values, but rather fexibly adapts the melody in a process of development

<sup>10</sup> Along with such 'post-Josquin' contemporaries as Adrian Willaert, Philippe Verdelot, and Jacquet of Mantua, Senf increasingly turned his attention to fve-voice composition and helped establish its equal footing with four-voice composition by the end of his life. For a detailed assessment of the fve-voice motets, see the introduction to NSE 3.

<sup>11</sup> Another reason for the small number of mass ordinaries is the fact that Senf himself had incorporated many ordinary settings from the repertoire of the dissolved chapel of Maximilian I into that of the Munich court chapel. Together with several other polyphonic ordinary settings which were already available when Senf was hired in Munich in 1523, there was simply no need to provide more settings. Wilhelm IV, Duke of Bavaria, rather focused on music for (personal) devotion.

<sup>12</sup> Schmidt-Beste 2012: 273.

<sup>13</sup> Nugent/Jas 2001.

as the motet unfolds: the melodies often undergo quickened elaboration at cadences as well as in the fnal phrases, such that they merge texturally with the other voices (e.g. *Pange, lingua* (i), SC M 80; NSE 2.36). In the four-voice motets featuring the plainchant in canon, Senf often opts for a quasi-canonic treatment, in which the melody is sung with increasing fexibility (e.g. *Assumpta est Maria*, SC M 7; NSE 1.2; and *Completi sunt dies Mariae*, SC M 18; NSE 1.9), demonstrating his greater regard for the sonorous results of musical transformation over the application of strict rules or traditions. Senf's compositional approach to motets can therefore be described as a style that freely integrates traditional resources and views composition less as a consistently applied solution to a difcult problem, than as a varied and sonorous presentation of musical materials.

Like Jean Mouton and Adrian Willaert, Senf adapted hallmarks of Josquin's style in his motet compositions, especially his psalm motets, such as paired imitation, clear declamation, and a rhetorical approach to form. Many of Senf's motets are structured in a series of clauses initiated by a matching pair of imitative duos — either discantus and contratenor or tenor and bassus — with phrases concluding on a full-voiced cadence frequently overlapping with the beginning of the next clause. But in Senf's motets, paired imitation counts only as one available technique within a vast arsenal of approaches. He just as often opts for simultaneous entries of two voices followed in imitation by the other pair, stretto entries, unpaired four-part imitation, or homophonic openings that immediately unravel in polyphony. Imitation might proceed at the fourth, ffth, or octave, and these intervals might change across paired voices in instances of imitative duos. Senf also frequently contrasts imitation with homophonic utterance, in contrast to Gombert, who tended to avoid imitative duos and relied on homophony only slightly. Moreover, Senf did not limit his use of liturgical melodies to settings of Marian antiphons or tenor cantus frmus compositions, like the followers of Mouton, Gombert, or contemporary Spanish composers. Tis is an indication of the difering tradition of musical performance Senf encountered and shaped at the Munich court.

Indeed, representational requirements for the music chapels of Wilhelm IV and Duke Albrecht of Prussia as well as the aspirations of infuential patrician families like the Fuggers shed some light on the corpus of texts Senf set to music. Beyond the courts, his work circulated in Central Europe in a rich variety of sources alongside the gospel motets, arrangements of psalm verses, and responsorial motets in which other contemporaries such as Gombert or Clemens non Papa specialised, and thus his contributions to the repertoire can also be viewed as an essential response to the needs of a sixteenth-century society in the midst of extraordinary transformation. Tese needs were certainly varied, as the sources of Senf's motets document, and a larger view of Senf's overall motet corpus has much to reveal about the liturgical contextualisation of the sixteenth-century motet, the place of the motet in musical performance beyond the liturgy, and the intertextual-symbolic relations that such music channelled for Senf's diverse sixteenth-century audiences.

# **A Constellation of Scribes, Printers, and Music Theorists: The Sources of Senfl's Four-Voice Motets**

Senf's four-voice motets survive in sixty-seven manuscript sources and fourteen prints (including manuscript and printed tablatures for lute and keyboard). Tese sources were all compiled over the course of the sixteenth century and demonstrate the continued interest in Senf's music even long after his passing. Te wide dispersion of these sources across the sixteenth-century German-speaking world, in addition to sources from Bohemia, Poland, and Upper Hungary, attests to Senf's reputation — as do the excerpts from his four-voice motets found in theoretical treatises by Heinrich Glarean (1547), Gallus Dressler (1561), Ambrosius Wilphlingseder (1563), and Ludovico Zacconi (1592).14

Among manuscript sources, the Munich choirbooks are especially signifcant, since they provide valuable insight into the performance of these motets at the court where Senf was employed. Senf's commitment to Josquin and his advocacy for the composer, for example, is evident in the compilation of the Munich choirbooks Mus.mss. 10 and 12, where Senf's motets are placed side-by-side with works by Josquin, the only two composers represented in these sources; it can be seen as well in the pride of place given to Josquin's motets in the *Liber selectarum cantionum* (RISM 15204).15

Two sources that are especially comprehensive in their transmission of Senf's four-voice motets are D-Rp C 120, a choirbook known as the 'Pernner Codex', and D-Z 81/2, a set of partbooks of which three of the original four survive. D-Rp C 120 is a comprehensive manuscript anthology of some 100 motets, lieder, and chansons originating from the immediate environment of the imperial chapel. Compiled around 1518–21, the manuscript refects the repertoire at the court of Emperor Maximilian I from the time during which Senf presumably served in an unofcial capacity as music director of the court chapel. D-Z 81/2, in contrast, was copied between the 1530s and 1550s in Central Germany but includes, among its numerous works by Senf, an extraordinary number of concordances with D-Rp C 120. Together, these manuscripts provide evidence that Senf's 'early compositions' travelled across Germany even in his later years. Despite its later date of copying and origins removed from Senf's immediate environment, D-Z 81/2 consistently transmits fewer scribal errors, includes a reliable text underlay, and is more accurate in its titling of works, and thus more often serves as the principal source for motets in this edition. One such example is *Descendi in hortum nucum* (i) (SC M 30; NSE 1.13). In D-Rp C 120, this motet is titled *Ascendo ad patrem meum*, whereas D-Z 81/2 transmits the text from the Song of Songs corresponding to the cantus frmus in the tenor and paraphrased prominently in the

<sup>14</sup> For a complete overview over the dissemination of Senf's works, see SC 2.

<sup>15</sup> Schlagel 2002.

bassus (see Plates 11–14 and 30).16 Most likely, the difering title in the Pernner Codex resulted from a mix-up with the similar plainchant melody of the Ascension antiphon *Ascendo ad Patrem meum* (cf. *Antiphonarium Augustense* (1495), fol. 34v ).17

Other manuscript sources attesting to the important place accorded Senf's four-voice motets in Central-German repertoires are the 'Eisenacher Cantorenbuch' (D-EIa s.s.); a set of partbooks from the Tomasschule in Leipzig (D-LEu Tomaskirche 49/50); and the so-called 'Walter-Handschriften' (D-GOl Chart. A 98, D-Ngm 83795 [T], D-Ngm 83795 [B], D-WRhk MS B, PL-Kj Mus. ms. 40013, PL-Kj Mus. ms. 40043), the latter of which all originated in Torgau.

Regarding printed sources, Senf broke new ground through his involvement in assembling the frst volume of motets printed in the German-speaking lands, the already mentioned folio choirbook *Liber selectarum cantionum*, issued in 1520 in Augsburg by Sigmund Grimm and Marx Wirsung and dedicated to Cardinal Matthäus Lang of Wellenburg, one of Maximilian's most trusted advisers.18 In this book, which is organised according to number of voices (three sections of 6vv, 5vv, and 4vv motets), Senf proudly presents his works (including three four-voice motets and the riddle canon *Salve sancta parens* among others) alongside compositions of the older generation, which includes Isaac, Josquin, Pierre de la Rue, Jacob Obrecht, and possibly Jean Mouton.19 Tis publication, however, proved to be an isolated event, for it was not, in fact, until 1537 that a second anthology of motets would be issued by a press in the German-speaking lands. Tis volume, Hans Ott's *Novum et insigne opus musicum* (RISM 15371),20 not only includes thirteen compositions by Senf (among them four four-voice motets),21 but also continued the system introduced in the *Liber selectarum cantionum* of ordering its contents according to scoring, a habit that would become standard practice by German presses for decades to follow (see Figure 2).22 Ott devotes the opening and closing positions of each section to works by Josquin, whom he praises in his dedication to King Ferdinand I as 'the most celebrated of this art' (*celeberrimu*[*m*] *huius artis*). He also singles out Isaac in addition to Senf, whom he describes as 'easily the best contemporary composer' of motets and to whom he suggests readers wanting more motets by Isaac should turn.23 Te apparent commercial success of Ott's anthology quickly reached the attention of other publishers: in 1538, both Johannes Petreius and Georg Rhau would enter the market with their frst motet anthologies, followed by Peter Schöfer the Younger in Strasbourg the following year.24

Although German printers did not begin to issue books of motets steadily until the fnal years of Senf's life, his four-voice motets continued to appear in anthologies issued from presses in Augsburg (Melchior Kriesstein; Philipp Ulhart), Frankfurt an der Oder (Johann Eichorn), Nuremberg (Johann vom Berg and Ulrich Neuber; Hieronymus Formschneider; Katharina Gerlach), and Wittenberg (Georg Rhau).25 Tese factors — the late entry into the market for polyphonic music by German printers and the greater cost of large anthologies — probably placed limitations on the international reach of Senf's motets: as John Kmetz has pointed out, printed German music did not typically travel far beyond German-speaking lands.26 Te music of German composers did not in general tend to exceed these boundaries and Senf's music was no exception in this respect (see Figures 2a–c, pp. XVI–XVII).

<sup>16</sup> Te ascription of the setting in D-Rp C 120 to Ludwig Senf by Rainer Birkendorf (Birkendorf 1994, i: 72, 207; iii: 69–70), made without his knowledge of the concordance in D-Z 81/2, can thus be confrmed. Te Zwickau partbooks also contain Senf's *Egregie Dei martyr, Sebastiane* (SC M 40; NSE 1.21), where sections of the cantus frmus appear in the discantus (in long note values) and the tenor (with various note values, embellishments, and free repetitions of sections); as well as the unusual *A subitanea et improvisa morte* (SC M 1; NSE 1.1) which sets a section from the Litany of Saints.

<sup>17</sup> A second *Descendi in hortum* (SC M 31) for fve voices, cited three times in D-HEu Cod. Pal. germ. 318, is lost.

<sup>18</sup> It is clear that Senf was involved in the preparation of this print to some extent. Recent research, however, has shown that it is not possible to determine his exact role in this printing project. Schiefelbein 2016.

<sup>19</sup> In the US-CA exemplar of RISM 15204, *Missus est Gabriel Angelus* is ascribed to Mouton by Bernhard Rem, while in the D-Sl copy of this print the motet is ascribed to both Mouton and Josquin by an unknown scribe. Te attribution to Mouton, however, remains in question.

<sup>20</sup> Tis volume, along with a second volume the following year (RISM 1538<sup>3</sup> ), was printed in Nuremberg by Hieronymus Formschneider. On the entire collection, see Gustavson 1998.

<sup>21</sup> Ott made the claim that the music in *Novum et insigne opus musicum* had never before appeared in print, although eight of the motets had already been issued in the *Liber selectarum cantionum*. Gustavson 1998, i: 210–11.

<sup>22</sup> German printers typically did not use the modal systems of organisation often found in Italian print anthologies. Lewis Hammond 2007: 36–7.

<sup>23</sup> 'Et tamen si quis Isaaci plura etiam in hoc opere requirit, is habet quo animum suum expleat, nempe laudatissimas cantiones artifcis nostra ætate facile in hoc genere primi, LVDOVICI SENFLII.'

<sup>24</sup> Neither volume printed in 1538 by Petreius — *Tomus primus psalmorum selectorum* (RISM 1538<sup>6</sup> ) and *Modulationes aliquot quatuor vocum* (RISM 1538<sup>7</sup> ) — contains music by Senf, nor is Senf's music included in Schöfer's *Cantiones quinque vocum selectissimae* (RISM 1539<sup>8</sup> ). Rhau's *Symphoniae iucundae* (RISM 1538<sup>8</sup> ) and *Selectae harmoniae* (RISM 1538<sup>1</sup> ), on the other hand, include motets and mass proper settings by Senf. Gustavson 2010: 207.

<sup>25</sup> In contrast to contemporary French and Italian publishers, German publishers typically printed repertoires that were far more international in scope and substantially larger in size: the average Venetian anthology of the mid-sixteenth century included only 16–24 leaves per partbook, making it much smaller than a contemporary German anthology, which often exceeds 60 folios per partbook. Lewis Hammond 2007: 36.

<sup>26</sup> Kmetz 2010: 170.

Figures 2a–c. Johannes Ott, ed., *Novum et insigne opus musicum* (Nuremberg: Hieronymus Formschneider, 1537; RISM 1537<sup>1</sup> ), title page and table of contents of the tenor partbook (D-Mbs; urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb00083303-0).

#### **From Liturgical Antiphon to Polyphonic Motet**

Senf's motets cover a wide variety of genres and compositions for numerous occasions, including ceremonies, liturgical services, private devotion, and humanist contexts. As in the motet œuvre of Isaac, the antiphon is the most frequently employed chant genre in Senf's motets. Since his time as a choirboy, Senf was intimately familiar with Isaac's compositions for this genre and had to provide for such a repertoire on a large scale beginning, at the latest, with his tenure at the Munich court in 1523, but most likely even before Isaac retired to Florence. As Franz Körndle points out,27 in the Liturgy of the Hours, above all at Vespers, only antiphons were sung as motets to complete the liturgical service, a practice that may (or may not) account for Senf's productivity in setting antiphons. Among the ffty-fve four-voice motets presented in these two volumes, almost half are antiphon settings, the majority of which are assigned to Marian feasts or for the seasons of Advent, Christmas, and the Nativity.

Within Senf's motet œuvre, one can fnd tenor motets in the proper sense, where the cantus frmus is set in long note values in the tenor voice and audibly defnes the polyphonic layout. Nevertheless, these works constitute a lesser portion of the overall four-voice œuvre and are found rather more often in compositions for fve or more voices (see NSE 3 and 4). In his four-voice motets, Senf demonstrates great variety in elaborating the cantus frmus, using approaches that he probably learned from Isaac. Instead of employing a rigid treatment of the plainchant in slow rhythmical values, he frequently integrates the cantus frmus into the polyphonic texture, employs a migrating cantus frmus (*Descendi in hortum nucum* (i), *Nativitas tua* (SC M 61; NSE 2.27)), or presents the cantus frmus in canon (*Dies est laetitiae* (SC \*M 33; NSE 1.15), *Gaude, Dei Genitrix* (SC M 43; NSE 1.23)).28 Far more common than settings with a strictly followed cantus frmus, however, are cantus frmus paraphrases, in which the plainchant is modifed in the chant-carrying voice and at the same time picked up and carried by all the voices, often in imitation. By blurring the line between recognisable paraphrase and apparently free counterpoint, Senf thereby transforms the plainchant into

<sup>27</sup> Körndle 1998: 111.

<sup>28</sup> Isaac's settings of *Gaude, Dei Genitrix* and *Sancta Maria Virgo* are transmitted uniquely in the Pernner Codex and both feature a migrating cantus frmus. Kempson therefore argues that they date from Isaac's period of employment at the chapel of Maximilian I. Kempson 1998, i: 41–3.

a fexible mensural melody. It might just as well be featured in the discantus, tenor, or bassus, while motives from the chant are paraphrased in the other voices.

Senf's earliest compositions often exhibit a duo-structured texture, in which a canon-like cantus frmus treatment in the lower voices is contrasted against the free and more forid motion of the upper ones, a compositional method not unlike the canonic doubling of the tenor found in works by Josquin, Isaac, and la Rue. Tis technique can be observed in *Assumpta est Maria in caelum*, *Completi sunt dies Mariae*, and *Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem* (i) (SC M 36; NSE 1.18), or in the aforementioned *Descendi in hortum nucum*.29 Other antiphon settings that can be regarded as 'early' works on the basis of source transmission include *Hic accipiet benedictionem* (SC M 46; NSE 1.24) and *Ave, sanctissima Maria* (SC \*M 11; NSE 1.4), which is anonymously transmitted in the Pernner Codex.30

#### **Songs to the Virgin and Private Devotion**

Although Senf was relatively reserved in his mass proper settings in terms of textual expression, he showed less inhibition in his devotional motet settings, as is apparent in the contrast between his setting of *Virgo prudentissima* as a motet (SC M 122; NSE 2.55) and his setting of the same text as a Magnifcat antiphon for the Feast of the Assumption (SC P 105h). In the proper setting, Senf is more interested in constructive principles than in textual considerations, with limited musical responses to the meaning of the words. Compared to the rigorously imitative counterpoint of the polyphonic antiphon, the motet aforded a composer wide-ranging opportunity to translate the content of the text into a musical language unrestricted in its use of lucid, illustrative elements. Removed from the confnes of a strictly liturgical performance, Senf is comparatively free in his setting of *Virgo prudentissima* as a motet. Tis diference is already evident in the opening point of imitation, which demonstrates a freer use of the pre-existing melodic materials hidden behind a seemingly austere counterpoint. Both settings open with the exact same point of imitation in an untransposed *d* mode. In the motet version, just as the contratenor launches into a stretto imitation of the discantus, it breaks of after the second measure, re-entering immediately after a minim rest, then flling in the harmonic texture when the discantus pauses to complement the other voices with harmonic thirds and sixths. Subsequently, the discantus carries the cantus frmus, albeit decorated and modifed at the cadences, while the three lower voices derive their melodic material from the plainchant melody, with frequent word repetition in response to the meaning of the text (for example, the fvefold repetition of the word 'aurora' in the tenor at mm. 13–19 set in a sequential passage of rising thirds).31 Passages like this are not characteristic of proper settings such as SC P 105h, which avoids textual repetition and sequential patterning.

In addition to texts that were often set by other composers, such as *Virgo prudentissima*, Senf also set texts for which only few polyphonic settings are known. Among these is the two-part motet *Virga Jesse foruit* (SC M 121; NSE 2.54). Although texts beginning with the words 'Virga Jesse foruit' are found in a variety of liturgical sources (as an Alleluia verse or antiphon sung on Marian feasts), an exact match to the text set by Senf or to the accompanying plainchant melody has yet to be identifed. Nevertheless, passages in the motet suggest the existence of a plainchant model: Senf emphasises his motifs clearly and deploys, for example, the opening head motif in the discantus and tenor voices (an upwards leap of a fourth followed by a stepwise descent to the starting note) again later in the *prima pars* in the tenor voice ('foruit') and at the start of the *secunda pars* in the contratenor and bassus to draw musical and textual connections.

Te popular Marian hymn *Salve, Regina* serves as the basis for three four-voice motets (SC M 95, \*M 96, M 97; NSE 2.44, 2.45, 2.46), each of which posed a unique problem for the editors, beginning with the featured plainchants. Liturgically, *Salve, Regina* is a Marian antiphon sung in the Liturgy of the Hours after Compline, but it also served many extra-liturgical functions, with numerous plainchant melodies documenting the varied musical traditions in which this song was performed. Some deviations derive from specifc regional traditions, but others cannot be attached to a certain region with any surety. Although the settings mentioned are all attributed to Senf, the cantus frmi all difer from one another. Extracts from Senf's models (including a reconstruction in the case of SC M 97) and selected versions of the chant from contemporary liturgical sources are shown in the synopsis (see Example 1, pp. XIX– XXII). Te two top lines represent chant sources from Augsburg: the *Antiphonarium speciale* (1511) and DK-Kk 3349, 8°, xv (*c*.1580), a chant book refecting liturgical practice at the Augsburg cathedral. Te third line transcribes the chant as it appears in a *Diurnale* from Vienna (A-Wn Cod. 1915, 15th/early 16th century).

<sup>29</sup> Senf's *Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem* (ii) (SC M 37; NSE 1.19) is only transmitted in later sources from Central Germany. In contrast to the early version, the cantus frmus is here found in the discantus. Another pairing of voices is found in *Cum aegrotasset Job* (SC M 24; NSE 1.10) and at the beginning of *Da pacem, Domine* (i) (SC M 25; NSE 1.11), where the cantus frmus is prominently featured in both the discantus and tenor.

<sup>30</sup> Te text of the latter motet may have been written by Pope Sixtus IV, who granted an indulgence of 11,000 years to those who prayed or sang the antiphon before an image of the 'virgo in sole' — a reason why the text is found in numerous books of hours beginning in the latter half of the ffteenth century (Blackburn 1999). On the basis of the *Nester-Teorie* as adapted by Martin Staehelin (Staehelin 1973), a comparison of the chant model as found in Senf's fve-voice motet *Mater digna Dei / Ave, sanctissima Maria* (SC M 55; NSE 3.10), and also parallels to the four-voice setting by Heinrich Isaac, Rainer Birkendorf ascribed this setting to Ludwig Senf. Tese parallels include the use of mensural alternation in the latter half of the motet and a similar division of the text (in Isaac's three-part setting, the texts of the frst and second *partes* are identical, whereas the third and fourth *partes* of the motet in this edition form one conjoined *pars* in Isaac's setting). Birkendorf 1994, i: 72 and 239–40.

<sup>31</sup> For a detailed analysis of this work, see Körndle 1998: 131–3.

**DTÖ 163.1 DTÖ 163.1**

*Salve, Regina / Stella maris a trimatu* (SC M 95) and [*Salve, Regina*] *– Vita, dulcedo* (SC \*M 96), transmitted uniquely in D-Mbs Mus.ms. 19, provide evidence of Marian veneration at the Munich court. Albrecht IV, Duke of Bavaria, donated a *Salve* service at the Frauenkirche in Munich in 1490, which included the ringing of the largest bell and, among several prayers, a 'Salve in mensuris' to be sung by the cantor, the schoolmaster, and his students.32 Wilhelm IV reaffrmed his father's donation and expanded Marian devotion at the court. Tis is evident, for example, in D-Mbs Mus. ms. 34, a choirbook anthology of *Salve, Regina* settings acquired by the Bavarian court in the 1520s and featuring the Bavarian coat-of-arms at the start of the frst motet.33

Only in *Salve, Regina / Stella maris a trimatu* (see Plates 24–5) are all verses of the plainchant set polyphonically. Tis setting stands apart from the other two, since Senf features two cantus frmi with difering texts, both of which are present at all times. In addition to the *Salve, Regina* melody, Senf includes a second cantus frmus, opening with the phrase *Stella maris a trimatu*. Tis text appears only in breviaries for Freising as a Magnifcat antiphon for the second Vespers of the Presentation of Mary within a *historia* (a versifed ofce) and seems to represent a local tradition also practised at the Munich court. No chant melody for this text is documented, although one can be reconstructed from Senf's setting.34

While the chant melodies of *Salve, Regina* and *Stella maris a trimatu* in SC M 95 alternate between the tenor and discantus, the cantus frmus in *Salve, Regina* (SC \*M 96) appears as a quasi-canon at the ffth between tenor and bassus. Tis anonymously transmitted *Salve* setting is composed for *alternatim* performance in which only the evennumbered verses are set polyphonically. Because this setting appears immediately after *Salve, Regina* / *Stella maris a trimatu* (SC M 95) in D-Mbs Mus.ms. 19 and Senf is identifed as composer on fol. 107r , an internal title page that precedes *Salve, Regina* / *Stella maris a trimatu*, scholars have suggested Senf as the composer of the second setting as well.35 Tis assumption is supported by the arrangement of the cantus frmus as a quasi-canon of the lower voices, a technique to which Senf frequently turned. Nevertheless, it is striking that the cantus frmi used in these two settings are not an exact match. *Salve, Regina* (SC \*M 96) is the only one of the three *Salve* settings notated without a b in the key signature, which might suggest performance of the opening two phrases of the cantus frmus, as it appears untransposed in the bassus, with a *b* instead of a *b* b. Although the Munich choirbook does not include accidentals in these opening measures, it can be assumed that the bassus approaches the upper neighbouring tone by a semitone step in imitation of the tenor that precedes it. Subsequent diferences in the plainchant melodies used in these two *Salve, Regina* settings lie within the range of variants in southern German-speaking lands, as the synopsis shows.

Te third setting, *Salve, Rex aeternae misericordiae* (SC M 97), is also composed for *alternatim* performance but features a Christological adaptation of the Marian antiphon in both of its extant sources. Tis adaptation closely resembles the version sung in 1525 at the Protestant Church of St. Bartholomäus in Erfurt. As transcribed in 1758 by the Lutheran theologian Johann Mehlig, the Erfurt text difers only slightly from the one transmitted in the sources for SC M 97.36 In this fragmentary setting, the cantus frmus is often found in either the discantus or tenor, but since the contratenor and the major part of the bassus do not survive, a complete reconstruction of the cantus frmus is not possible. Nevertheless, it is clear that the cantus frmus of *Salve, Rex* diverges from the models of the two other *Salve* settings. Tis is already apparent in the head motif of the plainchant: *Salve, Rex* does not feature a turn to the upper neighbouring tone often found in sources from southern Germany.37 Other signifcant melodic variants occur at the words 'et pium' ('et Jesum' in the Marian version) and 'o clemens'. For the phrase 'et pium', SC M 97 more closely resembles what is probably the oldest version of this plainchant, which features a descent below the tonal space of the authentic mode into the plagal tetrachord. Many chant sources and polyphonic settings such as SC M 95 and \*M 96 replace this phrase with alternative variants that remain within the authentic mode or dip just below to the Dorian lower neighbour.38 Based on the surviving voices of SC M 97, the cantus frmus is at this point carried by the discantus and, exceptionally, transposed upward not by a fourth, but by an octave with respect to the plainchant. Despite its resemblance to other *Salve* melodies, a melodic model for this motet has yet to be identifed in other contemporary monophonic or polyphonic sources.

Similar to *Salve, Regina / Stella maris a trimatu*, a second four-voice Marian motet, *Regina caeli, laetare / Conscendit iubilans* (SC M 92; NSE 2.42) features simultaneous texts and melodies that amplify and comment on one another. Te antiphon *Regina caeli* with its Alleluia trope, assigned in the *Responsoria noviter* (1509) to Easter on occasions honouring Mary, forms the backbone of the

38 Ibid.

<sup>32</sup> Heinzel 1995, i: 104–5.

<sup>33</sup> Tis choirbook was produced in the 1520s in the workshop of Petrus Alamire (Brussels/Mechlin), but it is unclear whether the manuscript was prepared specifcally for Wilhelm or personalised for him at a later date. Gasch 2017: 197–8.

<sup>34</sup> Kiel 2013.

<sup>35</sup> KBM 5/1: 89; Heinzel 1995: 34–8; Heinzel 1998: 146; and Kiel 2013: 390–4.

<sup>36</sup> Mehlig 1758: 549; 'sanctum' in place of 'Christe'; 'o proles Mariae' in place of 'o dulcis Jesu Christe'. Te two sources for Senf's motet (H-Bn Ms. mus. Bártfa 22 and D-Z 81/2) were both used in reformed communities, and D-Z 81/2 transmits another *Salve, Regina* adaptation: *Salve, Rex misericordiae*, a contrafactum of Heinrich Finck's Marian *Salve*. Although the second half of the text of this contrafactum difers somewhat from SC M 97, the opening motif matches the one in Senf's setting. Tese variants speak to the proliferation of multiple transformations of this famous melody.

<sup>37</sup> Heinzel 1995, i: 11. Isaac also does not include the upper *semitonium* in his two four-voice settings.

composition: heard throughout in the discantus, it is divided into fve sections, each of which is accompanied by another plainchant melody serving as a second cantus frmus. Tese parallel melodies — ranging from a stanza of the hymn *Festum nunc celebre* for Ascension Day to the cantio *Dies est laetitiae* — all pertain to Christ and count among the most widely transmitted songs of the time. Four of them are usually assigned to Christmas and Easter time, while the ffth, an excerpt from the *Te Deum laudamus*, is a petition for divine aid and a reminder of the redemptive power of Christ's blood. Combined with this famous Marian antiphon, they would have served as an enhancement to Marian celebrations at Easter by recalling the life cycle of the son to whom she gave birth. Te motet — highly unusual in its approach of combining all sections of the motet with various texts and melodies — is uniquely transmitted in the 'Pernner Codex' (see Plate 23) and therefore pre-dates Senf's employment in Munich. Nevertheless, it documents — like *Salve, Regina / Stella maris* — the importance accorded to Marian devotion in the frst half of the sixteenth century and a widespread need to enhance Marian occasions with elaborate new music.

With texts derived from the liturgy, the previous settings could have been performed on occasions specifed in the liturgical calendar. Te motet cycle of the *Quinque Salutationes* (SC M 8; NSE 1.3), however, represents another aspect of Senf's work: para-liturgical piety at the court of Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria. In the only source in which it is transmitted, D-Mbs Mus.ms. 10, the cycle is fronted by a title page stating that Senf set these fve invocations to Christ specifcally at the duke's request. A second commission from Wilhelm is Senf's fve-voice motet *Mater digna Dei / Ave, sanctissima Maria* (SC M 55; see NSE 3.10). In D-Mbs Mus.ms. 12, this composition also includes an internal title page that states the origin of this 'Oratio ad incomparabilem Virginem Mariam' at the personal request of the duke. It thus serves as a Marian counterpart to the Christological *Quinque Salutationes*.39 Te texts of both works can be found in the *Tesauro spirituale*40 (see Plates 1–2) by the Franciscan friar Bernardino Busti (*c*.1450–1513), a devotee to the cult of Mary,41 and underscore the musical veneration of Christ and Mary at the Munich court in the context of a centuries-old relationship with the Franciscan friary immediately adjacent to the residence.42

Confronted with a commission to set fve non-liturgical *salutationes* without a cantus prius factus, Senf chose to key specifc words in the text with appropriate plainchant quotations from the liturgy.43 Tese plainchant extracts, inserted as quotations, form liturgical points of reference in the music and may in turn point to Senf's orientation towards his model Josquin, who cites appropriate plainchant melodies of hymns at specifc lines of text in his four-voice motet cycle *Qui velatus facie fuisti*.44 Tis technique informs the opening of each individual *salutatio*, which quotes each time the melody of the antiphon *Asperges me*, recalling the start of Sunday mass when the congregation is sprinkled with holy water. Both Josquin and Heinrich Finck employ a similar approach at the beginnings of individual sections of their cyclical *O Domine Jesu Christe* settings: Josquin begins each part with sustained homophonic chords for the opening invocation, while Finck employs in each part a similar pattern of rhythmic declamation in the opening points of imitation.45 All three composers thereby create a cyclical system, which — in the case of Senf — is modifed in the culmination of the cycle, the ffth *salutatio*. In Senf's cycle, only the frst four *salutationes* begin with the same musical material, whereas in the ffth *salutatio* the acclamation 'Ave [Domine Jesu Christe]' introduces a new cantus frmus derived from the hymn *Ave, maris stella*. In place of a more traditional means for signalling the conclusion, such as an expansion of the scoring or the introduction of a canon,46 Senf highlights the last section of his cycle by breaking from the pattern established in the previous four parts with a new musical quotation and by almost doubling the concluding section's length.

**Text and Structure: Senfl's Hymns and Psalm Motets** While Senf's attention to antiphon settings refects the international importance of this genre in the early sixteenth century, the psalm motet was a musical medium of special signifcance to the Reformation period in Central Europe. When Senf appears in standard music histories of the motet, if at all, it is his psalm motets that are placed in the foreground,47 since they represent an innovative development in the German-speaking world. Musicologists have

<sup>39</sup> To what extent Wilhelm IV actually infuenced the selection of texts remains an open question. It is remarkable, however, that among all other choirbooks of the Munich court chapel from the frst half of the sixteenth century only Senf's *Opus Musicum* (preserved in D-Mbs Mus.mss. 35–38) includes a title page with a dedication to Duke Wilhelm IV. In contrast to the 8-part *motetti missales* cycle attributed to Loyset Compère, *Ave, Domine Jesu Christe*, which features a modifed form of these texts and may have been sung during low mass in the Sforza chapel of the Milan cathedral, Senf's cycle was composed for the private devotion of the Bavarian duke. Gasch 2016.

<sup>40</sup> *Tesauro spirituale* (Milan: Ulrich Scinzenzeler, 1494), sigs. [mvi]r–v and p[i]r–v.

<sup>41</sup> See, for example, his *Mariale* (Milan: Ulderico Scinzenzeler, 1492 I parte; Milan, Leonard Pachel, 1493 testo integrale); *Rosarium Sermonum* (Venice: Giorgio Arrivabene, 1498); and *Tesauro spirituale della b. Vergine Maria* (Milan: Giovanni Antonio da Honate, 1488).

<sup>42</sup> Gasch 2016.

<sup>43</sup> Lodes 2014.

<sup>44</sup> See, for example, the end of the third stanza and the beginnings of the fourth and sixth stanzas. NJE 22: 18.

<sup>45</sup> *O Domine* (like *Qui velatus facie fuisti*) circulated widely in books of hours. It can also be found in the German print *Hortulus animae noviter jam ac diligenter impressus* (Mainz: Peter Schöfer, 1513), fol. 37r–v, which circulated in numerous editions.

<sup>46</sup> Heinrich Finck used both techniques in his *O Domine Jesu Christe* cycle.

<sup>47</sup> Te editors defne psalm motets as polyphonic settings of complete psalms. *De profundis* (i) (SC M 28), which survives only in fragmentary form, therefore is not a psalm motet, since only a portion of the psalm is set to music.

long stressed the historical precedence of Josquin's psalm motets, and Senf's subsequent composition of psalm motets must undoubtedly be viewed as a continuation of Josquin's pathbreaking work. When Senf turned his attention to psalm settings around 1518, the genre was still young. Numerous psalm motets attributed to Josquin, many of which have since been deemed spurious, circulated after Josquin's lifetime alongside settings by Senf in prints edited by Johannes Ott and Johannes Petreius, who sought to fulfl the demands of a Central European market eager for polyphonic psalms. Te style of a psalm motet such as Josquin's *Memor esto verbi tui* provided an important model for Senf: paired duos, the insertion of block-chord passages (often for textual emphasis), and a tendency towards syllabic declamation are stylistic hallmarks that impart a certain regularity, general orderliness, and clarity to these motets, heard, for example, to striking efect in Senf's *Nisi Dominus* (SC M 65; NSE 2.29 and NSE 3.15).

Since the declamatory character of psalm tones precluded their adaptation as cantus frmi, composers of psalm motets were largely unhindered in the melodic arrangement of voices. Nevertheless, declamatory passages in psalm motets often display similarities to common recitation formulas. In *Deus, in adiutorium* (SC M 32; NSE 1.14), the initial motif recalls one such recitation formula, as does Senf's setting of the phrase 'habitare fratres in unum' in *Ecce quam bonum* (SC M 38; NSE 1.20), which paraphrases the seventh psalm tone.48

Te two settings of *Beati omnes* are examples of two diferent reception phenomena: for the more expansive frst setting (SC M 12; NSE 1.5), the occasion is relatively circumscribed. Te motet was possibly composed for the wedding of Margrave Casimir of Brandenburg and Susanna of Bavaria, which was arranged by the bride's uncle Maximilian I and celebrated during the Augsburg Diet in 1518.49 Although details of the musical celebration of the liturgy are lacking, the psalm was part of the Augsburg ritual for wedding celebrations, where it was recited as the couple knelt in front of the priest.50 Senf, who was responsible for the musical arrangement of services and ceremonies by the imperial court chapel at least after Isaac's death in 1517, develops the motivic design of *Beati omnes* (i) through shortened melismas and syllabic declamation (such as at 'Uxor tua' or at the beginning of the *secunda pars*), resulting

50 Lodes 2010. See also Kelber 2018: 149–54.

in a clear presentation of the text.51 Tat Senf considered this motet an exemplary showcase of his compositional technique is suggested by its inclusion in the *Liber selectarum cantionum*.52

Te origin of the second *Beati omnes* setting (SC M 13; NSE 1.6) is uncertain. Te earliest source in which it appears is the *Novum et insigne opus musicum* (RISM 15371), printed in Nuremberg nearly two decades after the frst version was composed. Te paired imitations of the upper and lower voices are reminiscent of French motet style, as infuenced by Josquin, but from a matrimonial perspective, the new division of the text into two *partes* is striking (see the Critical Reports for nos. 5 and 6 in the present volume). Tis division, articulated by clear, homorhythmic caesuras at the end of the frst and beginning of the second parts, contrasts the virtues of familial happiness in a God-fearing household (1.p.) with the benediction of the psalm's fnal verse (2.p.).53 Regarding this second setting, a special case of transmission should be mentioned: in a copy of Sixt Dietrich's *Magnifcat Octo Tonorum. Liber Primus* (RISM A/I D 3015) now kept in the Royal Library of Belgium (KBR, Brussels), a scribe added the motet along with several other compositions by hand in the back endleaves (B-Br Fétis 1.782A A 1 L.P. (suppl. ms.); see Plates 3–6). Te scribe, however, did not copy all of the appended works in all partbooks, such that only the contratenor and tenor of Senf's *Beati omnes* (ii) are found in this source.

Perhaps the most widely discussed of Senf's psalm motets in musicological literature is *Ecce quam bonum*. Te following excerpt from Johannes Mathesius's *Historien*, a collection of homilies on the life and work of Martin Luther frst published in Nuremberg in 1566, has been the basis for a political interpretation of this motet, according to which Senf composed it as an admonition to those gathered at the Diet of 1530 in Augsburg for the arrival of Emperor Charles V:

Mein gut freund Senfi/ der mir durch den Pfarrner [*sic*] zu Bruck vil lieblicher Psalm zugeschicket/ wilfaret mit freuden Doctor Luthern/ vnnd schickt jm die schöne muteten/ das Non moriar, vnnd Respons/ in pace in idipsum, daran/ vn[d] an seinem künstlichen/ Ecce quàm bonum, welchs er dem Reichstag/ als der Keyser ankam/ zur vermanung ließ außgehen/ hat mich vnnd meine mitsinger/ neben seinem Nunc dimittis, oftmals von hertzen erfrewet. Schöne Moteten oder weyse melodeyen/ die jre seele/ leben vnd guten text haben/ sind aller ehren werd/ als köstliche gaben Gottes.54

<sup>48</sup> *Deus, in adiutorium* is also a prime example of the reception of Senf's motet by sixteenth-century music theorists. Heinrich Glarean uses the motet in his *Dodekachordon* (RISM 1547<sup>1</sup> ) to illustrate the rare Lydian mode. Glarean's inclusion of this motet in his ground-breaking study became the central point of departure for the theoretical reception of this motet into the seventeenth century. Grassl 2013: 573–5.

<sup>49</sup> Lodes 2010. At the time of the Augsburg Diet, Senf had just recovered from a hunting accident in which he lost two toes. See the letter by Paul Hofhaimer to Vadian in Arbenz 1891: 209–10.

<sup>51</sup> Fuhrmann 2012: 309–46.

<sup>52</sup> Giselbrecht/Upper 2012; Schiefelbein 2016.

<sup>53</sup> Fuhrmann 2012. Fuhrmann also assumes that Senf could have composed this motet for one of his own two weddings (in 1527 and at the latest 1535).

<sup>54</sup> Mathesius 1566: fol. 106<sup>v</sup> .

In composing this motet, Senf makes use of a structural principle derived from Josquin: the expansion of the setting, with two repetitions of the psalm's frst verse in each of its two parts, yields a refrain-like structure that is clearly reminiscent of Josquin's *Miserere mei, Deus*.55 Te sharply profled musical motif of the opening of the psalm, coupled with the harmonic boldness of the setting, renders the refrain distinctive and memorable, with each recurrence coloured by a difering arrangement of vocal entries and the use of transposition. Although paired imitation forms the basis of this setting, Senf loosens the texture through melismatic restraint, variously deployed vocal groupings, and a mosaic-like motivic conception derived from small building blocks.56

Senf's psalm motets bear witness to the fact that he composed not only for the Catholic liturgy of the Munich court, but also for clients advocating Lutheran reforms. Among them were the musically-inclined Duke Albrecht of Prussia and Martin Luther himself. A letter written by Luther to Senf in 1530, in which he solicited, among others, a setting of *In pace in idipsum* (SC \*P 85), was the subject of great attention already in the sixteenth century (see the Critical Report for NSE 2.30) and infuenced the later reception of Senf in the nineteenth century.57 Te frst printed German translation of the letter, accompanied by further details on the correspondence between Luther and Senf, appeared in the foreword to an anthology of psalm settings by the Zwickau composer and cantor David Köler (see Plates 15–18). In Köler's account, Senf did not at frst compose for Luther the setting of *In pace in idipsum* he desired, but rather prepared a setting of psalm verse 117:17 for his moral edifcation: 'Non moriar sed vivam et narrabo opera Domini' (SC M 66; NSE 2.30). Tis motet, also transmitted in a source from the court of Duke Albrecht of Prussia (see Plates 19–20), is an impressive example of Senf's ability to compose a motet of some eighty-six breves in length on the basis of a very short cantus frmus. Te plainchant sounds four times in its entirety: beginning in the discantus, it wanders through the contratenor and tenor, before descending in the fnal measures to the bassus.58

Senf may have met Duke Albrecht at the Augsburg Diet of 1518, for both of them were present at the wedding of Albrecht's elder brother Casimir. Te Duke and the composer began a correspondence initiated by a gift of six partbooks from Senf to Albrecht on the occasion of the duke's wedding that was to last some ffteen years (beginning in 1526, the last documented letter is dated 1540). Tis correspondence, carried out in part by Senf's long-term colleague, the singer Lucas Wagenrieder, led to the transfer of numerous musical compositions from Munich to Königsberg.59 Together with the fve-part motet *De profundis clamavi* (ii) (SC M 29; NSE 3.6) and a six-voice (now lost) *Quid retribuam* (SC M 89), Senf's setting of Psalm 69 (*Deus, in adiutorium*) was also sent to the court of Duke Albrecht in 1535. Te motets Senf sent to both Martin Luther and Duke Albrecht confrm that the development of the Latin motet was hardly inhibited by the Reformation in the frst half of the sixteenth century, as some music histories purport, but that, in fact, early reformers continued to seek new polyphonic settings of Latin texts in addition to music in the vernacular.60

Another prominent genre among Senf's motets are hymns. When setting hymns, Senf often opts for a clear and systematic arrangement of the individual stanzas. Tis is evident in the liturgical hymns for the *Ofcium* (D-Mbs Mus.ms. 52) as well as in three of the hymns included in the frst two volumes of the NSE. In Senf's setting of the Lenten hymn *Christe, qui lux es* (SC M 15; NSE 1.7), which includes the frst fve of the hymn's seven stanzas, the hymn tune is placed in long note values frst in the discantus (frst stanza), then as a quasi-canon between the contratenor and tenor (second stanza), and then fnally as a quasi-canon between tenor and bassus in the fourth and ffth stanzas. Tis compositional approach highlighting the individual stanzas is also found in the Resurrection hymn *Festum nunc celebre* (SC M 41; NSE 1.22). Again, Senf selects specifc stanzas from the hymn (1, 2, 4, 6) and assigns the plainchant to a diferent voice for each stanza: accordingly, the discantus sings the plainchant in stanza 1, the contratenor in stanza 2, the tenor in stanza 4, and the bassus in the concluding one.

A similar strategy is also found in *Pange, lingua* (iii) (SC M 82; NSE 2.38), where Senf sets the frst four stanzas of the hymn. With each stanza, the cantus frmus wanders to a diferent voice, a technique that results in a large-scale motet of 259 breves in duration and counts as the most extensive in scope among the composer's three *Pange, lingua* settings. Although Senf features the same plainchant melody as a cantus frmus in all three settings, *Pange, lingua* (i) and (ii) (SC M 80, M 81; NSE 2.36 and 2.37 respectively), in which only the frst stanza is set, stand apart from *Pange, lingua* (iii): both settings feature the cantus frmus in the tenor voice and are composed in perfect mensuration. Another aspect shared by these two shorter settings appears at the third line of text, 'sanguinisque pretiosi' ('and of the precious blood'), where the bassus joins the tenor in singing

<sup>55</sup> Josquin's setting likewise features the opening words of the psalm as an ostinato ascending stepwise in the *tenor primus* voice. Te tenor ostinato in Josquin's setting inspired other compositional works, such as Jean Richafort's fve-voice motet *Misereatur mei / Miserere mei, Deus*, and Senf's own *Miserere mei* (SC M 58; NSE 3.12) or his *Omnes gentes plaudite manibus* (SC M 79; NSE 3.21).

<sup>56</sup> Fuhrmann 2012: 318–24.

<sup>57</sup> Lodes 2015.

<sup>58</sup> In *De profundis clamavi* (i) (see Plates 7–10) Senf also sets a single psalm verse that utilises an equally short cantus frmus. In this instance, however, he chooses a diferent approach to cantus frmus composition: the setting is built on a quasi-canon between the two lower voices; see also n. 53.

<sup>59</sup> Gasch 2012.

<sup>60</sup> Senf's compositions have often been overlooked in such histories, which instead herald the chorale motets as pioneered by Johann Walter as a sign of the re-emergence of the motet in Lutheran services, an oversight that also stems in part from the fact that Senf's musical compositions do not easily align with one confession. See, for example, Sanders 2001.

the cantus frmus in long note values against the faster-moving upper voices, in imitation at the octave in *Pange, lingua* (i) and at the ffth in *Pange, lingua* (ii). In this latter setting, Senf reveals his openness to unusual experiments that demand from performers technical skill and rhythmic acumen. In the aforementioned passage as found in *Pange, lingua* (ii), the tenor sings in syncopation with respect to the tactus: in mm. 25–30, each cantus frmus note set in the tenor as a perfect breve is prefxed (or followed) by a minim, creating an efect of cascading tonal dislocations. Immediately following these unusual sonorities, the passage starting at m. 35, where Senf sets the fourth line of text, 'quem in mundi pretium' ('which, for the price of the world'), manifests a remarkable approach to notational construction, in which every second note of the tenor is coloured in an alternating pattern of perfect and imperfect breves. Tis optical component to the notated voice cannot be heard acoustically but stands out visually in the original mensural notation provided in this motet's unique source, Georg Rhau's 1542 *Sacrorum hymnorum liber primus*.61

# **Singing with the Humanists**

In addition to hymns, Senf turned his attention to humanist poetry, for which he cultivated a very diferent approach to musical setting. Four of his four-voice motets set texts in Latin metres characterised by particular sequences of long and short syllables: *Sum tuus in vita* (i) (SC M 109; NSE 2.50), *Tristia fata boni* (SC M 116; NSE 2.51), and *Quid vitam sine te* (SC M 90; NSE 2.41; see Plates 21–2) conform to the metrical structure of elegiac distichs, while *Nunc, Deus, ad requiem* (SC M 67; NSE 2.31) is comprised of dactylic hexameters. Only the frst three pieces, however, are set in a manner that refects the metre of the texts. In setting these elegiac distichs, Senf devises musical phrases that maintain the scansion of the verses or hemistichs, either as breves and semibreves or as a faster declamation of semibreves and minims. Both rates of declamation might even appear simultaneously in diferent voices, a feature that defnes Senf's general approach to text setting in humanist motets, whose settings are not governed by textual metres as strictly as his settings of odes. Humanist metres in his motets are largely confned to the arrangement of individual voices within the overall texture, in which the text is not always declaimed homophonically, as in the four-part odes, but rather more often unfolds in polyphonic imitation.

Te various authors whose poetry Senf set suggest that he had good connections to a diverse humanist network. *Tristia fata boni* was written by Wolfgang Seidl, abbot of Tegernsee and preacher at the Munich court, who, in an autograph anthology of his writings, proudly noted (see Plates 31–2): 'Super hoc carmen composuit harmoniam musicam Ludouicus Senfius inter nostrates musicus celeberrimus, quæ passim iam etiam in scholis cantatur.'62 *Sum tuus in vita* (see Plate 29) is likewise a poem of Christian edifcation penned by Veit Dietrich, a close confdant of Martin Luther. Senf's contacts with key fgures of the Lutheran Reformation are well known, yet it is noteworthy that the earlier sources for Senf's setting (D-Z 81/2 and RISM 15383) represent the frst known witnesses to Veit's versifed prayer. How Senf became acquainted with the text is unknown, but it may have been through the reformer Hieronymus Baumgärtner of Nuremberg, who acted as middleman in Senf's correspondence with Luther.63 *Quid vitam sine te*, in contrast, points to the nearby city of Augsburg, with a motet text cast in the form of a dialogue between the patrician Christoph Ehem and his deceased wife.64

A special case is represented by the motet *Nunc, Deus, ad requiem*, whose anonymous text references the Canticle of Simeon, *Nunc dimittis*, but at the same time paraphrases an excerpt from Marcus Hieronymus Vida's *Christias*, an epic poem on the life of Christ frst published in Cremona in 1535 (see the Critical Report to NSE 2.31). Not only is the choice of text unusual for Senf, but the text setting of this motet also departs signifcantly from the approach used in the three humanist settings discussed above. Tis applies both to the formation of phrases (the end of the hemistich 'corporis exutum vinclis' (mm. 23–30), for example, already forms the beginning of a new phrase that ignores the caesura of the hexameter) and to the stressed syllables of individual words (e.g. the homophonic section 'vinclis' in mm. 29–30, with its unnatural upbeat). Moreover, the declamation of long and short syllables in corresponding note values observed in Senf's other humanist settings is rarely employed, which raises the question as to whether *Nunc, Deus, ad requiem* may have been preserved not with its original text, but rather only as a contrafactum.65

#### **Questions of Authorship**

As certain as we can be about Senf's authorship in most cases, questions arise regarding the authorship of several motets included in this edition due to their anonymous transmission in sixteenth-century sources. Te setting of *Dies est laetitiae*, a popular *cantio* which also circulated in such German-language versions as *Der tag der ist so freidreich*, was attributed to Senf by Rainer Birkendorf following his study of the manuscript D-Rp C 120.66 If Senf is indeed the composer of this motet, it would count among his earliest surviving para-liturgical compositions.

<sup>61</sup> A similar approach is found in *Herr durch dein Blut* (SC S 139), where the bassus voice is notated throughout in a sequence of alternating *ligaturae cum opposita proprietate* and semibreves. While there the ligature groupings are aligned with the tactus, in *Pange, lingua* (ii) Senf shifts the voice vis-à-vis the rhythmic framework so that its notes extend over the boundaries of the mensural units.

<sup>62</sup> D-Mbs Clm 18688, fol. 9<sup>v</sup> : 'Ludwig Senf, the most famous musician of our time, wrote a setting of this poem, which is still sung in some schools to this day.' Translation by McDonald 2012: 93.

<sup>63</sup> Luther WA, v: nos. 1727–8.

<sup>64</sup> Fuhrmann 2018.

<sup>65</sup> For this insight, the editors would like to thank Grantley McDonald, who addressed humanist motets in the context of a workshop held at the University of Vienna in May 2018.

<sup>66</sup> Birkendorf 1994, i: 72 and 238–9; iii: 94.

Te attribution to Senf of the anonymous *In exitu Israel* (ii) (SC \*M 48; NSE 1.26), frst proposed by Martin Bente,67 was tacitly accepted in the catalogue of the choirbooks preserved in the Bavarian State Library and by James C. Griesheimer in his 1990 dissertation on Senf's motets.68 Diferences between this setting, which survives uniquely in the Munich choirbook Mus.ms. 13, and the setting of the same psalm securely attributed to Senf suggest the two settings are complementary. Instead of an *alternatim* setting as found in *In exitu Israel* (i) (SC M 47; NSE 1.25), all verses of the psalm are set polyphonically in *In exitu Israel* (ii). An additional diference is the plainchant model: *In exitu Israel* (ii) primarily employs the *tonus peregrinus* in the so-called 'German chant dialect' in contrast to the 'Roman chant dialect' as found in *In exitu Israel* (i). Although Bente's attribution rests solely on the basis of the heading in D-Mbs Mus.ms. 13 that precedes the securely attributed *In exitu Israel* (i), the possibility that Senf also composed this second setting is not unreasonable. Two other instances in which Senf may have provided both through-composed and *alternatim* settings include the two *Salve, Regina* motets in D-Mbs Mus.ms. 19 discussed above or the two *Missae Paschales* (SC \*O 1 and O 2).

Perhaps the most questionably ascribed of the fourvoice motets is *Collegerunt pontifces* (SC \*M 17; NSE 1.8). Te wide transmission of this work, which has been preserved in twelve sources, is due above all to its publication in Georg Rhau's *Symphoniae iucundae* (RISM 15388), where the setting appears without attribution. Among the several copies of the motet derived from this print is D-Rp A.R. 863–870, a manuscript compiled in the 1570s, possibly by Erasmus Zollner for use at the Gymnasium Poeticum in Regensburg. It is the only source to ascribe this motet to Senf, in contrast to all other sources, which transmit the composition anonymously. Tis scant evidence prompted Ludwig Finscher (and later Tomas Noblitt) to classify the attribution as 'highly doubtful',69 although a stylistic evaluation of the motet has yet to be undertaken. In the light of this late sixteenth-century attribution and without any alternative proposals, the editors have included the motet in the edition with the hope that its inclusion among works of secure attribution will provoke future discussion.

**\*\*\***

Questions of authorship are but one issue the editors hope users of this edition will address, but of utmost importance is stimulating further interest in a composer whose music enjoyed widespread esteem during his lifetime, set standards for his contemporaries, and paved the way for his successors. With the collected works of Ludwig Senf, we might better understand the work of other composers in the German-speaking world, such as Arnold von Bruck, Sixt Dietrich, or Leonhard Paminger, who furthered the techniques of musical composition in which Senf excelled. At the same time, this edition allows us to consider Senf's music once more in conjunction with works by the international host of composers with which it so often travelled. As scholars continue to unravel devotional practices at the Munich court, the collected works of Senf should cast new light on the musical practices adapted by the *Kapellmeister* appointed after him, including Ludwig Daser, Matthaeus LeMaistre, and, most prolifc of all, Orlando di Lasso. Indeed, Senf was instrumental in establishing one of the most illustrious musical institutions of sixteenth-century Europe, and in this capacity, his impact on music cannot be underestimated. He ushered in a new era with the frst printed anthology of sacred polyphony in the German-speaking world, and, in managing these various roles, found a way to navigate the fuid confessional boundaries that defned Central Europe in the frst half of the sixteenth century.

<sup>67</sup> Bente 1968: 183–4.

<sup>68</sup> KBM 5/1: 75–7; Griesheimer 1990, iii: 374.

<sup>69</sup> Finscher 1963: 205; Noblitt 1981: 70 n. 56.

Plates 1–2. Bernardino Busti, *Tesauro spirituale* (Milan: Ulrich Scinzenzeler, 3.12.1494), sig. p[1]r–v (D-Mbs Inc.c.a. 199; urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb00066120-0).

Plates 3–4. L. Senf, *Beati omnes qui timent Dominum* (ii) (SC M 13), B-Br Fétis 1.782A A 1 L.P. (suppl. ms.), contratenor, fols. 12v–13r (with kind permission).

Plates 5–6. L. Senf, *Beati omnes qui timent Dominum* (ii) (SC M 13), B-Br Fétis 1.782A A 1 L.P. (suppl. ms.), tenor, fol. 13r–v (with kind permission).

Plates 7–8. L. Senf, *De profundis clamavi* (i) (SC M 28), discantus in D-Z 81/2 (with kind permission).

Plates 9–10. L. Senf, *De profundis clamavi* (i) (SC M 28), discantus, tenor, and bassus in D-Z 81/2 (with kind permission).

Plates 11–12. L. Senf, *Descendi in hortum nucum* (i) (SC M 30), discantus of D-Z 81/2 (with kind permission).

Plates 13–14. L. Senf, *Descendi in hortum nucum* (i) (SC M 30), tenor and bassus of D-Z 81/2 (with kind permission).

Plates 15–18. David Köler, *Zehen Psalmen Davids des Propheten, mit vier, fünf, vnd sechs Stimmen gesatzt* (Leipzig: Günther Wolf, 1554), German translation of a letter by Martin Luther to Ludwig Senf, dated 4 October 1530 (copy from D-Z with kind permission).

Plates 21–2. L. Senf, *Quid vitam sine te* (SC M 90), beginnings of *prima* and *secunda partes* in tenor of RISM 1545² (D-Mbs; urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb00079623-9).

Plate 23. L. Senf, *Regina caeli / Conscendit iubilans* (SC M 92), *prima* and *secunda partes*, D-Rp C 120, pp. 164–5 (with kind permission).

Plates 26–8. L. Senf, *Salve, Rex aeterne* (SC M 97), bassus of D-Z 81/2 (with kind permission).

Plate 29. L. Senf, *Sum tuus in vita* (i) (SC M 109), beginning of discantus in D-Rp A.R. 940–941 (with kind permission).

Plate 30. L. Senf, *Descendi in hortum nucum* (i) (SC M 30) in D-Rp C 120, pp. 30–1 with the erroneous caption 'Ascendo ad patrem meum' (with kind permission).

Plates 31–2. Wolfgang Seidl, autograph copy of his poem *Tristia fata boni* in D-Mbs Clm 18688, fol. 9r–v (with kind permission).

# 1. A subitanea et improvisa morte

SC M 1

# 2. Assumpta est Maria in caelum

SC M 7

Do Do . . num,

# 3. Quinque Salutationes Domini Nostri Jesu Christi

Salutatio prima: Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Verbum Patris Salutatio secunda: Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Laus Angelorum Salutatio tertia: Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Lumen caeli Salutatio quarta: Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Splendor Patris Salutatio quinta: Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Vita dulcis

SC M 8

 - - Ver -

mo. -

DTÖ 163.1

flos

et fru - - ctus Vir - - gi - nis,

DTÖ 163.1

be Rex al be be = - -

di

oo

0

ager

. . . . . . . bis, bis, no - bis. -

# 4. \*Ave, sanctissima Maria (attributed)

2.p. Tu es singularis Virgo pura 3.p. Ora pro nobis Jesum 4.p. Tuum dilectum filium

SC \*M 11 attr.

DTÖ 163.1

li - -

# (con�ictin� ascriptions) 5. Beati omnes qui timent Dominum (i)

2.p. Filii tui sicut novellae olivarum

SC M 12 con�.

#


°

*14*

&

&

&

?

¢

am bu - -lant, qui am bu - -lant in vi is - e - - - - ius. La -

<sup>w</sup>™ ˙ w w <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › › › <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>

˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ w <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ w ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙

am bu - - lant, qui am bu - -lant in vi is - e - - - ius. La -

DTÖ 163.1

˙ ˙ w ∑ Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> w ∑ ∑ Ó ˙

qui am bu - -lant in vi is - e ius, - in vi is - e

‹ am bu - - lant in vi is - <sup>e</sup> - - ius.

(con�ictin� ascriptions)

5. Beati omnes qui timent Dominum (i)

2.p. Filii tui sicut novellae olivarum

<sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup> w w › w w › ›

› › w › › w ›

Be - a - ti o - - mnes qui ti - - - - - -



™ ™

™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

∑ w w w › w w › w™ ˙

› w w › w w w w™ ˙ ›

Be - a - ti o - - mnes qui ti - - ment


™ ™

™ ™ ™

™ ™

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>

› w w ∑ w

™ ™

˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙


™ ™ ™ ™

% <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ›

™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™


Do

Do - mi - num, *Do*

°

&

& ∑ ∑ œ œ ∑ ∑∑ ∑ ∞¶

&

?∑ œ œ ∑∑ ∞¶

‹ Be

™ ™ ™ ™

‹ ment Do - mi - num,

∑ œ œ ∑ ∞¶

œ œ ∞¶

Be

¢

ment Do

°

&

&

&

?

*7*

D

Ct

T

B

¢

°

*42*

&

&

?

& Ú

be ne - ti

¢

be - - a - tus es, be a - - tus es,

b

‹ be ne - ti - - bi e rit, - ti

b

et be ne - ti - - bi e

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ › › <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙

bi

˙ ˙ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> › › <sup>Ó</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ›™

w Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ›™

DTÖ 163.1

3 - - - - - e

*et be ne* - *ti bi* - , et be ne -




# ™

™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

∞¶

qui

SC M 12 con�.

™ ™ ™ ™

25

™ ™ ™ ™ - - - - ment

qui ti - - -

mi

#

di Si - - on, ex


# 6. Beati omnes qui timent Dominum (ii)

2.p. Benedicat tibi Dominus ex Sion

atus qui be - a

U rit, e - - -

Ec be ho mo

Is ra

7. Christe, qui lux es

SC M 15


# 8. \*Collegerunt pontifices

2.p. Unus autem ex ipsis

SC \*M 17

no-strum lo et gen et -- gen --

e ce ce - rent, fut - ter - fin - ter - fir rent ce ce ca rent e um.

# 9. Completi sunt dies Mariae

SC M 18

um su su su - pri - 


˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> w Ó ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup>

<sup>E</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ∑ Ó ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>


∑ › w w w w w w w w w

` ™ ™ ™

˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙™ œ w ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>

<sup>E</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> w Ó ˙ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙

› ∑ › w w w › w Ó w ˙ ˙ ˙

<sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> w w ∑ Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙



™ ] #


pri mo - - ge - - - - ni - tum,


™ ™ ™ ™


™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

w w › w w › w w ›

°

*21*

&

& ‹

?

Ú

um su um -

‹ tum, pri

™ ™ ™

& ™

& ™

‹ - - *re* - *ret, pa* - - - - *re*

�


‹ - *um, � li*

™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™ Ú

#

¢

°

*28*

&

&

?

¢

°

*14*

&

&

& ‹

?


Ú

‹ - - - vit, �e - - - - - vit et di

¢

# 10. Cum aegrotasset Job

2.p. Videte, omnes populi

SC M 24

™ ™ ™ ™ -

53

™ ™ ™ ™



<sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup>

˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ w ∑ <sup>w</sup> ˙ w ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup>

DTÖ 163.1


�e - - - - - - - - - vit et

› › <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › › <sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup>

et di xit: - no - -


™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™


sunt, ci me i i ver- mes sunt, \_ me ro a

di -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------bre - vi - a - bun - tur, bre -

ર્ન્ડ

9

DTÖ 163.1

11. Da pacem, Domine (i)

SC M 25

est, non \_\_ est, non \_ est, qui - a \_\_ \_ non \_

# 12. De profundis clamavi (i)

SC M 28

13. Descendi in hortum nucum (i)

SC M 30

vi po cum ut

con

Re - ver te

# 14. Deus, in adiutorium meum intende

2.p. Exultent et laetentur

SC M 32

'Eu

ge,

eu

ge,

0

di-cunt

qui

ris, Do - mi - ne, ne, ne mo - re

Ad iu- tor- me us-

<sup>E</sup> œ œ › ∑ ∑ w w w w w ∑ Ó ˙

›™ <sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>∑</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙

Ad iu- tor- me us-

‹ Ad iu- tor- me us- et li be- ra- tor- me us- es

› Ó ˙ w w w w ∑ ∑ Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ w

∑ w w w w w Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ w w

Ú

˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙

˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ∑ Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ Ó Ó ˙ ˙ ˙

<sup>w</sup> ∑ ∑ Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> › <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙

‹ ra tor- me us- es tu; Do mi- ne,- ne mo - ris,- re Do mi- ne,-

mi ne,- ne mo - re - - - - - - - ris, Do mi- ne,- ne mo - - re

<sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>™ <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙

˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ › <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>

‹ ne mo - ris,- re Do mi- ne,- ne, Do mi- ne,- ne mo -

Ú

Ú

et li be- ra- tor- me us- es tu;


Ú Ú

Ú Ú Ú

Do mi- ne,- ne mo -

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

Do mi- ne,- ne mo - ris,- re Do mi- ne,- ne mo - - re

<sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>

et

73

et li be- -

# (attributed) 15. \*Dies est laetitiae

SC \*M 33 attr.

75

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™



*gi*


#



™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™ #

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™


°

&

&

&

?

‹ *ti ae* -


™ ™ ™ ™ ™ ™ ™ ™


*in or tu* - *re* - *ga*

‹ *sit ho di* - - *<sup>e</sup> de ven* - *tre vir gi* - - *na*

*di* - - *e de ven* - *tre vir gi* - - *na*

*7*

¢

°

*14*

&

&

&

?

¢

°

*131*

& ‹

&

?

& ™

™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

Ad iu- tor- me us-

li be- ra- tor- me us- es tu; Do mi- ne,- ne mo - re

‹ tu; Do mi- ne,- ne mo - ris,- re

‹ re ris,- Do mi- ne,- ne mo - ris,- re

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ›

ris, Do mi- ne,- ne mo - ris,- re

˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ›

¢

°

*138*

&

&

&

? Ú

¢

°

*144*

&

&

&

?

w › w w w w › w ∑ w w w

› <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w <sup>∑</sup> w w <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>

™ ™ ™ ™

DTÖ 163.1

<sup>Ó</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>

*nam pro* - *ces* - *sit ho di* - - *e de ven* - *tre vir*

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w <sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup>

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w <sup>∑</sup> w w

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ∑ Ó ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup>

DTÖ 163.1

% ∑ Ó ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>

‹ *ho di* - - *<sup>e</sup> de ven* - *tre vir gi* - - *na* - - - *li pu er* -

*in or tu* - *re* - - *ga* - *li, nam pro* - *ces* - - *sit ho* - -

‹ ae *in or tu* - *re* - *ga* - - *li, nam pro* - *ces* - *sit*

16. Dum steteritis ante reges

SC M 34

qua aut quid \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ ta

0-

0

I

9:0

P

P

# 17. Ecce concipies et paries filium

# 2.p. Hic erit magnus

SC M 35

pi pa et --es

DTÖ 163.1


0 0 vo vo - ca - bi - tur. vo - ca - bi - tur.

78

SC M 36

DTÖ 163.1

DTÖ 163.1

DTÖ 163.1

19. Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem (ii)

SC M 37

DTÖ 163.1

# 20. Ecce quam bonum

2.p. Quoniam illic mandavit Dominus

SC M 38

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ - - - - - - -

> ™ ™ ™ ™ - - - num et

ha bi- ta- - re


™ ™ ™ ™



°

& ‹

&

?

& Ú Ú Ú

Ú Ú

‹ - - - dum,

*7*

¢

°

*14*

&

&

&

?

¢

°

*23*

&b

& ‹

& ‹

?b

b

b

quem Jo an-

quem Jo an-

ex cla- ma-

™ ™ ™ ™ - - - - - - nes

™ ™ ™ ™ - - - - nes vi

nes, Jo an- - - - - - - vi nes


ex cla- ma-

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

&b Ú

b

ma - - - - - - di bat,

™ ™ ™ ™

#




bat di cens,>- 'Ec

nes, Jo an- - - - - - - nes vi dens-

ex cla-

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙™

<sup>Ó</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ w <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙™

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙™

<sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> wb ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙

<sup>e</sup> œ w ˙ w › w w ˙ ˙™ œ w ˙ w › w

<sup>e</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w w ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w

<sup>e</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › w

˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> wb › w <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> wb › w

<sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup>™ ˙™ œ w ˙ § <sup>∑</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>

w Ó ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › ∑ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>

<sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> wb ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙

<sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ›

cla- ma-

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™





™ ™ ™ ™

vi dens-

™ ™ ™ ™

89

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™ -



™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™





cla- ma- -

b b



#


b

™ ™ ™ ™

b

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™

™ ™ ™ ™



b

™ ™ ™ ™






¢

°

*30*

& ‹

& ‹

?b

b

b

¢

°

*37*

&b

& ‹

& ‹

?b

b

b

b

™ ™ ™ ™


™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™

> ™ ™ ™ ™

bi- ta-


<sup>∑</sup> › <sup>w</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup>

ce- quam bo

™ ™ ™

ec - - quam bo ce - - num et

™ ™ ™ ™

bi- ta- - re fra

™ ™

Ec

˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ ›™ <sup>∑</sup> › <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> › <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙

˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>∑</sup> › <sup>w</sup> ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ <sup>Ó</sup> ˙

Ec

™ ™ ™ ™


et quam iu cun- - - - - - dum

‹ num et quam iu cun- - - - - ha dum

quam iu cun- dum,- et quam iu cun- dum- ha

™ ™ ™ ™

DTÖ 163.1

<sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> ˙ › <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ w w

<sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ › <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>

˙ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>w</sup> › <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ w w w <sup>w</sup>

˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>Ó</sup> ˙ ˙ ˙ <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup> <sup>w</sup>™ ˙ w w <sup>Ó</sup> ˙™ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> ˙ ˙

DTÖ 163.1

‹ quam iu cun- - - - - - - - dum ha bi- ta- - re fra tres-

Ec et quam iu - cun - - -

bo bo ce quam - num, num ec - -

et quam iu-cun dum, et quam iu-cun - - - - - dum, iu -

\*터=브·+브

in cu et sae

 A rum. men. -

num, ec ce quam bo num et quam iu-cun

# 21. Egregie Dei martyr, Sebastiane

SC M 39

DTÖ 163.1

22. Festum nunc celebre

SC M 41

nit \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ con - ci - pa - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ri - - - - ter, tum, an -

0

0

pti -

I

ni

DTÖ 163.1

# 23. Gaude, Dei Genitrix

2.p. Virgo, tu sola

SC M 43

Ge trix. ni

De - - i Ge -

DTÖ 163.1

24. Hic accipiet benedictionem

SC M 46

SC M 47


[Versus 20–26]


et nunc, et sem

SC \*M 48 attr.

142

nis, qui con sus sus es tror ver v re

DTÖ 163.1

DTÖ 163.1

\*ロ・=ロ・+ロ・+ロ・

142

e

in

**144 145**

‹

*e o* -


*\* = +* § ›™ ›

# CRITICAL APPAR ATUS

#### **EDITORIAL CONVENTIONS**

Te goal of the editors is to present the compositions of Ludwig Senf in a practical critical edition. All sources transmitting Senf's works have been taken into account, and principal sources have been designated for each composition based on an evaluation of several factors, including completeness, accuracy, and dating. Te readings found in these sources form the basis for this edition. Variations in the sources that depart from the edition are catalogued in the critical reports.

Te editorial benchmarks set by the New Josquin Edition (NJE) have served as an important starting point for this edition, which is designed to be used in conjunction with Stefan Gasch and Sonja Tröster, *Ludwig Senf (c.1490– 1543): A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works and Sources*, 2 vols., Épitome musical (Turnhout, 2019; henceforth: SC, for Senf Catalogue). In order not to constrain the picture of Senf's compositional output or the sixteenth-century reception of his music, works that survive only in fragmentary form have also been edited, as well as compositions of doubtful or conficting attribution. Te titles of works considered doubtful by the authors of the SC are marked with an asterisk. Te label 'conficting ascriptions' means that a composition is ascribed in contemporaneous sources not only to Senf, whereas compositions later attributed to Senf by scholars are labelled as 'attributed'. Works considered misattributed are described in the SC but not included in the edition. Te four volumes of motets of the New Senf Edition (NSE) are organised according to scoring and structured alphabetically.

#### **On the Edition**

Te editors strive to present a modern edition that preserves some visual aspects of the original sixteenth-century notation. Voices are designated D (discantus), Ct (contratenor), T (tenor), and B (bassus); additional voices are named according to the principal source and therefore not standardised. When sources assign alternative names, these names are indicated in the critical reports. A prefatory staf indicates the original clefs and key signatures in the principal source. At the beginning of each section or *pars* of an edited composition, the range of each voice is provided.

Obvious mistakes apart, note values given in the principal source are transcribed without alteration in the edition, as are the original mensuration or proportion signs. With the exception of *breves*, *longae*, *maximae*, and chant notation, modern note shapes are used. Perfect breves and longs are notated with a dot. In *tempus perfectum*, dotted longs are thus not distinguishable optically from perfect longs. Imperfect longs (not dotted in the edition) can equal the value of either two (imperfect) breves or a dotted breve plus breve. Since the latter case defes the limitations of modern notation, the exact value is indicated in a footnote. Final notes of compositions or sections are always rendered as *longae* and imply indeterminate duration.

A combination of normal and dotted barlines is used in the edition. Te dotted barline appears whenever the note value exceeds the length of the measure. Te music sometimes implies the need to bar one or more voices diferently; in those cases, all voices are numbered by measure together according to the smallest measure unit, rather than numbered individually.

Ligatures in the principal source are indicated by solid brackets (┏━┓) above those notes that are grouped together in the ligature.

Coloration (the blackening of notes), including socalled *minor color*, is indicated with corner brackets (┏ ┓).

For compositions arranged as *alternatim* settings, plainchant from late ffteenth- or sixteenth-century sources has been provided for the unset portions.

# Text

Te text of each motet is based on the version of the text given in the principal source. It has been standardised according to Neo-Latin orthography and modern liturgical sources. Proper names and *nomina sacra* are capitalised. If no source transmitting the composition includes a text, the edition follows, when available, a standard version of the text based on the incipit or title. Textual repetitions indicated in the source by signs of repetition (*ij*) are written out and placed in angle brackets; missing text is supplied in italics as needed.

For motets combining Latin and German texts, a standardised version of the German text based on the principal source is used in the edition. Te original German orthographies as found in the sources are included in the critical reports.

Although diferences in texts for individual voices may occur in the principal source, such as a difering word, verb tense, or orthography, the text in this edition is rendered the same for all voices. In cases where individual phrases are not included in a certain voice for apparent compositional reasons, ellipses are used to represent the missing text. Textual discrepancies (apart from alternative spellings) are catalogued in the critical reports.

Senf's tenure at the Munich court chapel coincides with the publication of the *Scintille di musica* (Brescia: Lodovico Britannico, 1533) by Giovanni Maria Lanfranco, whose discussion of singing text with music formed the basis for later sixteenth-century expansions on this topic by Giosefo Zarlino and Gaspar Stoquerus. Prescriptions outlined by these theorists, though useful to the editors, are often contradicted by the sources transmitting Senf's music. One occasionally fnds, for example, syllables assigned to proscribed semiminims, fnal syllables assigned to medial notes of phrases, repeated notes sung to the same syllable, or various text underlay possibilities across a large intervallic leap. Among the most persuasive testimonies to the disparities that can occur between theoretical prescription and performance practice are the Munich choirbooks used in the preparation of this edition. Teir careful alignment of text and notes provides a valuable window on how texts were sung by the Munich court chapel, and thus points to the kind of performance practices Senf would personally have known, despite any theoretical advocacy to the contrary.

Tus, wherever available, text underlay is transcribed as it appears in the designated principal source. In those cases where sources do not provide consistent underlay or do not align text and notation in a manner familiar to the modern reader, the editors have adhered to a few basic principles in deciding how to underlay the text. Tese principles are based on rules described by sixteenth-century music theorists, patterns of text underlay in other contemporaneous musical sources, and recent musicological study. Among the most fundamental are:


When sources and theorists do not ofer clear guidance, the editors take into account the accentual aspects of the language. In his colloquy on Latin and Greek pronunciation, Erasmus stresses the importance of teaching correct pronunciation to the youngest of students, so they might unlearn the bad habits of vernacular languages and gain an understanding of Latin syllabic quantities. Such concerns would have been a pedagogical preoccupation at the Latin schools where Senf's music was sung. In making decisions about text underlay, the editors have found singing the music especially instructive. We hope that paying attention to the sounding qualities of the text will help us shed the donkey's ears Erasmus laments among so many scholars deaf to the nightingale's song.

#### Literature consulted:


#### Accidentals and *musica fcta*

Accidentals that appear in the principal source are placed in front of the notes. Cautionary accidentals are not included in the edition but are documented in the critical reports. Editorial accidentals, applied according to the rules of *musica fcta*, are always placed above the relevant notes and apply only to these.

Te use of *musica fcta*—in the sense of accidentals not notated in the source but supplied by the performer—is roughly guided by three basic rules transmitted in contemporary theoretical writings (frst compiled by Edward Lowinsky in 1964):


Te purpose of the frst rule is to avoid false perfect intervals (diminished, augmented) in the harmonic sense. In the NSE, the second rule involves raising the leading note in cadential formulae. Te last rule is applied to avoid melodic tritones.

*Musica fcta* is always dependent on context, and more than one choice may be possible. Apart from the question of how closely the above-mentioned rules were followed, problems with *musica fcta* often arise in passages where the rules confict with one another. In general, the editors weigh considerations of melodic principles, note values, and simultaneously sounding intervals in applying *musica fcta*, thereby avoiding excessively stark dissonances without smoothing out all acoustic delicacies. In cases where the use of *fcta* is more arguable, the editorial accidentals appear in brackets. *Musica fcta* is also provided in motets with missing voices, albeit more sparingly, since it is often less certain where it should be supplied.

Literature consulted:


#### **On the Critical Reports**

Detailed information on the individual pieces and sources that transmit Senf's compositions is provided in the SC. Tis information includes descriptions of all the sources with remarks on their physical make-up, dating, and provenance, along with citations of secondary literature relevant to each source.

In regard to individual works, the following information is provided in the SC and therefore not reproduced here:


Te critical reports document the transmission of each composition and provide the following information:


• a list of all known sources, including intabulations. Each source is designated by an editorially-assigned siglum based on the location of the manuscript, the name of the printer or, for music treatises, the author. Te numbering in the sigla is based on the sources used in a particular volume and thus difers from volume to volume. Original numberings of compositions in the sources as well as foliation or pagination, if applicable, are indicated. Numberings given in square brackets are taken from the secondary literature listed in the general list of sources (pp. 159–64). Voices are designated according to the source and abbreviated. Voice designations that deviate from the principal source are described according to their relationship to the edition (for example, 'D2=V', where 'D2' would be the voice designation in the source and 'V' would be the voice designation in the edition). If the voices are not named within a source that comprises partbooks, the voices are designated according to the labels of the partbooks. In cases where voice designations deviate from the labels in their partbooks, the diference between partbook label and internal voice designation is clarifed (i.e. 'A2 in V'). Te composer ascription found in the source is provided in italic text; the abbreviation 'anon.' indicates that no attribution is present. When the source is a set of partbooks, the attribution is derived from the tenor (unless stated otherwise).

For example, the entry:

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 46], no. 45 (D, T, B), *LS*, Ct missing, text in T and B, text incipit in D

indicates that a composition in Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek MS 81/2 (abbreviated in the relevant volume as **Zwi2**), a manuscript set of partbooks, is numbered in the source as 45, but assigned number 46 in Gasch 2013b (as would be indicated in the general list of sources of that volume). Tis source includes neither foliation nor pagination. Te surviving partbooks are labelled discantus, tenor, and bassus. Te contratenor partbook is missing. In the tenor partbook, the composition is attributed to 'LS'. Te tenor and bassus partbooks provide full text underlay for the composition, whereas the discantus transmits only a text incipit.

In most cases, one complete extant copy of a print has been consulted for the edition and is identifed by the library's RISM siglum.


Te section titled 'Variant Readings' ofers a detailed comparison of all sources of a composition with the exception of intabulations. As an intabulation is an arrangement of a composition that often has too many deviations to document, variants in these sources are not included. In the case of compositions transmitted in only one source, the label 'Critical Notes' is used in place of 'Variant Readings'. Any deviations from the edition are listed in this section, which is subdivided into the following categories:

Voice designations Clefs Staf signatures Mensuration and proportion signs Canonic devices, directions, and/or non-verbal signs Variants in pitch and rhythm Accidentals Coloration Ligatures Textual variants and text placement

All musical variants are documented in the following format:


For example, the entry:

$$\begin{array}{ccc} \text{28}\_1 & & \text{D} & \text{Reg}^4 & \text{Sb Mi} \\ \end{array}$$

would mean that the frst notational sign in measure 28 of the discantus in the edition is subdivided into a semibreve followed by a minim in the manuscript **Reg4**.

Te entry:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc} \text{47}\_2 & & \text{B} & & \text{Gr} & & \text{Sb-e} \\ \end{array}$$

indicates, that contrary to the edition, the second sign of the bassus in measure 47 reads as a semibreve on *e* in the print **Gr**. (Pitches are given according to the scheme that designates middle C as *c*1, the octave lower as *c*, and the octave higher as *c*2.)

An attempt to catalogue all diferences in text underlay would yield an unwieldy amount of data beyond the practical scope of documentation. Terefore, only variations in phrase underlay considered signifcant are recorded. Texts are transcribed according to the spelling used in the edition.

A typical entry might appear as follows:

32₃–38₂ T **Lei1** *quia manducabis, manducabis*

Te frst element in the row defnes the outer boundaries of the phrase, which, in this case, lasts from the third notational sign of measure 32 up to and including the second sign of measure 38. In this passage, the text underlay in the tenor partbook of the manuscript **Lei1**, contrary to the edition, is 'quia manducabis, manducabis'.

Any further information regarding either the composition, its transmission, and/or the sources is recorded in the section 'Remarks'.

#### **GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS**


#### **BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ABBREVIATIONS**


# **RISM SIGLA OF LIBRARIES**


# **SOURCES** (Library sigla are cited according to RISM)

A. Manuscripts







# C. Teoretical Writings



## D. Chant sources


# **BIBLIOGRAPHY**







# **CRITICAL REPORTS**

# **1.** *A subitanea et improvisa morte* **(SC M 1)**

## **Text**

Te text traditionally forms part of a series of petitions to the Lord in the Litany of Saints.

A subitanea et improvisa morte libera nos, Domine. From sudden and unexpected death deliver us, O Lord.

# **Cantus firmus**

Te opening of the motet resembles a standard recitation formula for the Litany of Saints, as does the motif accompanying 'libera nos, Domine'. Te following excerpt from the litany provided in the *Exemplar in modum accentuandi* (1513), fol. 67r , ofers one such example. Senf's setting retains the recitation formula up until its pitch change at the end of 'improvisa' as well as the descending tetrachord on 'libera nos'.

#### **Unique Source**

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 43], no. 42 (D, T, B), *Ludo: Senfi*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

# **Critical Notes**


#### **Remarks**

Te discantus is the frst voice to sing the complete text. Tis may be the reason why the text underlay for this voice replaces 'nos' with 'me' in its frst statement of the text only.

#### **2.** *Assumpta est Maria in caelum* **(SC M 7)**

#### **Text**

Tis text is an antiphon sung for the Feast of the Assumption of Mary (15 August).

Assumpta est Maria in caelum: gaudent angeli, laudantes benedicunt Dominum.

Mary has been taken up into heaven; the angels rejoice, and bless God with songs of praise.

## **Cantus firmus**

Te setting is based on a version of the antiphon similar to the one found in the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 196r–v. Senf sets the cantus frmus as a quasi-canon in the two lower voices. Te only deviation from the chant melody as found in the *Antiphonarius* (1519) is at 'benedicunt', where the ligature in Senf's setting is shifted to the second syllable.

#### **Principal Source**

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 59], no. 56 (D, T, B), *LS*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

# **Other Source**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 62], pp. 246–7 ([D, Ct, T, B]), anon., text incipit in all voices

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Reg4** is the earlier of the two sources (Birkendorf 1994), but it shares some of its repertoire with **Zwi2**, a source that possibly originated in Zwickau in the 1530s (Gasch 2013b). Tere are only a few minor diferences between the transmission of this motet in these two sources as catalogued in the brief list of variant readings. Although incomplete, the version of the motet found in **Zwi2** includes full text underlay for its three surviving voices. Te variants in **Zwi2** also accord well with the text setting, and therefore this source has been chosen as principal source. **Reg4** has been used to complete the contratenor part.

### **Variant Readings**


#### **3.** *Quinque Salutationes Domini Nostri Jesu Christi* **(SC M 8)**

#### **Text**

Te text set to music in this cycle is a devotional prayer to Jesus. Te text follows the version in the *Tesauro spirituale* (Milan: Ulrich Scinzenzeler, 3.12.1494), sig. p[1]r–v, a book of prayers by the Franciscan friar Bernardino Busti. Te Franciscan friary of St. Antonius, situated in direct vicinity to the ducal residence, had a close relationship with the court and therefore may have played a role in Wilhelm IV's commission of this setting.

#### *Salutatio prima*

Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Verbum Patris, Filius Virginis, Agnus Dei, Salus mundi, Hostia sacra, Verbum caro factum, Fons pietatis.

*Salutatio secunda* Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Laus Angelorum, Gloria Sanctorum, Visio pacis, Deitas integra, verus homo, fos et fructus Virginis Matris.

*Salutatio tertia* Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Lumen caeli, Pretium mundi, Gaudium nostrum, Panis Angelorum, Cordis iubilus, Rex et Sponsus virginitatis.

*First Salutation* Hail, Lord Jesus Christ, blessed King, Word of the Father, Son of the Virgin, Lamb of God, Salvation of the world, Sacred sacrifce, Word made fesh, Fount of piety.

*Second Salutation* Hail, Lord Jesus Christ, blessed King, Praise of the Angels, Glory of the Saints, Vision of peace, Unscathed deity, True man, Flower and Progeny of the Virgin Mother.

*Tird Salutation* Hail, Lord Jesus Christ, blessed King, Light of heaven, Ransom of the world, Our joy, Bread of the Angels, Jubilation of the heart, King and Spouse of virginity.

*Salutatio quarta* Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Splendor Patris, Princeps pacis, Ianua caeli, Panis vivus, Virginis partus, Vas puritatis.

*Salutatio quinta* Ave, Domine Jesu Christe, Rex benedicte, Vita dulcis, Veritas perfecta, Praemium nostrum, Caritas summa, Fons amoris, Dulcedo et Pax durabilis, Requies nostra, Vita perennis: miserere nobis.

# *Fourth Salutation* Hail, Lord Jesus Christ, blessed King, Refection of the Father, Prince of peace, Gate of heaven, Living bread, Ofspring of the Virgin, Vessel of purity.

*Fifth Salutation* Hail, Lord Jesus Christ, blessed King, Sweet life, Perfect truth, Our reward, Supreme charity, Fount of love, Permanent sweetness and peace, Our rest, Eternal life: have mercy on us.

# **Cantus firmus**

Te motet cycle is not based on a single plainchant. Rather, keywords from the text are combined with quotations from relevant liturgical melodies, such as the melody of *Asperges me* in each voice at the beginning of the frst four *partes*; a *Gloria* intonation in mm. 80–2 (B), 82–4 (D), 84–6 (T); and an intonation from the *Requiem* introit in mm. 305–7 (B), 306–8 (T), etc. (Lodes 2014).

# **Unique Source**

**Mun1** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 10, [no. 1], fols. 1<sup>r</sup> –18<sup>r</sup> (D, Ct, T, B), *Lud: Sennf.*, text in all voices

#### **Source Evaluation**

Te manuscript **Mun1**, a choirbook from the court chapel of Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria, is the only extant source for this motet cycle. Fol. 1<sup>r</sup> serves as a title page with the following dedicatory text:

*QVinq*[*ue*] *Salutationes D*[*omi*]*ni n*[*nost*]*ri | Hiesu Chr*[*ist*]*i. Ex Illustrissimi | principis & Domini. D*[*omi*]*ni | Vuilhelmi Comitis Palatini | Rheni. Vtriusq*[*ue*] *Bauariae | Ducis, &c. Comissione, | A Ludouico Sennphlio, | Eiusde*[*m*] *Illust*[*rissimo*]*. D*[*omino*] *Mu=|sico Intonatore hu=|milimo. excusae | Dicateq*[*ue*]*, Sum*[*m*]*is | et studio et | obedie*[*n*]*tia*.

'Te Five Greetings to our Lord Jesus Christ. Composed at the behest of the most celebrated Duke and Lord, Lord Wilhelm IV, Count Palatine of the Rhenish Palatinate and Duke of both Bavarias, etc., by Ludwig Senf, humble *musicus intonator* to his most famous Lord, executed and dictated with the highest diligence and obedience.'

Te dedication thus indicates that the motet cycle was commissioned by Senf's employer, Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria. Te only other motet we are certain to have been personally commissioned by Wilhelm is *Mater digna Dei / Ave, sanctissima Maria* (SC M 55; NSE 3.10), which can be viewed as a Marian counterpart to the *Salutationes*. According to Fétis 1844: 15, the *Quinque Salutationes* were printed in Nuremberg in 1526 by Hieronymus Formschneider. Tis information is repeated in Ambros 1893: 415, Kroyer 1903: XLV, and Bente 1968: 69. Te print, however, never existed, as has been demonstrated by Gustavson 1998 and Gustavson 2013 (on the cycle itself, see Lodes 2014; on the context of the cycle, see Gasch 2016).

#### **Critical Notes**



Textual variants and text placement 80₂–81₁ D repetition of -*gelorum* (at page turn) 288–289₁ Ct *dulcedo*

# **4.** *\*Ave, sanctissima Maria* **(SC \*M 11 attr.)**

# **Text**

Te text is a prayer that circulated widely in books of hours dating from the 1470s, where it is often accompanied by a rubric identifying the author as Pope Sixtus IV (1414–84). As stated in many of these sources, Sixtus granted an indulgence of 11,000 years for recitation of the prayer before an image of Mary *in sole* (see Bäumker 1883: no. 11; Blackburn 1999).


# **Cantus firmus**

& ‹ b

& ‹ b

Te setting of this Marian antiphon paraphrases a version of the plainchant similar to this one in the *Responsoria* (1509), fol. 122r–v. For a discussion of other settings of this chant, including Senf's fve-voice *Mater digna Dei / Ave, sanctissima Maria* (SC M 55; NSE 3.10), see Blackburn 1999.

œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

nos ab o - - - - mni - bus ma - - - lis.

<sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup>

# **Unique Source**

& ‹ b

& ‹ b

& ‹ b

& ‹ b

& ‹ b

mun °

A °

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 60], pp. 232–7 ([D, Ct, T, B]); T of 3.p. derives from D, T of 4.p. derives from Ct; anon., text incipit in all voices


<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup>

Tu es sin gu - - la - ris Vir - go pu - - ra. Tu con ce - - pi - sti Je - sum

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

si ne - pec ca - - to. Tu pe pe - - ri - sti Cre- a - to - - rem et Sal- va - to - - rem

°

<sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

°


du - bi - to. O - - ra

Re - gi - na cae li, - Por - - ta pa ra - - di - - si, Do


# **Critical Notes**



# **Remarks**


## **5.** *Beati omnes qui timent Dominum* **(i) (SC M 12 confl.)**

# **Text**

Ps. 127:1–6. Te motet sets the complete text of Ps. 127 in two *partes*. Tis psalm was often set to music; RISM 15691, for example, is an entire volume published by Clemens Stephani of *Beati omnes* settings, which includes Senf's *Beati omnes* (ii); see no. 6 (SC M 13).

#### 1.p.

Beati omnes qui timent Dominum, qui ambulant in viis eius. Labores manuum tuarum quia manducabis, beatus es, et bene tibi erit. Uxor tua sicut vitis abundans in lateribus domus tuae.

# 2.p.

Filii tui sicut novellae olivarum in circuitu mensae tuae. Ecce sic benedicetur homo qui timet Dominum.Benedicat tibi Dominus ex Sion, et videas bona Jerusalem omnibus diebus vitae tuae, et videas flios fliorum tuorum, pacem super Israel.

1.p.

Blessed are all they that fear the Lord, that walk in his ways. For thou shalt eat the labours of thy hands, blessed art thou, and it shall be well with thee. Ty wife is as a fruitful vine on the sides of thy house.

2.p.

Ty children are as olive plants round about thy table. Behold: thus shall the man be blessed that feareth the Lord. May the Lord bless thee out of Zion, and mayst thou see the good things of Jerusalem all the days of thy life, and mayst thou see thy children's children and peace upon Israel. (adapted from *RDC*)

# **Cantus firmus**

Te tenor line in mm. 1–19 follows Psalm tone VII. It matches the model given in Michael Koßwick, *Compendiaria Musice artis aeditio* (Leipzig: Wolfgang Stöckel, 1516) (D-KIu), sig. B2r:

# **Principal Source**

**Gr** RISM 15204 (D-Mbs), fols. 263v–271r ([D, Ct, T, B]), *L. S.*, text in all voices

# **Other Sources**


### **Source Evaluation**

**Gr** has been chosen as principal source for this psalm motet because of the composer's involvement in the print. Te versions in the other manuscript sources for this motet difer only slightly from the print, suggesting their dependence on this or a derivative source. Nevertheless, **Lei1** transmits signifcant variations in text underlay (see also NJE 15, CC: 15–16).

### **Variant Readings**





Textual variants and text placement

Te text underlay of the edition follows the principal source **Gr**. Signs of repetition are not included in this source; rather, passages where repeated text could have been supplied are simply left blank. In contrast to the compositors of **Gr**, the scribe of **Lei1** tends to align the last syllables of phrases with the fnal notes of musical phrases.


#### **Remarks**


#### **6.** *Beati omnes qui timent Dominum* **(ii) (SC M 13)**

#### **Text**

For the text and translations, see this volume, no. 5 (SC M 12). Like *Beati omnes* (i), the present setting divides the text of Ps. 127 into two *partes*, albeit diferently. Verses 1–4 of the psalm are set in the *prima pars*, and verses 5–6, which begin with the text 'Benedicat tibi Dominus', are set in the *secunda pars*.

# **Principal Source**


#### **Other Sources**


#### **Source Evaluation**

**Fo1** is possibly the earliest surviving source for this psalm motet and is the principal source. Since the positioning of rests, ligatures, clefs in discantus and bassus, and text underlay in **Erl** are in many cases identical in **Fo1**, it seems reasonable to assume that **Erl** was copied from this print. Tis impression is further reinforced by a mistake in **Fo1** at m. 15₁ in the bassus that appears in **Erl** but then was subsequently corrected in this manuscript source (this mistake is also corrected by hand in the D-Mbs exemplar of **Fo1** consulted for this edition). Te same mistake can be found uncorrected in **Ne**, another source which likewise mainly follows **Fo1**. In contrast, **Kas** and **Stu** do not transmit this mistake, and the two surviving partbooks of **Bru** accord in many instances with **Kas** and **Stu**. All three of these latter sources have individual variants in pitch and rhythm but also share many deviations from **Fo1** in respect to pitch, rhythm, clefng, and the positioning of ligatures. Tey thus seem to form a separate branch of transmission from **Fo1**, **Erl**, and **Ne**.



**Variant Readings**



# Textual variants and text placement


#### **Remarks**


#### **7.** *Christe, qui lux es* **(SC M 15)**

#### **Text**

Te earliest record of this hymn, whose authorship is uncertain, is the sixth-century monastic rule of Caesarius of Arles (*c*.470–542) (AH 51, no. 22; Hiley 2009: 71). Te hymn consists of six stanzas in its earliest sources but later came to conclude with a seventh, variable stanza based on the Lesser Doxology. Senf sets only the frst fve stanzas. Te additional sixth and seventh stanzas provided in italics below are derived from the *Psalterium Spirense* (1515), fol. 231<sup>r</sup> .

1. Christe, qui lux es et dies, noctis tenebras detegis, lucisque lumen crederis, lumen beatum praedicans.

2. Precamur, sancte Domine, defende nos in hac nocte, sit nobis in te requies, quietam noctem tribue.

3. Ne gravis somnus irruat, nec hostis nos surripiat, nec caro illi consentiens, nos tibi reos statuat.

1. Christ, who are light and day, you lift of the darkness of night, you are believed to be the light of light, proclaiming the blessed light.

2. We beg you, Holy Lord, protect us this night. Let us have rest in you; grant us a tranquil night.

3. Let not sleep fall on us as an oppressor; nor the enemy snatch us away, nor fesh, giving him its assent, make us guilty in your sight.

4. Oculi somnum capiant, cor ad te semper vigilet, dextera tua protegat famulos qui te diligunt.

5. Defensor noster aspice, insidiantes reprime, guberna tuos famulos, quos sanguine mercatus es.

6. *Memento nostri, Domine, in gravi isto corpore, qui es defensor animae, adesto nobis, Domine.*

7. *Deo Patri sit gloria eiusque soli Filio, cum Spiritu Paracleto, et nunc et in perpetuum. Amen.*

#### **Cantus firmus**

4. Tough our eyes be full of sleep, let our hearts be ever awake to you. May your right hand protect your servants who love you.

5. Look on us, our defender, suppress those that lie in ambush, and guide your servants, whom you ransomed with your blood.

6. *Remember us, O Lord, in this burdensome body; you, who are the defender of the soul, be near to us, O Lord.*

7. *Glory be to God the Father and to his only Son, with the Spirit, the Comforter, both now and evermore. Amen.* (Leofranc Holford-Strevens)

Te *Psalterium Spirense* (1515), fol. 231<sup>r</sup> , assigns this Compline hymn to the period spanning the frst to the ffth Sundays of Lent ('Ad Co[m]pletoriu[m] a d[omi]nica Inuocauit usq[ue] ad Judica'). In Senf's setting, this chant melody appears most prominently as a cantus frmus sung by the discantus in the frst stanza, as a quasi-canon between contratenor and tenor in the second stanza, and as a quasi-canon between tenor and bassus in the fourth and ffth stanzas.

lu men - cre - de - ris, lu men - be a - - tum prae di - - cans.

#### **Principal Source**

**Fo2** RISM 1538³ (D-Mbs), no. 38 (D, Ct, T, B), *Ludouicus Senf* (index T), text in all voices

#### **Other Sources**


#### **Source Evaluation**

All four sources transmitting this motet in full provide relatively accurate readings. Deviations among these sources relate principally to the extent to which *e*b and textual repetitions are recorded. Perhaps more important with regard to fliation are two ligatures absent in **Fo2** but found in the other three sources: when the bassus takes up the cantus frmus in mm. 169–201, **Reg1**, **Reg3**, and **Zwi2** all provide a ligature for this voice at mm. 172–3, and **Reg3** and **Zwi2** provide another one at mm. 195–6, both in accordance with the ligature pattern of the cantus frmus established in previous statements. **Fo2**, **Reg3**, and **Zwi2** all date from the 1530s–1540s, whereas **Reg1** was possibly notated in 1575 per the accompanying inscription found at the end of the transcription of this motet in the discantus partbook: '3. Martij. Anno Domini 1575' (fol. 35r ). Among the three earlier sources of this motet, the text underlay in **Reg3** difers most from the other sources, while **Zwi2** has deviations in the discantus at mm. 70 and 76 not transmitted in any other source. Tus, **Fo2**, which appears to be the most representative of the group, has been chosen as the principal source. **Wilphlingseder** prints the frst 13 mm. of this motet as an *exemplum sesquialteræ* in his *Erotemata musices practicae*. In this treatise, the proportion sign 3₂ is provided in place of the '3' that appears at m. 5 in the four other sources. **Wilphlingseder** also uses slashes to indicate the *sesquialtera* rhythm as groupings of three minims in duration in the contratenor, tenor, and bassus.



**8. \****Collegerunt pontifices* **(SC \*M 17)**

#### **Text**

Te text of this motet is taken from John 11:47–50, 53. Most sources transmitting Senf's motet leave out the word 'concilium', whereas **Bud**, **StG**, and **Wit** insert the text phrase 'collegerunt concilium' at the place where 'concilium' should appear. In early ffteenth-century liturgical books (e.g. *Responsoria* (1509), fols. 21v–22v ; *Graduale Pataviense* (1511), fol. 58r–v) the frst line reads 'Collegerunt pontifces et Pharisaei concilium', without a repetition of 'collegerunt'. When underlaying the tenor in **Bud** at mm. 28₃–31₂, the scribe wrote 'collegeru[n]t ponti', then crossed out the second word and wrote 'conciliu[m]' in its place.

#### 1.p.

Collegerunt pontifces et Pharisaei [concilium] et dicebant, 'Quid facimus? Quia hic homo multa signa facit. Si dimittimus eum sic, omnes credent in eum, et venient Romani et tollent nostrum locum et gentem.'

#### 2.p.

Unus autem ex ipsis, Caiphas nomine, cum esset pontifex anni illius, dixit eis, 'Vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit vobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo ut non tota gens pereat.' Ab illo ergo die cogitaverunt ut interfcerent eum.

1.p.

Te chief priests therefore and the Pharisees gathered [a council] and said: 'What do we, for this man doth many miracles? If we let him alone so, all will believe in him; and the Romans will come, and take away our place and nation.'

# 2.p.

But one of them, named Caiphas, being the high priest that year, said to them: 'You know nothing. Neither do you consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.' From that day therefore they devised to put him to death. (*RDC*)

# **Cantus firmus**

Plainchant melodies corresponding with this text are found, for instance, in the *Responsoria* (1509), fols. 21v–22v , and in the *Graduale Pataviense* (1511), fol. 58r–v. In a (para-)liturgical context the chant served as an antiphon and processional on Palm Sunday. Apart from the characteristic downward leap at the beginning, however, the melodies in this motet bear little resemblance to these forid plainchants.

# **Principal Source**

**Rh1** RISM 15388 (D-Mbs), no. 24 (D, A, T, B), anon., text in all voices

# **Other Sources**


# **Source Evaluation**

*Collegerunt pontifces* is the motet with the largest number of concordances in this volume. Te earliest source preserving all four voices, **Rh¹**, was issued from Georg Rhau's workshop in Wittenberg. A notational error in the bassus (25₁) provides conjunctive evidence for the dependency on this print of the manuscripts **Lei²**, **Reg²**, and **Ros²**. Te reading transmitted in **Reg¹**, a source copied in the 1570s and the only one to attribute the motet to Senf, could also have been derived from a version dependent on the print as it contains hardly any variants; only the error in the bassus was corrected. **Kra** is one of the earlier manuscript sources (*c*.1545) and the one with the highest number of scribal errors (a note missing at m. 68₁ in the bassus, a passage copied one tone too high at mm. 123₄–124₄ in the discantus). It was not possible to establish a clear dependency for this source, as the reading exhibits no substantive variants.

Some of the other sources, in contrast, seem to form a second strand of transmission. Closely connected are **Bud**, **StG**, and **Wit**, which share several variants and are the only ones that transmit the phrase 'collegerunt concilium'. Te interrelationship of these three sources cannot be determined with any certainty, as the contratenor is the only voice preserved in common between **Bud** and **StG**, and it is only possible to compare the tenor voices of **Bud** and **Wit**. Moreover, **StG** and **Wit** share no surviving voices in common and can only be linked via the evidence in **Bud**. **Bud** and **StG** share, for example, a slightly diferent melodic motif in the contratenor (59₂) and discantus (58₃) that more closely matches the preceding motif, as well as a later variant in the contratenor (117₂–118₁). **Bud** and **Wit** share a diferent pitch in the tenor (185₂), which would not work well with the bassus as transmitted in **Rh1**. Further evidence of a common dependency is provided by a scribal error in **Wit** (T: 69₂) amended incorrectly in **Bud**. Based on the dating and the geographical origin of the sources it can be assumed that the later manuscript **Bud** can be traced back to **Wit** or, perhaps more likely, a closely related source unknown today. A fourth source related to this strand of transmission is **Ber**, which contains some variants in common with **StG** (especially in the discantus) as well as the same conjunctive error (D: 130₁, which features a *c*² instead of *d* ²). On the other hand, the lower voices of **Ber** do not share the most signifcant variants found in **Bud** and **Wit** (e.g. m. 185 in T and B).

Te manuscripts **Dre5** und **Nur1** can only tentatively be connected with one of these two branches: both date from the second half of the sixteenth century and transmit autonomous variants. Placement of ligatures and text underlay suggest that **Dre5** should be assigned to the second strand of transmission (**Ber**, **Bud**, and **Wit**), whereas the cautionary accidental in the discantus of **Nur1** may indicate dependency on a source derived from the print.

**Rh1** was designated the principal source as it is not possible to reconstruct the fragmentary sources from the second strand of transmission. Moreover, **Rh1** transmits only a few notational errors and had a substantial impact on the further transmission of this motet. It therefore presents the version that was probably best known in the sixteenth century.

#### **Variant Readings**


1₁–2₁ T **Bud** *c*¹ T **Nur1** Mi Sm (at line break) T **Dre5** Mi-*e*¹ Mi-*d*¹ Mi-*e*¹ Ct **Nur1** Mi Sm (at line break) 6₂–₃ Ct **Bud**, **StG** Sb-*d*¹ 6₂ T **Bud** *g* Ct **Kra** erroneous *b* 7₁ T **Bud** *a* B **Kra** Sb dotted Br Ct **Bud**, **StG** 2 Mi 11₁–₂ D **Ber**, **StG** dotted Mi-*b*¹ 13₁ B **Bud** *c* T **Nur1** Mi Sm (at page turn) B **Nur1** 2 Mi (at page turn) T **Kra** erroneously *d*¹ D **Ber**, **StG** Sm-*b*¹ Sm-*a*¹

19₃–21₂ B **Bud** dotted Mi-*c*¹ Sm-*b* dotted Mi-*a* Sm-*g* Mi-*f* Sb-*e* 23₃–₄ T **Ber**, **Bud**, **Wit** Sb 24₁–₄ T **Nur1** Sb-*c*¹ 2 Mi-*c*¹ 24₃–₄ T **Dre5** Sb B **Lei2**, **Reg2**, **Rh1**, **Ros2** erroneous *e* Ct **Bud**, **StG** *c*¹ Ct **Nur1** 2 Mi (at line break) 32₁–₂ T **Kra** Mi-rest Sb-*d*¹ 35₃–₅ D **Ber**, **StG** 4 Sm-*d*¹ *e*¹ *f* ¹ *g*¹ Mi-*a*¹ 35₃–36₁ Ct **Bud**, **Kra** Sb D **StG** *c*² T **Ber** 2 Sb D **Nur1** Mi Sm (at line break) Ct **Bud**, **StG** dotted Mi-*g*¹ Sm-*e*¹ Ct **Ber** 2 Mi B **Nur1** *B* 47₂–48₁ Ct **Bud** Sb 2 Mi Sb Ct **StG** 2 Sb Ct **Kra** *f* ¹ 50₃–51₁ B **Bud** Sb Ct **Bud**, **StG** 2 Mi Ct **Bud**, **StG** dotted Mi-*g*¹ Sm-*e*¹ T **Bud** 2 Mi D **Ber**, **StG** *b*¹ Ct **Bud**, **StG** *e*¹ Ct **Reg1** *g*¹ B **Ber**, **Lei2** *b* (**Lei2** with correction mark?) B **Dre5**, **Reg1** *c*¹ B **Kra** note missing, although indicated by custos T **Bud** erroneous *b* T **Wit** erroneous *g* 76₂–₃ D **Ber**, **StG** Sb B **Kra** erroneous *e* D **Ros2** erroneously Sm T **Kra** 2 Mi D **Reg2**, **Rh1** *e*² 82₂–₃ T **Bud** Sb-*d*¹ D **Ros2** erroneously dotted (?) Ct **Nur1** 2 Sb (at page turn) B **Ros2** erroneously Mi (?) Ct **Bud**, **StG** 2 Mi Ct **StG** 2 Mi Ct **Nur1** 2 Sb (at page turn) B **Nur1** 2 Sb (at page turn) Ct **Nur1** erroneous *d*¹ T **Bud** Mi Mi-rest T **Ber**, **Bud**, **Dre5**, **Nur1**, **Ros2** *a* 117₂–118₁ Ct **Bud**, **StG** Sb-*c*¹ Mi-rest T **Bud** 2 Mi T **Ber**, **Bud**, **Wit** 2 Mi 121₂–₃ D **Dre5** Sb 121₃–₄ D **Ber**, **StG** dotted Mi-*c*² Fu-*b*¹ Fu-*c*² 122₂–₃ B **Bud** Sb D **Ber**, **StG** *g*¹ Ct **Bud** Sb Mi D **Reg2**, **Rh1**, **Ros2** Mi Sm (at line break in **Rh1**)





# **Remarks**


#### **9.** *Completi sunt dies Mariae* **(SC M 18)**

# **Text**

Te text of this Christmas antiphon paraphrases Luke 2:6–7.


### **Cantus firmus**

Although the *Antiphonarius* (1519) is useful for fnding plainchant models for Senf's compositions, its version of this antiphon for the vigil of Christmas or Christmas Day (fol. 14<sup>v</sup> ) does not seem to be the model for this setting. In this antiphoner, the plainchant opens with a downward leap of a third (*a*–*f* at 'Completi') and a stepwise progression up a third on 'primogenitum'. By employing a fourth in both places instead, Senf was apparently acquainted with another version of the chant, similar to this one from the *Antiphonarium* (1537), fol. 31v :

# **Principal Source**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 24], pp. 86–7 ([D, Ct, T, B]), *Ludouic*[*us*] *SenfL*, text in T and B, text incipit in D and Ct

### **Other Source**

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 46], no. 45 (D, T, B), *LS*, Ct missing, text in T and B, text incipit in D

#### **Source Evaluation**

As it transmits all four voices, **Reg4**, the earlier of the two sources, has been designated the principal source. Te text underlay in **Zwi2** is similar to **Reg4** with one exception: the adjective 'unigenitum' ('only begotten') appears in the bassus in place of 'primogenitum'. Both sources include only text incipits for the discantus.

### **Variant Readings**


#### **Remarks**


# **10.** *Cum aegrotasset Job* **(SC M 24)**

#### **Text**

Te text of this antiphon for the Feast of Job is based on Job 19:13–14, Isaiah 38:1, and Job 17:1 in the *prima pars* and Lamentations 1:12 in the *secunda pars*.

#### 1.p.

# Cum aegrotasset Job, fevit et dixit: noti mei et propinqui mei derelinquerunt me, cives mei vermes sunt, caro mea immutata est, dies mei breviabuntur.

#### 2.p.

Videte, omnes populi, si est dolor similis sicut dolor meus.

# 1.p.

When Job had fallen ill, he wept and said: my friends and my kinsmen have deserted me; my countrymen are worms, my fesh has changed, and my days shall be shortened.

2.p.

See, all ye people, if there be any sorrow like to my sorrow. (Leofranc Holford-Strevens; *RDC*)

# **Cantus firmus**

Te cantus frmus of the present setting, which is treated as a quasi-canon between the discantus and the tenor in the *prima pars* and carried by the tenor in the *secunda pars*, is similar to the one found in the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 136<sup>r</sup> (see below), but several melodic deviations suggest a diferent tradition. Senf's model also difers with regard to the text: where the antiphon includes the verb form 'breviantur' (present passive: 'they are shortened'), Senf's setting replaces it with 'breviabuntur' (future passive: 'they shall be shortened'), which accords with the form of the verb found in Job 17:1.

# **Unique Source**

**Mun4** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 16, [no. 8], fols. 46v–54r ([D, Ct, T, B]), *Lud: Sennf.*, text in all voices

**Critical Notes** Variants in pitch and rhythm 129 T Mx

#### **Remarks**


#### **11.** *Da pacem, Domine* **(i) (SC M 25)**

#### **Text**

& ‹

Te text of this antiphon is based on Ecclesiasticus 50:25 and 2 Ezra 4:20.

Da pacem, Domine, in diebus nostris, quia non est alius qui pugnet pro nobis, nisi tu, Deus noster.

Give peace in our days, O Lord, for there is no one else who fghts for us, except you, our God.

Da pa cem, - Do - mi - ne, in di e - - bus no stris, - qui a - non est a li - - -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

us qui pu gnet - pro no bis, - ni si - tu, De - us no ster. -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

& ‹

& ‹

# **Cantus firmus**

In the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 138<sup>v</sup> , this antiphon is assigned to the Feast of the Maccabees ('De Historia Machabeorum'), but it also served more broadly as a prayer for peace and, especially in the sixteenth century, a plea for unity within the church (Burn 2012: 151). Te chant melody is featured in Senf's setting as a relatively free quasi-canon between discantus and tenor embellished by faster-moving passages in imitation.

us qui pu gnet - pro no bis, - ni si - tu, De - us no ster. -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

Da pa cem, - Do - mi - ne, in di e - - bus no stris, - qui a - non est a li - - -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

#### **Principal Source**

& ‹

(see below),

**Cantus firmus**

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

**Unique Source**

**Critical Notes**

**Remarks**

**Text**

& ‹

& ‹

**Cantus firmus**

Variants in pitch and rhythm 129 T Mx

**11.** *Da pacem, Domine* **(i) (SC M 25)**

In the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 138<sup>v</sup>

pugnet pro nobis, nisi tu, Deus noster.

**Mun4** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 16, [no. 8], fols. 46v–54r

(Gasch 2013a). Bente's conclusion should therefore be rejected.

si est do lor - si mi - - lis sic ut - do lor - me us. -

<sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

Te text of this antiphon is based on Ecclesiasticus 50:25 and 2 Ezra 4:20.

and tenor embellished by faster-moving passages in imitation.

Da pacem, Domine, in diebus nostris, quia non est alius qui

Te cantus frmus of the present setting, which is treated as a quasi-canon between the discantus and the tenor in the *prima* 

but several melodic deviations suggest a diferent tradition. Senf's model also difers with regard to the text: where the antiphon includes the verb form 'breviantur' (present passive: 'they are shortened'), Senf's setting replaces it with 'brevia-

Cum ae - gro-tas- set Job, �e - - vit et di xit: - no - - ti me i - et pro-pin-qui

œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

me i - de - re - lin - que - runt me, ci - ves me i - ver-mes sunt, ca - ro me a -

œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

im mu - - ta - ta est, di es - me i - bre - vi - an - tur. Vi - de - te, o mnes - po pu - - li,

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

• Although **Mun4** has been damaged by ink corrosion, the notation and text underlay for this motet remain legible. • Bente assumes this motet to be one of Senf's last as **Mun4** post-dates Senf's death (Bente 1968: 343). Te Munich scriptorium was known, however, to recopy repertoire already in use by the Munich court chapel into new choirbooks

but it also served more broadly as a prayer for peace and, especially in the sixteenth century, a plea for unity within the church (Burn 2012: 151). Te chant melody is featured in Senf's setting as a relatively free quasi-canon between discantus

Da pa cem, - Do - mi - ne, in di e - - bus no stris, - qui a - non est a li - - -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

us qui pu gnet - pro no bis, - ni si - tu, De - us no ster. -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

([D, Ct, T, B]), *Lud: Sennf.*, text in all voices

, this antiphon is assigned to the Feast of the Maccabees ('De Historia Machabeorum'),

fghts for us, except you, our God.

Give peace in our days, O Lord, for there is no one else who

*pars* and carried by the tenor in the *secunda pars*, is similar to the one found in the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 136<sup>r</sup>

buntur' (future passive: 'they shall be shortened'), which accords with the form of the verb found in Job 17:1.

**Reg3** D-Rp B 211–215, [no. 16], fols. 32v–33r (D), fols. 37v–38v (A), fols. 24<sup>r</sup> –25r (T), fols. 32<sup>r</sup> –33<sup>v</sup> (B), *LS 4*, text in all voices

# **Other Source**

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 54], no. 52 (D, T, B), *L. S.*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Reg3** is the only source that transmits all four voices of this motet. With the exception of one apparent notational error (a *d*¹ instead of *c*¹ in the discantus at m. 20₁), no further scribal errors can be identifed in this source. As its text underlay and placement of accidentals are more complete than **Zwi2**, **Reg3** has been designated the principal source.

### **Variant Readings**


#### **Remarks**


### **12.** *De profundis clamavi* **(i) (SC M 28)**

#### **Text**

Tis motet sets Ps. 129:1, the frst verse only of this penitential psalm.

De profundis clamavi ad te, Domine. Out of the depths I have cried to thee, O Lord. (*RDC*)

#### **Cantus firmus**

In the *Psalterium Pataviense* (1512), fol. 84<sup>v</sup> , the short chant melody associated with this psalm verse is printed as a Vespers antiphon for 'feria quarta' ('the fourth weekday'). In Senf's setting, the chant melody appears in all extant voices, most prominently as a quasi-canon in long note values between the two lower voices in mm. 8–27. Unlike the melody found in the *Psalterium Pataviense* (1512), Senf's melody leaps to *c* at 'ad'.

# **Unique Source**

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 65], no. 62 (D, T, B), *Lude: Senftl / LS*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

# **Critical Notes**

Textual variants and text placement 37₂–40₁ D *clamamavi* (at line break)

#### **13.** *Descendi in hortum nucum* **(i) (SC M 30)**

#### **Text**

Te text of this antiphon for the Assumption or Nativity of Mary is derived from the Song of Songs 6:10, 12.

Descendi in hortum nucum ut viderem poma convallium et inspicerem si foruissent vineae et germinassent mala punica. Revertere; revertere, Sunamitis; revertere; revertere ut intueamur te!

I went down into the garden of nuts to see the fruits of the valleys and to look if the vineyards had fourished and the pomegranates budded. Return; return, O Shulammitess; return; return that we may behold thee! (adapted from *RDC*)

#### **Cantus firmus**

Te chant melody of this antiphon in the *Responsoria* (1509), fol. 119r , resembles the tenor cantus frmus found in Senf's setting, albeit with a difering ligature on the word 'Revertere'. When the tenor drops out in mm. 27–41, the discantus takes up the chant melody in faster-moving note values.

## **Principal Source**

**Zwi2** D-Z 81/2, [no. 60], no. 57 (D, T, B), *LS*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

#### **For the contratenor**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 13], pp. 30–1 ([D, Ct, T, B]), anon., with the caption *Ascendo ad patrem meum*, no text

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Reg4** is the earlier of the two sources, but assigns the title *Ascendo ad patrem meum* to this motet, whereas **Zwi2** transmits a diferent and complete text that matches the cantus frmus presented in the tenor (see Gasch 2013b: 504–5). Te title in **Reg4** possibly derives from confusion between the cantus frmus in this setting (*Descendi in hortum nucum*) and the similar monophonic chant *Ascendo ad patrem meum* (cf. *Antiphonarium Augustense* (1495), fol. 34<sup>v</sup> , where the melody of this chant likewise opens with an upward leap of a third that continues in a stepwise ascent to the upper octave from the starting pitch, which here, however, begins on *g*). **Reg4** transmits one obvious notational error (D: 10₄) and does not include text underlay. **Zwi2** was therefore chosen as principal source, while the missing contratenor part was derived from **Reg4**.

Unaware of the attributed concordance in **Zwi2**, Birkendorf nevertheless ascribed the anonymously transmitted *Ascendo ad patrem meum* in **Reg4** to Senf (Birkendorf 1994, i: 72, 207; iii: 69–70).

# **Variant Readings**


#### **14.** *Deus, in adiutorium meum intende* **(SC M 32)**

#### **Text**

Ps. 69:2–6. Tis motet sets the complete psalm, with the exception of the frst verse, which functions as a superscription to the psalm ('In fnem. Psalmus David in rememorationem, quod salvum fecerit eum Dominus'). Verses 2–4 are set in the *prima pars*, and verses 5–6 in the *secunda pars*.

### 1.p.

Deus, in adiutorium meum intende; Domine, ad adiuvandum me festina. Confundantur et revereantur qui quaerunt animam meam. Avertantur retrorsum et erubescant qui volunt mihi mala. Avertantur statim erubescentes qui dicunt mihi, 'Euge; euge.'

#### 2.p.

Exultent et laetentur in te omnes qui quaerunt te, et dicant semper, 'Magnifcetur Dominus!' qui diligunt salutare tuum. Ego vero egenus et pauper sum; Deus, adiuva me. Adiutor meus et liberator meus es tu; Domine, ne moreris.

# **Cantus firmus**

Te opening motif of Senf's motet invokes a recitation formula possibly used to intone this psalm verse in the Divine Ofce.

#### **Principal Source**

**Mun1** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 10, [no. 7], fols. 101v–108r (D, Ct, T, B), *Lud: Sennf*, text in all voices

#### **Other Sources**


# 1.p.

O God, come to my assistance; O Lord, make haste to help me. Let them be confounded and ashamed that seek my soul. Let them be turned backward and blush for shame that desire evils to me. Let them be presently turned away blushing for shame that say to me: 'Tis well, 'tis well.

#### 2.p.

Let all that seek thee rejoice and be glad in thee, and let such as love thy salvation say always, 'Te Lord be magnifed!' But I am needy and poor; O God, help me. Tou art my helper and my deliverer; O Lord, make no delay. (*RDC*)

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Mun¹**, a choirbook from the court chapel of Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria, serves as principal source for this motet. One departure from **Mun1** found in all four prints is a passage of coloration with altered rhythm that appears in m. 125 of the tenor part. **Fo¹** and **Glarean**, the two earlier printed sources, include dotted breves in the bassus at mm. 117 and 123, both of which produce a tritone with the discantus. Tese tritones are not found in **Be** and **Dressler**, but a new variant appears in these two later prints not found in the other three sources: an *f* ¹ in the tenor part at m. 12. Te absence of two ligature markings in **Be** and **Dressler** (D: 15–16 and Ct: 125) also suggests their shared fliation. Te four prints depart from **Mun1** in some aspects of text underlay, especially at the end, where approaches difer as to how often 'Domine, ne moreris' is to be repeated and how syllabic the delivery should be. In a few passages from this section (D: 160–2; Ct: 148–50 and 160–2; B: 158–61) the four prints agree in their text underlay. **Glarean** is the only source to underlay Greek letters at the end of the *prima pars* ('εὖγε' in place of 'euge' in the contratenor and bassus; see Textual variants and text placement, mm. 67–75) and transmits errors of notation not found in any other source. Although **Dressler** follows **Glarean** theoretically (including his advocacy of the twelve-mode system), he seems to have relied on another, more accurate copy of Senf's motet as his source.



#### **Remarks**

**Glarean** and **Dressler** both include this motet as an example of the Lydian mode. **Dressler** also indicates that this motet is an example of what used to be known as the ffth mode (D and B: 'Exemplum Lydii modi, ueteris quinti'; T: 'Exemplum ueteris quinti toni').

#### **15. \****Dies est laetitiae* **(SC \*M 33 attr.)**

#### **Text**

Tis Christmas *cantio* was a widely known song that circulated in multiple versions with difering numbers and ordering of stanzas (see for example, A-Wn Cod. 4494, fols. 94v–95r (8 stanzas); Lossius 1553, pp. 26–7 (4 stanzas); or Leisentritt 1567, fols. 19r –20<sup>r</sup> , 45v–46v (14 stanzas); see also AH 1: 39, 42, 194; and EdK 1.3: Eg17). Given this variety in transmission, only the frst stanza is provided here.

Neither of the two sources transmits a complete text but only text incipits. Te additional German incipit in **Aug** refers to one of many paraphrased versions in the vernacular that circulated during this time period (see Wackernagel 1867: nos. 689–99). Although it is possible that this setting was sung in German, it is challenging to underlay any of the German versions presently known without generating conficts between the text and the musical setting.

Dies est laetitiae Tis is the day of joy in ortu regali, at the royal birth, puer admirabilis, a wonderful boy, totus delectabilis wholly delightful qui inestimabilis who is inestimable est et inefabilis and inefable

nam processit hodie for today has come forth de ventre virginali from a virgin's womb in humanitate, in his human nature, in divinitate. in his divine nature. (Leofranc Holford-Strevens)

## **Cantus firmus**

A-Wn 4494, fol. 64<sup>v</sup> (on this manuscript, see Strohm 2007).

Although the *cantio* circulated widely on *g*, a version on *f* such as the transcription above from the Orationale of Emperor Friedrich III (1415–93) was also popular. In contrast to the version above, the cantus frmus of the setting in this edition features a stepwise descent in lines 2, 4, and 9, rather than a tonal repetition of the frst or second note.

# **Principal Source**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 58], pp. 224–5 ([D, T, B]), Ct derives from T, anon., text incipit in all three transcribed voices

39₂ B **Aug** erroneous *F* 39₃ D **Reg4** note stem missing

39₃–₄ D **Reg4** appears as coloration due to missing note stem at 39₃

• In **Aug**, a scribe notated the following text beneath the bassus at the bottom of fol. 24<sup>r</sup>

Te text, based on Matthew 10:18–19, is an antiphon traditionally sung on feasts of the apostles.

• Te motet is transmitted anonymously in both manuscripts. Birkendorf (1994, i: 72) ascribed the setting to Senf on the

this inscription served as practice for the start of a letter to the *Stadtpfeifer* Jacob von Hurlach (Jonas 1983: 39).

Senf places the cantus frmus in the tenor voice. Tis melody more closely matches the version of this plainchant antiphon transcribed below from the *Antiphonarium Augustense* (1495), fol. 80r–v, than it does the one found in the *Antiphonarius*

Te text of Senf's setting also difers slightly from these two chant sources: all three sources for the motet include the two words 'aut quid' after 'qualiter'. Te phrase 'aut quid' is also found in Matthew 10:19 ('Cum autem tradent vos nolite cogitare quomodo aut quid loquamini') and appears in another version of the antiphon text found in the *Antiphonarium* (1537),

praesides nolite cogitare quomodo aut quid loquamini.' Te version of the text found in the motet's sources thus represents

(D), fol. 232v

(= pp. 173–4) (B), *Lud: Senf:*, heading: *Antiphona IIII uocum*, text in all voices

**Dre3** D-Dl Grimma 14, no. 9 (D, T, B), *Ludouicus Senf:*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

**Dre¹** D-Dl 1/D/2, no. 2, fol. 2r–v (= pp. 3–4) (D), fol. 2r–v (= pp. 61–2) (A), fol. 2r–v (= pp. 123–4) (T), fol. 2r–v

**Dre3** is preserved in a poor, fragmentary condition (i.e. missing paper in D). It transmits some of the same variants from **Lei¹** as **Dre¹**, as can be seen, for example, in their tenor parts (clefng, positioning of rests, a preference for *ligaturae obliquae* for descending and *ligaturae rectae* for ascending ligatures). At the same time, variants between **Dre¹** and **Dre3**, especially

(in this latter source, the antiphon is to be sung in conjunction with the *Benedictus* on feasts of the apostles).

you in that hour what to speak.

, where it fgures as part of the second nocturn in feasts honouring the apostles: 'Dum steteritis ante reges et

ste - te - ri - tis an te - re - ges et prae - si - des, no li - - te

prae me - - di - ta - - ri qua li - - ter re - spon - de - a - tis; da bi - - tur e nim -

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ

quid lo - qua - mi - ni.

(A), fol. 199<sup>r</sup>

(T), fol. 219<sup>v</sup>

(B), anon., text in all voices

statpfeyfer sol mir [followed by an illegible scribble] | Fraintlichen grus Mein fraintlichen grus.' Luise Jonas suggests that

: 'Dem Ersam und weisen Jacob

When you stand before kings and governors, do not consider in advance how or what to answer, for it shall be given

Coloration

**Remarks**

**Text**

**Cantus firmus**

hora quid loquamini.

(1519), fol. 249r

–219<sup>v</sup>

Dum °

**Principal Source**

**Other Sources**

**Source Evaluation**

another variant of the text of this antiphon.

**Lei¹** D-LEu 49/50, [no. 178], fol. 219<sup>r</sup>

°

°

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

ra

vo - bis in il la - ho-

fols. 218<sup>r</sup>

?

?

?

basis of the *Nester-Teorie*.

**16.** *Dum steteritis ante reges* **(SC M 34)**

Dum steteritis ante reges et praesides, nolite praemeditari qualiter aut quid respondeatis; dabitur enim vobis in illa

#### **Other Source**

**Aug** D-As 2° Cod. 142a, fols. 23v–24r ([D, T, B]), Ct derives from T, anon.; fol. 25r (D only), anon., Latin and German text incipit in canonic voice

#### **Source Evaluation**

Both manuscripts seem to have originated within the circle of the imperial chapel of Maximilian I. Although **Aug** must be the earlier of the two, **Reg4** ('Pernner Codex') is more reliable in its transmission of the musical notation (mm. 37–9). Tis latter source has therefore been designated principal source.

While **Reg4** provides only the text incipit 'Dies est letitie' for each voice, the tenor of **Aug** (fol. 23<sup>v</sup> ) includes incipits both in Latin, 'Dies est letitie', and in German, 'Der Tag der ist so freidreich allen creaturen'.

Te second, more correct, version of the discantus on fol. 25r of **Aug**, which bears no text incipit, might be the beginning of an unfnished second entry of this motet.

#### **Variant Readings**

Canonic devices, directions, and/or non-verbal signs


Variants in pitch and rhythm



#### **Remarks**


# **16.** *Dum steteritis ante reges* **(SC M 34)**

#### **Text**

Te text, based on Matthew 10:18–19, is an antiphon traditionally sung on feasts of the apostles.

Dum steteritis ante reges et praesides, nolite praemeditari qualiter aut quid respondeatis; dabitur enim vobis in illa hora quid loquamini.

When you stand before kings and governors, do not consider in advance how or what to answer, for it shall be given you in that hour what to speak.

## **Cantus firmus**

Senf places the cantus frmus in the tenor voice. Tis melody more closely matches the version of this plainchant antiphon transcribed below from the *Antiphonarium Augustense* (1495), fol. 80r–v, than it does the one found in the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 249r (in this latter source, the antiphon is to be sung in conjunction with the *Benedictus* on feasts of the apostles). Te text of Senf's setting also difers slightly from these two chant sources: all three sources for the motet include the two words 'aut quid' after 'qualiter'. Te phrase 'aut quid' is also found in Matthew 10:19 ('Cum autem tradent vos nolite cogitare quomodo aut quid loquamini') and appears in another version of the antiphon text found in the *Antiphonarium* (1537), fols. 218<sup>r</sup> –219<sup>v</sup> , where it fgures as part of the second nocturn in feasts honouring the apostles: 'Dum steteritis ante reges et praesides nolite cogitare quomodo aut quid loquamini.' Te version of the text found in the motet's sources thus represents another variant of the text of this antiphon.

#### **Principal Source**

**Lei¹** D-LEu 49/50, [no. 178], fol. 219<sup>r</sup> (D), fol. 232v (A), fol. 199<sup>r</sup> (T), fol. 219<sup>v</sup> (B), anon., text in all voices

#### **Other Sources**

**Dre¹** D-Dl 1/D/2, no. 2, fol. 2r–v (= pp. 3–4) (D), fol. 2r–v (= pp. 61–2) (A), fol. 2r–v (= pp. 123–4) (T), fol. 2r–v (= pp. 173–4) (B), *Lud: Senf:*, heading: *Antiphona IIII uocum*, text in all voices **Dre3** D-Dl Grimma 14, no. 9 (D, T, B), *Ludouicus Senf:*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Dre3** is preserved in a poor, fragmentary condition (i.e. missing paper in D). It transmits some of the same variants from **Lei¹** as **Dre¹**, as can be seen, for example, in their tenor parts (clefng, positioning of rests, a preference for *ligaturae obliquae* for descending and *ligaturae rectae* for ascending ligatures). At the same time, variants between **Dre¹** and **Dre3**, especially in the discantus and bassus parts (ligatures in mm. 18, 28; the splitting of a Br-*f* ¹ into two Sb in **Dre¹** (mm. 46–7)) make an assessment of their dependency difcult to determine. Both sources deviate from **Lei¹** at m. 9₂–₃ of the discantus (see Variants in pitch and rhythm), although they do not transmit the same variant reading. In this measure, the reading in **Lei¹** is more plausible than that of **Dre¹**, since the discantus is not dissonant with the three other voices. As the most plausible and complete of the three sources, **Lei¹** has therefore been designated principal source.


# **Remarks**

Te discantus, altus, and especially tenor partbooks of **Lei¹** were written by several scribes. Tese scribes are inconsistent in their use of *ligaturae obliquae*; rather, they simply seem to have sketched the *ligaturae*, since the exact pitches are at times difcult to decipher.

#### **Text**

Te text of this motet is an antiphon derived from Luke 1:31–2. Te phrase 'in utero' that follows 'concipies' in the Vulgate has been left out, and only the frst half of v. 32 is included.


#### **Cantus firmus**

Te *Responsoria* (1509), fol. 121v , indicates that this antiphon is to be sung during Advent in honour of Mary ('In adventu d[omi]ni de beata virgine'). In Senf's setting, the melody appears prominently as a cantus frmus in the tenor voice, with some minor diferences: the second syllable of 'vocabis' ends on *c* instead of *b*, and the melismas on the second syllables of 'eius' and 'flius' are both shortened. Te melody of 'magnus', though diferent in Senf's tenor, can be found in the discantus in mm. 87–91.

#### **Principal Source**

**Zwi²** D-Z 81/2, [no. 55], no. 53 (D, T, B), *L S*, Ct missing, text in extant voices

#### **For the contratenor**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 46], pp. 192–5 ([D, Ct, T, B]), *L : Senfel*, text incipits in all voices except Ct *prima pars*

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Reg4**, the earlier of the two sources, is thought to have originated within the circle of the imperial chapel of Maximilian I (either in Innsbruck or Augsburg; Birkendorf 1994) and transmits all four voices of this motet. Tis source contains more errors in its transcription, however, than the incomplete **Zwi²**, and its tenor is missing a passage at mm. 111–17. Furthermore, only text incipits are provided in **Reg4**, whereas **Zwi²** provides complete text underlay for its three surviving voices. Terefore, **Zwi²** has been designated as the principal source. Since **Zwi²** is missing the contratenor partbook, **Reg4** has been used to complete the contratenor part for this edition.

#### **Variant Readings**



# **Remarks**

• In **Zwi2**, the scribe consistently writes 'Jesus' instead of 'Jesum' at the end of the *prima pars* in all three partbooks.

• To avoid the simultaneous sounding of *b* b against *c* in m. 63, the contratenor has been raised from *b* b to *c*¹ in this edition. A similar alteration has also been applied in m. 79: as notated in **Reg4**, the concluding passage would result in a fnal sonority of *f-f-d*¹*-f* ¹. For a more plausible ending, the last note of the contratenor has been lowered to *c*¹.

# **18.** *Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem* **(i) (SC M 36)**

88₁–₂ B **Reg4** *obliqua* in place of *recta*

#### **Text**

Te text, which paraphrases John 1:29, is an antiphon traditionally sung at Vespers on the Feast of the Circumcision. Te text transmitted with Senf's settings uses the imperfect verb form 'exclamabat' instead of the more common 'exclamavit'. Tis seems to have been a somewhat localised tradition in southern German-speaking lands, since contemporary liturgical books and settings of the same text, for example, by H. Finck (D-Z 81/2, no. 39) and S. Mahu (RISM 15407, no. 12), also use the verb form 'exclamabat'.

Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem, quem Joannes videns exclamabat, dicens, 'Ecce agnus Dei. Ecce qui tollit peccata mundi', alleluia.

Behold, Mary has borne us a Saviour, whom John on seeing cried out, saying, 'Behold the Lamb of God. Behold him who taketh away the sins of the world', alleluia.

#### **Cantus firmus**

Te motet is built on a quasi-canon between tenor and bassus of the cantus frmus. A model similar to Senf's cantus frmus appears in the *Responsoria* (1509), fols. 121v–122r .

In the tenor, the melody is transposed to begin on *b* b. Te only variation from the melody in the *Responsoria* (1509) occurs at 'mundi', where the leap of a third in the melisma is flled in with a passing note. Te liturgical place of this antiphon is usually at Vespers on the Feast of the Circumcision. According to the *Responsoria* (1509), it is to be sung during the Feast of the Nativity on occasions honouring the Virgin Mary ('Tempore nativitatis de beata virgine').

#### **Unique Source**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 25], pp. 88–91 ([D, Ct, T, B]), *Ludouic*[*us*] *Semf* [sic], text in all voices

#### **Critical Notes**




#### **Remarks**

In contrast to the majority of motets transmitted in **Reg4**, all four voices are provided with full text underlay.

#### **19.** *Ecce Maria genuit nobis Salvatorem* **(ii) (SC M 37)**

#### **Text**

For the text and translations, see above, no. 18 (SC M 36).

# **Cantus firmus**

For a possible model for the cantus frmus, see this volume, no. 18 (SC M 36). Te plainchant melody is most prominent in the discantus, where it appears, with some embellishments, in long note values.

# **Principal Source**

**Lei1** D-LEu 49/50, [no. 233], fol. 300<sup>v</sup> (D), fol. 330<sup>v</sup> (A), fol. 285r–v (T), fol. 308r–v (B), anon., text in all voices

# **Other Sources**


#### **Intabulation**

**Ge** Brown 1583₂, no. 33, pp. 41–3, anon., nGk-tab., 4vv

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Dre4**, copied under the direction of Wolfgang Figulus, has been ruled out as the principal source: the discantus partbook is missing, the extant books have been severely damaged by ink corrosion, and only a low-quality microflm copy is available for study, inhibiting a thorough examination of this source. Still, it is clear that its music and text underlay closely match those of **Ei**. Since it seems unlikely that Figulus copied the music from a print that he himself published, **Dre4** is probably a precursor to **Ei** (see Steude 1974: 85–7). **Wei**, too, belongs to this branch of transmission: the MS was copied at approximately the same time that **Ei** was published (in the last quarter of the sixteenth century), and variant readings for the motet in **Wei** accord with **Ei** in several instances. Te melodic lines of the discantus and contratenor, however, are occasionally embellished (for example, D: 24₁ and Ct: 24₁–₄; or at cadences, as in Ct: 17₃ or D: 52–3₁), and the use of ligatures in **Wei** does not always correspond with the print. Tese sources together form a separate stemmatic branch from **Lei1**: signifcant deviations in rhythm and text underlay shared between **Ei**, **Dre4**, and **Wei** contrast with the reading found in **Lei1** (D: 24 or 51; 52: Br instead of a dotted Sb; T: 20–1; B: incorrect ligature in m. 31). Unlike **Lei1**, these sources tend to avoid repetitions of text in favour of assigning longer melodic phrases to one word or a textual phrase. Tey also provide fewer accidentals than **Lei1**, the earliest of the vocal sources. Because the latter source provides a complete and plausible musical text, it has been designated the principal source.

Te intabulation of this motet in **Ge** both shortens and rearranges the motet. Like **Dre4** and **Ei**, it transmits several *fcta* accidentals that present evidence of later sixteenth-century styles of performance practice.




#### **Remarks**

• Te discantus of **Wei** has the header 'OFFICIVM IN NATALITIIS [*sic*] CHRI[sti]'. Te motet is labeled 'ANTIPHO-NA' (p. 14 in the contratenor partbook) and is followed by an anonymous homophonic arrangement of Psalm 147 labelled 'Psalmus 8 TONI | Sex Vocum. | Lauda Jerusalem Domini' (p. 13 in the tenor partbook).

• All three partbooks of **Wei** replace the text 'qui tollit peccata mundi' with 'qui tollis peccata mundi'.

#### **20.** *Ecce quam bonum* **(SC M 38)**

#### **Text**

Ps. 132:1–3. Te motet sets the complete Ps. 132 along with the Lesser Doxology. Te text and motivic material for the verse 'Ecce quam bonum et quam iucundum habitare fratres in unum!' recur four times across the two *partes* of the motet in a refrain-like structure that recalls Josquin's *Miserere mei, Deus* (Fuhrmann 2012: 329).

#### 1.p.

Ecce quam bonum et quam iucundum habitare fratres in unum! Sicut unguentum in capite, quod descendit in barbam, barbam Aaron, quod descendit in oram vestimenti eius; sicut ros Hermon, qui descendit in Montem Sion.

Ecce quam bonum et quam iucundum habitare fratres in unum!

#### 2.p.

Quoniam illic mandavit Dominus benedictionem et vitam usque in saeculum.

Ecce quam bonum et quam iucundum habitare fratres in unum!

Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

# 1.p.

Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! Like the precious ointment on the head that ran down upon the beard, the beard of Aaron, which ran down to the skirt of his garment: as the dew of Hermon, which descendeth upon mount Sion.

Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!

# 2.p.

For there the Lord hath commanded blessing, and life for evermore.

Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!

Glory be to the Father and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. Amen.

Ecce quam bonum et quam iucundum habitare fratres in unum!

# Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! (adapted from *RDC*)

# **Cantus firmus**

Passages in Senf's setting paraphrase Psalm Tone VIII (see, for example, the example provided in the *Psalterium Spirense* (1515), fol. 248<sup>v</sup> , transcribed below). One such passage occurs at he frst appearance of the words 'habitare fratres in unum' (mm. 17–23).

# **Principal Source**

**Mun¹** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 10, [no. 8], fols. 109v–126r (D, Ct, T, B), *Lud: Sennf*, text in all voices

#### **Other Sources**


#### **Source Evaluation**

**Mun¹**, copied *c*.1530–40 for the Bavarian court chapel, has been designated the principal source. Among the other sources, **Kas**, copied by Johannes Heugel *c*.1534–50 for the court of Philip of Hesse, is closest to **Mun¹**, with remarkably similar patterns of text underlay, accidentals, and ligatures. Tis motet seems to have formed an integral part of the Hessian court's chapel working repertory: mistakes in pitch in **Kas** (mm. 25, 30, 34, and 90) were corrected and a missing passage (T: 244–9) was copied into the margin. **Fo¹** (Hans Ott's *Novum et insigne opus musicum*) was printed during the same decade that **Mun¹** was copied. Its principal departures from **Mun¹** are related to text underlay. **Fo¹** must have served as the model for **Bud**, a manuscript from the collection of the church of St. Aegidius in Bártfa whose earliest portions were copied around 1550. **Fo¹** and **Bud** share several variants: a similar approach to text underlay, the same correction of the contratenor in m. 56, and a s*ignum congruentiae* in the tenor at m. 239. **Got**, the so-called 'Gotha Choirbook' (copied around 1545 possibly under the direction of Johann Walter for the newly constructed Schlosskirche in Torgau), difers most from the four other sources, with ornamentations in mm. 52 (D) and 59–60 (T), a syllabic approach to text underlay in mm. 64–82 that includes several dotted breves divided into minims, and the use of coloration in mm. 241–9. It is not possible to confrm whether **Got** was copied from **Fo¹**, but it does share characteristics with **Fo¹** that help distinguish these two sources from **Mun¹** and **Kas** (for example, a *g*¹ in the discantus at m. 221, a perfect breve in the tenor at m. 232, and several similar instances of text underlay).

#### **Variant Readings**





#### **Remarks**


### **21.** *Egregie Dei martyr, Sebastiane* **(SC M 39)**

## **Text**

& ‹

& ‹

Tis antiphon text is sung liturgically for the Feast of the martyrs St Sebastian and St Fabian (20 January).

Egregie Dei martyr, Sebastiane, princeps ac propagator sanctissimorum praeceptorum, ecce nomen tuum in libro vitae caelestis ascriptum est, et memoriale tuum non derelinquetur in saecula.

Excellent martyr of God, Sebastian, leader and propagator of the most holy teachings, behold, your name has been added to the book of heavenly life, and remembrance of you shall never cease.

E - gre - gi - e De - i mar tyr - Se - ba - sti - a - ne, prin ceps - ac pro - - pa

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ

ga tor - san ctis - - si - mo -rum prae ce - - pto rum, ec ce - no men - tu um - in li - bro

vi tae - cae le - - stis a scri - -ptum est, et me mo - - ri - a - le tu um - non

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

de - re - lin - que - tur in sae cu - - la.

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

#### **Cantus firmus**

Senf uses elements of the cantus frmus in diferent voices. At the beginning, the discantus presents it without embellishment in semibreves up to m. 14. From m. 22 onwards, the melody appears primarily in the tenor and in varying note values interspersed with free repetitions of musical phrases. A signifcant melodic diference from the chant as it appears in the *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 96<sup>v</sup> , occurs at 'Sebastiane', where the cantus frmus of the motet rises both times to *c*¹ instead of *b*. In addition, the melody of the phrase 'ecce nomen tuum in libro vitacaelestis' is transposed down a fourth in Senf's setting to begin on *a*.

vi tae - cae le - - stis a scri - -ptum est, et me mo - - ri - a - le tu um - non

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

de - re - lin - que - tur in sae cu - - la.

ga tor - san ctis - - si - mo -rum prae ce - - pto rum, ec ce - no men - tu um - in li - bro

E - gre - gi - e De - i mar tyr - Se - ba - sti - a - ne, prin ceps - ac pro - - pa

œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ

# **Unique Source**

& ‹

& ‹

237₁–239₁ D, T **Bud**, **Fo1**, **Got** *et semper* 240₁–242₁ D **Fo1**, **Got** *Sicut erat* 243₁–248₁ Ct **Kas** *semper* 244₁–246₁ D **Fo1**, **Got** *in principio* 244₁–246₁ D **Kas** *et in saecula* 244₂–245₆ Ct **Bud**, **Fo1** *et semper*  244₂–246₁ Ct **Got** *et semper*  250₁–252₁ D **Fo1** *et semper* 253₁–255₁ D **Fo1**, **Got** *sicut erat* 256₁–259₁ D **Fo1**, **Got** *in principio*

260₁–270 D **Fo1** *et nunc et semper, et nunc et semper, et semper*

261₂ Ct **Mun1** *sae-* instead of *et* (at page turn)

263₂–268₄ D **Kas** *saeculorum, saeculorum*

270₁–275₁ B **Fo1**, **Got** *saeculorum* 270₂–275 T **Bud**, **Fo1**, **Got** *et in saecula* 273₁–277 D **Fo1**, **Got** *et in saecula* 278₁–283 T **Fo1**, **Got** *saeculorum* 293–294₁ B **Bud**, **Fo1** *bonum* 293₂–294 T **Bud**, **Fo1** *bonum* 302₁ Ct **Bud**, **Fo1**, **Got**, **Kas** *-cun-*

• According to Johann Mathesius (1566: fol. 106<sup>v</sup>

as a model of diminished *tempus perfectum* (S<sup>3</sup>

**21.** *Egregie Dei martyr, Sebastiane* **(SC M 39)**

Egregie Dei martyr, Sebastiane, princeps ac propagator sanctissimorum praeceptorum, ecce nomen tuum in libro vitae caelestis ascriptum est, et memoriale tuum non dere-

**Remarks**

**Text**

**Cantus firmus**

linquetur in saecula.

to begin on *a*.

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

*Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 96<sup>v</sup>

Augsburg in 1530.

260₁–270 D **Got** *et nunc et semper, et nunc et semper, et, et semper, et in saecula*

• In all three extant partbooks of **Bud**, the *sesquialtera* rhythmic groupings in mm. 204–82 are indicated by slashes.

Senf uses elements of the cantus frmus in diferent voices. At the beginning, the discantus presents it without embellishment in semibreves up to m. 14. From m. 22 onwards, the melody appears primarily in the tenor and in varying note values interspersed with free repetitions of musical phrases. A signifcant melodic diference from the chant as it appears in the

In addition, the melody of the phrase 'ecce nomen tuum in libro vitacaelestis' is transposed down a fourth in Senf's setting

E - gre - gi - e De - i mar tyr - Se - ba - sti - a - ne, prin ceps - ac pro - - pa

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ

ga tor - san ctis - - si - mo -rum prae ce - - pto rum, ec ce - no men - tu um - in li - bro

vi tae - cae le - - stis a scri - -ptum est, et me mo - - ri - a - le tu um - non

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

de - re - lin - que - tur in sae cu - - la.

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ

, occurs at 'Sebastiane', where the cantus frmus of the motet rises both times to *c*¹ instead of *b*.

shall never cease.

• Lodovico Zacconi provides the discantus motif in mm. 205–7 in his *Prattica di Musica* (1592, fol. 194<sup>r</sup>

Tis antiphon text is sung liturgically for the Feast of the martyrs St Sebastian and St Fabian (20 January).

₂).

), this motet was composed for the opening of the Imperial Diet in

Excellent martyr of God, Sebastian, leader and propagator of the most holy teachings, behold, your name has been added to the book of heavenly life, and remembrance of you

[*recte*: fol. 188<sup>r</sup>

])

**Zwi²** D-Z 81/2, [no. 64], no. 61 (D, T, B), *LS* (T), *Lude: Senf:* (D), Ct missing, text in extant voices

#### **Critical Notes**

Variants in pitch and rhythm 95₁ B *e* corrected (?) to *d*

Textual variants and text placement


#### **22.** *Festum nunc celebre* **(SC M 41)**

#### **Text**

Te text of this hymn for the Feast of the Ascension was possibly written by Hrabanus Maurus (*c*.780–856) (AH 50, no. 143). Senf only sets stanzas 1, 2, 4, and 6 of the hymn.

Both sources transmitting this motet set the phrase 'et tu, nate Dei' instead of 'hoc tu, nate Dei' in the second line of stanza 6.

compellunt animos carmina promere, compel hearts to bring forth songs, cum Christus solium scandit ad arduum, when Christ ascends to the lofty throne,

concinit pariter angelicus chorus the angelic choir sings together

*districtus rediet arbiter omnium, the rigorous judge of all will return qui mitis modo transiit. in marvellous manner.*

demergat vel in inferos. or plunge us into hell.

*sed iustis bona præmia. but goodly rewards to the just.*

6. Præsta hoc, genitor optime, maxime, 6. Tis, noblest and greatest creator, regnans perpetuo fulgida Trinitas reigning for ever, resplendent Trinity,

1. Festum nunc celebre magnaque gaudia 1. Te well-thronged feast day and its great joys caelorum pius arbiter. righteous judge of the heavens.

2. Conscendit iubilans laetus ad aethera, 2. He rises, rejoicing and cheerful, up to heaven, sanctorum populus praedicat inclitum, the crowd of saints proclaim his renown, victoris boni gloriam. the glory of the noble conqueror.

3. *Qui scandens superos, vincula vinxerat,* 3. *He who scaling the heights bound chains with chains, donans terrigenis munera plurima*, *presenting to those born on earth the greatest gifts,*

4. Oramus, Domine, conditor inclite, 4. We beseech you, O God, glorious creator, devotos famulos respice protegens, care for your devoted servants, be our protector, ne nos livor edax daemonis obruat lest the Devil's devouring envy overwhelm us

5. *Ut cum fammivoma nube reverteris,* 5. *When with a faming cloud you return occulta hominum pandere iudicans, to reveal humanity's secrets and judge them, ne des supplicia horrida noxiis, do not give frightful punishments to the guilty,* 

et tu, nate Dei, et bone Spiritus, and you, son of God, and kindly Spirit, per cuncta pie saecula. *Amen.* righteously through all ages. *Amen.*

#### **Cantus firmus**

Senf's model closely follows the version of this widespread hymn transcribed below from Lossius 1553, p. 137. In Senf's setting, however, the two syllables that correspond with 'Christus' in the frst stanza are sung syllabically, and the second syllable corresponding with 'scandit' in this stanza is sung to a three-note melisma, where the middle note functions as a lower neighbouring tone.

Within the polyphonic texture, Senf assigns the plainchant to each voice part consecutively from high to low for the duration of one stanza. Tus, the discantus sings the cantus frmus for stanza 1, then the contratenor (stanza 2), the tenor (stanza 4), and fnally the bassus (stanza 6). Te cantus frmus and its ligatures in stanzas 1 and 4 (for discantus and tenor respectively) are identical except for the fact that they are sung at the lower octave by the tenor. Te cantus frmus sung by the contratenor and bassus in stanzas 2 and 6 is likewise parallel (beginning a fourth lower than the discantus and tenor and modifed at the end in the bassus for the fnal cadence), but for these two voices Senf used a modifed form of the cantus frmus to accommodate the polyphonic texture.

#### **Principal Source**

**Zwi²** D-Z 81/2, [no. 50], no. 48 (D, T, B), *LS* (D), Ct missing, text in extant voices

#### **For the contratenor**

**Lei1** D-LEu 49/50, [no. 48], fols. 78<sup>r</sup> –80<sup>r</sup> (D), fols. 77r –79r (A), fols. 67v–69v (T), fols. 80<sup>r</sup> –81v (B), *L. S.*, text in all voices

#### **Source Evaluation**

**Zwi²** is more reliable than **Lei1** in its transmission of music and text and therefore serves as principal source. Te discantus in **Lei1**, for example, is missing mm. 82–4 and in mm. 84₂–₄ is notated a third too high. Since the contratenor is missing in **Zwi²**, it has been completed on the basis of the surviving altus partbook in **Lei1**. Te presence of what appear to be mistakes in this partbook has been resolved with the editorial addition of rests at mm. 162₂ and 259₂.

#### **Variant Readings**



# **Remarks**

In **Lei¹**, the note head below the fnal maxima (*d*¹) of the contratenor at m. 285 is rendered as a smaller breve on *b* (as in the edition). It designates an optional addition to the fnal sonority.

## **23.** *Gaude, Dei Genitrix* **(SC M 43)**

#### **Text**

Te text is an antiphon for the octave of the Feast of the Assumption of Mary (15 August).


#### **Cantus firmus**

Senf uses a melodic model of the antiphon also preserved in the so-called 'Neumarkt Cantionale' (PL-Wrk MS 58, fol. 132v ; see below). His model difers from the version in the chant source by its inclusion of an extra line at the end: 'ad Dominum Jesum Christum'. Senf presents the chant mainly in the tenor as well as in the discantus and bassus. From m. 52 onwards, selected passages of the chant (e.g. 'aeterni') are repeated in transposition in the tenor.

Te model employed by Senf also resembles the melody used in Isaac's motet on the same text (CMM 65-10, no. 15) and in an anonymous settng in PL-Kj Mus. ms. 40098 (the 'Żagań partbooks'), no. 32 (see EdM 8: 31–2).

#### **Unique Source**

**Mun²** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 12, [no. 7], fols. 102v–111r (D, Ct, T, B), *Lud: S.*, text in all voices

#### **Critical Notes**


Variants in pitch and rhythm 164 T Mx Textual variants and text placement 136₁–139₁ B *quaesusumus* (at page turn) 137₁–139₁ D *quaesusumus* (at page turn)

# **Remarks**

**23.** *Gaude, Dei Genitrix* **(SC M 43)**

Te text is an antiphon for the octave of the Feast of the Assumption of Mary (15 August).

Gaude, Dei Genitrix, Virgo immaculata; Rejoice, Mother of God, Immaculate Virgin. gaude, quae ab angelo gaudium suscepisti; Rejoice, you who received joy from the angel.

gaude, Mater, gaude, sancta Dei Genitrix. Rejoice, Mother; rejoice, Holy Mother of God.

Virgo, tu sola Mater innupta, Virgin, you only unmarried mother, te laudant facturae Genitrix lucis: all creation praises you, Mother of Light. sis pro nobis, quaesumus, perpetua interventrix Be a constant intercessor for us, we beseech you,

and in an anonymous settng in PL-Kj Mus. ms. 40098 (the 'Żagań partbooks'), no. 32 (see EdM 8: 31–2).

ad Dominum Jesum Christum. before <our> Lord, Jesus Christ.

selected passages of the chant (e.g. 'aeterni') are repeated in transposition in the tenor.

gaude, quae genuisti aeterni luminis claritatem: Rejoice, you who gave birth to the brightness of eternal life.

Senf uses a melodic model of the antiphon also preserved in the so-called 'Neumarkt Cantionale' (PL-Wrk MS 58, fol. 132v

Gau - de De - i Ge - ni - trix, Vir - go im ma - - cu - la - ta; gau de, - quae ab

an ge - - lo gau di - - um su - sce pi - - .sti; gau - - de, quae ge nu - - i - sti ae ter - - ni

lu mi nis - - cla ri - - ta - tem: gau de - Ma - ter, gau - de san cta - De - i

Ge - ni - trix. Vir - go, tu so la - Ma - ter in nu - - pta, te lau- dant fa ctu - - rae Ge - - ni

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

trix lu cis: - sis pro no bis, - quae su - - mus, per pe - - tu - a in ter - - ven- trix.

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup>

see below). His model difers from the version in the chant source by its inclusion of an extra line at the end: 'ad Dominum Jesum Christum'. Senf presents the chant mainly in the tenor as well as in the discantus and bassus. From m. 52 onwards,

Te model employed by Senf also resembles the melody used in Isaac's motet on the same text (CMM 65-10, no. 15)

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup>

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

<sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> œ œ <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup> <sup>œ</sup>

(D, Ct, T, B), *Lud: S.*, text in all voices

1.p. 1.p.

2.p. 2.p.

**Text**

**Cantus firmus**

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

& ‹

**Unique Source**

**Critical Notes**

Clefs

**Mun²** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 12, [no. 7], fols. 102v–111r

157₁–168 D G3 clef 164₁–169 Ct C3 clef

Variants in pitch and rhythm 164 T Mx In the manuscript, the second note head on *f* ¹ above the fnal longa (*c*¹) of the contratenor at m. 169 is smaller and blackened (as in the edition). It indicates an optional addition to the fnal sonority.

#### **24.** *Hic accipiet benedictionem* **(SC M 46)**

#### **Text**

;

Te text, which is based on Ps. 23:5–6, serves as an antiphon for the Feast of the Common of One Confessor (*Commune unius confessoris*).

Hic accipiet benedictionem a Domino, et misericordiam a Deo, salutari suo, quia haec est generatio quaerentium Dominum.

He shall receive a blessing from the Lord, and mercy from God his Saviour; for this is the generation of them that seek the Lord. (adapted from *RDC*)

#### **Cantus firmus**

Senf's model for this antiphon difers from melodies found in contemporary liturgical books (e.g. *Antiphonarius* (1519), fol. 264<sup>v</sup> ; D-Mbs Clm 4304, fol. 14<sup>v</sup> ). With the exception of the rising third and the downward stepwise progression at 'misericordia', it more closely matches the version below transcribed from CH-E 611, fol. 263<sup>v</sup> , a fourteenth-century antiphoner from the Benedictine monastery of Einsiedeln.

#### **Unique Source**

**Reg4** D-Rp C 120, [no. 40], pp. 176–7 ([D, Ct, T, B]), *L : Senfel 4or*, text incipit in all voices

#### **Critical Notes**

Non-verbal signs 53 D, Ct, T, B U

#### Variants in pitch and rhythm


#### **Remarks**

• Te Sb-*c* supplied in this edition at m. 43₂ in the bassus was probably an accidental omission made by the scribe of **Reg4**. Tis insertion was made on the basis of imitation between the bassus and tenor: the additional note brings their melodies into closer alignment at the same time that it resolves problems in the counterpoint.

• In m. 38 of the discantus, either the scribe or a later corrector seems to have been aware that the music was copied incorrectly. It also seems that it was unclear where the error was to be found and how to amend it. An attempt to correct the problem can be observed in the two Sm-*a* transcribed in **Reg4** at m. 38₁–₂: the note shapes clearly difer from the surrounding semiminims. While the second semiminim seems originally to have been a minim that was subsequently corrected, the frst semiminim seems to have been added after the former was modifed. In order to avoid consecutive ffths in m. 39 between the upper voices and to maintain the paired imitation in this passage (mm. 39–42), these two semiminims have been modifed for this edition to Mi-*g* and Mi-*a* and the subsequent minim at m. 39₁ has been lengthened to a semibreve.

# **25.** *In exitu Israel de Aegypto* **(i) (SC M 47)**

### **Text**

Te text supplied here is the complete Ps. 113 followed by the Lesser Doxology. In SC M 47, Senf set only the verses given below in roman type. All sources for SC M 47 include the word 'quia' in the third verse ('Mare vidit et fugit; Jordanis quia conversus est retrorsum'), probably due to the syntactical similarity between the third and ffth verses. Senf's setting even seems to have been composed specifcally to accommodate this additional word. Terefore, the text underlay of the third verse in the edition of this setting retains the additional 'quia' as found in the motet's sources.


#### **Cantus firmus**

Of the 29 verses that constitute the complete psalm, only eleven are set here along with the Lesser Doxology, an arrangement that implies *alternatim* performance. None of the sources for this motet indicates what kind of *alternatim* performance was practised; yet they all utilize fermatas, barlines, and/or *longae* to separate the verses from one another and thus facilitate this kind of performance. For this reason, a plainchant version has been supplied in the edition for those verses not set polyphonically.

Tis edition adapts the *tonus peregrinus* formula supplied by Heinrich Glarean in his *Dodekachordon* (Basel, 1547) for the unset verses, since it matches the model Senf used for his setting. A departure from this formula in the motet appears at the start of verse 11, where the tenor's *a*-*b* b-*a* more closely matches the incipit associated with the Roman model (Lindberg 2011: 131).

Glarean, *Dodekachordon*, p. 42

Another option is to perform the unset verses in fauxbourdon. In the year before Georg Rhau printed **Rh²**, he published another edition of his popular introduction to music theory, *Enchiridion utriusque musicae practicae* (Wittenberg, 1538) [VD16 R 1674], with the following fauxbourdon model.

# Rhau, *Enchiridion*, sigs. [F8]v–G[1]r

Rhau prefaces this model with the indication that the *diferentia peregrina* he provides is sung exclusively with Psalm 113 ('Sequitur diferentia peregrina, sic dicta, q[uod] in nostris canciunculis raro admodum occurrit, nam non nisi ad unum Psalmum decantatur', sig. [F8]v ). Like Senf's setting, it is also based on the same formula found in Glarean.

# **Principal Source**

**Rh²** RISM 1539¹⁴ (D-Mbs), [no. 34] (D, A, T, B), *L. Senfel*, text in all voices

# **Other Sources**


#### **Source Evaluation**

It seems fairly certain that **Des**, **Eis**, **Ros1**, and **Zwi1** were all copied from or based on copies of **Rh²**: text underlay in these four manuscript sources closely matches the text transmitted in **Rh²**, the bassus clef changes in verses 3 and 7 are identical, and a mistake in the print at m. 74 of the countertenor was copied into all four manuscripts (only in **Eis** was the mistake corrected). Like **Rh²**, **Eis** avoids fermatas at the ends of verses altogether, whereas **Des**, **Dre²**, and **Ros1** incorporate them regularly (**Zwi1** exhibits a haphazard pattern of fermatas). **Rh²**, **Des**, and **Dre²** are inconsistent in separating verses with closing barlines, whereas **Eis** and **Zwi1** use closing barlines consistently, and **Ros1** avoids them altogether. One scribal difference distinguishing the print from the manuscripts **Dre²**, **Eis**, **Ros1**, and **Zwi1** is the fact that in the manuscripts coloration is more often avoided, whereas coloration is used throughout **Rh²**. Several diferences between **Dre²** (which was copied *c*.1585) and the other sources distinguish this set of partbooks. Te most substantial departure in **Dre²** is a diferent musical setting for verse 9. Tis setting adapts the music used for verse 3 from the present setting (see the edition of this verse at the end of this critical report). **Des**, **Eis** and **Ros1** are relatively meticulous in their reproduction of the music from the print, whereas **Zwi1** and **Dre²** transmit more mistakes than the other sources. Moreover, **Des**, **Dre²**, **Eis** and **Ros1** (and probably **Zwi1**) post-date the print, making a strong case for the designation of **Rh²** as principal source.




# Remarks


**26. \****In exitu Israel* **(ii) (SC \*M 48 attr.)**

# **Text**

¢

In this second setting of the text, the complete Ps. 113 is set to music, and it is again followed by the Lesser Doxology (vv. 28–9). For the text and translations, see above, no. 25 (SC M 47). Te only textual variation between these two settings appears in verse 24, where the present setting omits the preposition 'a' before the word 'Domino'

# **Cantus firmus**

In the Divine Ofce, Ps. 113 is sung at Vespers on Sundays. Tis setting mainly uses the *tonus peregrinus* in the Germanic chant dialect, as it is given, for example, in the *Psalterium Spirense* (1515), fol. 87<sup>r</sup> . Tis chant difers from the model used in *In exitu Israel* (i) (see no. 25 above), especially in the section 'domus Jacob'.

Te cantus frmus, a section of it, or a variation thereof (e.g. v. 4) is present in every verse, mostly either in the discantus or tenor. Te composer employed several variants of the *tonus peregrinus* (gathered in Lundberg 2011) in this setting. Whereas most parts are based on Lundberg ex. 2.4 (which matches the melody above), vv. 13–14 follow the Roman chant dialect (v. 13 follows Lundberg ex. 2.6; v. 14 ex. 2.7). A diferent variant of the Germanic chant dialect (Lundberg ex. 2.3) appears in v. 20, the same variant that forms the basis for most parts of SC M 48. Te setting used for the doxology faintly alludes to the chant: the Roman chant dialect appears at the beginning of v. 28, whereas in v. 29 it more closely resembles the beginning of the Germanic chant dialect.

# **Unique Source**

**Mun³** D-Mbs Mus.ms. 13, [no. 2], fols. 27v–58r (D, Ct, T, B), anon., text in all voices

#### **Critical Notes**


# Staf signatures

172₁–174₄ D upper b erroneously placed on fourth line (*g*¹)

# Mensuration and proportion signs


# Canonic devices, directions, and non-verbal signs


# Variants in pitch and rhythm


Textual variants and text placement 560 Ct *A*-(men)

# **Remarks**



### **ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF TEXT INCIPITS**


# DENK M Ä LER DER TONKU NST IN ÖSTERREICH

# **BISHER ERSCHIENENE BÄNDE**

**1 (1894):** *Johann Josef Fux, Messen* (Johann Evangelist Habert, Gustav Adolf Glossner) **2 (1894):** *Georg Mufat, Florilegium Primum für Streichinstrumente* (Heinrich Rietsch) **3 (1895):** *Johann Josef Fux, Motetten I* (Johannes Evangelist Habert) **4 (1895):** *Georg Mufat, Florilegium Secundum für Streichinstrumente* (Heinrich Rietsch) **5 (1896):** *Johann Stadlmayr, Hymnen* (Johannes Evangelist Habert) **6 (1896):** *Marc'Antonio Cesti, Il Pomo d'oro (Prolog und 1. Akt)* (Guido Adler) **7 (1896):** *Gottlieb Mufat, Componimenti Musicali per il Cembalo* (Guido Adler) **8 (1897):** *Johann Jakob Froberger, Orgel- und Clavierwerke I* (Guido Adler) **9 (1897):** *Marc'Antonio Cesti, Il Pomo d'oro (2.*–*5. Akt)* **(**Guido Adler) **10 (1898):** *Heinrich Isaac, Choralis Constantinus I* (Emil Bezecný, Walter Rabl) **11 (1898):** *Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber, Violinsonaten 1681* (Guido Adler) **12 (1899):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus), Opus musicum I* (Emil Becezný, Josef Mantuani) **13 (1899):** *Johann Jakob Froberger, Clavierwerke II* (Guido Adler) **14/15 (1900):** *Trienter Codices I* (Guido Adler, Oswald Koller) **16 (1901):** *Andreas Hammerschmidt, Dialogi oder Gespräche der gläubigen Seele mit Gott I* (Anton W. Schmidt) **17 (1901):** *Johann Pachelbel, 94 Kompositionen für Orgel oder Clavier* (Hugo Botstiber, Max Seifert) **18 (1902):** *Oswald von Wolkenstein, Geistliche und weltliche Lieder* (Josef Schatz, Oswald Koller) **19 (1902):** *Johann Josef Fux, Instrumentalwerke I* (Guido Adler) **20 (1903):** *Orazio Benevoli, Festmesse und Hymnus zur Einweihung des Domes in Salzburg 1628* (Guido Adler) **21 (1903):** *Johann Jakob Froberger, Orgel- und Clavierwerke III* (Guido Adler) **22 (1904):** *Trienter Kodices II* (Guido Adler, Oswald Koller) **23 (1904):** *Georg Mufat, Concerti grossi I* (Erwin Luntz) **24 (1905):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus), Opus musicum II* (Emil Bezeczný, Josef Mantuani) **25 (1905):** *Heinrich Franz Biber, Violinsonaten II [Rosenkranzsonaten]* (Erwin Luntz) Neuausgabe: s. Bd. 153

**DTÖ 163.1 DTÖ 163.1**

**26 (1906):** *Antonio Caldara, Kirchenwerke* (Eusebius Mandyczewski) **27 (1906):** *Wiener Klavier- und Orgelwerke aus der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts. Alessandro Poglietti, Ferdinand Tobias Richter, Georg Reutter der Ältere* (Hugo Botstiber) **28 (1907):** *Heinrich Isaac, Weltliche Werke* (Johannes Wolf) **29 (1907):** *Michael Haydn, Instrumentalwerke I* (Lothar Herbert Perger) **30 (1908):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus): Opus musicum III* (Emil Bececzný, Josef Mantuani) **31 (1908):** *Wiener Instrumentalmusik vor und um 1750 I* (Karl Horwitz, Karl Riedel) **32 (1909):** *Heinrich Isaac, Choralis Constantinus II* (Anton von Webern) Mit einem Nachtrag zu den weltlichen Werken (Johannes Wolf) **33 (1909):** *Johann Georg Albrechtsberger: Instrumentalwerke* (Oskar Kapp) **34/35 (1910):** *Johann Josef Fux, Costanza e fortezza* (Egon Wellesz) **36 (1911):** *Ignaz Umlauf, Die Bergknappen* (Robert Haas) **37 (1911):** *Österreichische Lautenmusik im XVI. Jahrhundert* (Adolf Koczirz) **38 (1912):** *Trienter Codices III* (Guido Adler) **39 (1912):** *Wiener Instrumentalmusik vor und um 1750* (Wilhelm Fischer) **40 (1913):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus), Opus musicum IV* (Emil Bececzný, Josef Mantuani) **41 (1913):** *Gesänge von Frauenlob, Reinmar v. Zweter und Alexander* (Heinrich Rietsch) **42–44 (1914):** *Florian Leopold Gassmann, La Contessina* (Robert Haas) **44a (1914):** *Christoph Willibald Gluck, Orfeo ed Euridice* (Hermann Abert) **45 (1915):** *Johann Michael Haydn, Drei Messen. Missa Sti. Francisci, Missa in Dominica Palmarum, Missa in Tempore Quadragesimae* (Anton Maria Klafsky) **46 (1916):** *Antonio Draghi, Kirchenwerke* (Guido Adler) **47 (1916):** *Johann Josef Fux, Concentus musico-instrumentalis* (Heinrich Rietsch) **48 (1917):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus): Opus musicum V* (Emil Bececzný, Josef Mantuani) **49 (1918):** *Messen von Heinrich Biber, Heinrich Schmeltzer, Johann Caspar Kerll* (Guido Adler) **50 (1918):** *Österreichische Lautenmusik zwischen 1650 und 1720* (Adolf Koczirz) **51/52 (1919):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus): Opus musicum VI* (Emil Bececzný, Josef Mantuani) **53 (1920):** *Trienter Codices IV* (Rudolf Ficker, Alfred Orel)

**54 (1920):** *Das Wiener Lied von 1778 bis Mozarts Tod* (Margarete Ansion, Irene Schlafenberg)

**55 (1921):** *Johann Ernst Eberlin, Oratorium Der blutschwitzende Jesus* (Robert Haas)

**56 (1921):** *Wiener Tanzmusik in der zweiten Hälfte des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts. Johann Heinrich Schmeltzer, Johann Josef Hofer, Alexander Poglietti* (Paul Nettl)


**59 (1923):** *Drei Requiem für Soli, Chor, Orchester aus dem 17. Jahrhundert. Christoph Straus, Franz Heinrich Biber, Johann Caspar Kerll* (Guido Adler)

**60 (1923):** *Christoph Willibald Gluck, Don Juan* (Robert Haas)

**61 (1924):** *Trienter Codices V* (Rudolf Ficker)

**62 (1925):** *Michael Haydn, Kirchenwerke* (Anton Maria Klafsky)

**63 (1925):** *Johann Strauss Sohn, Drei Walzer. "Morgenblätter", "An der schönen blauen Donau", "Neu-Wien"* (Hans Gál)

**64 (1926):** *Deutsche Komödienarien 1754*–*1758 I* (Robert Haas)

**65 (1926):** *Josef Lanner, Ländler und Walzer* (Alfred Orel)

**66 (1927):** *Johann Schenk, Der Dorfbarbier* (Robert Haas)

**67 (1928):** *Emanuel Aloys Förster, Kammermusik* (Karl Weigl)

**68 (1928):** *Johann Strauss Vater, Acht Walzer* (Hans Gál)

**69 (1929):** *Stefano Bernardi, Kirchenwerke* (Karl August Rosenthal)

**70 (1929):** *Paul Peuerl – Isaac Posch, Instrumental- und Vokalwerke* (Karl Geiringer)

**71 (1930):** *Lieder von Neidhart (von Reuenthal)* (Wolfgang Schmieder, Edmund Wiessner)

**72 (1930):** *Das deutsche Gesellschaftslied in Österreich von 1480 bis 1550* (Leopold Nowak, Adolf Koczirz, Anton Pfalz)

**73 (1931):** *Blasius Amon, Kirchenwerke I* (Caecilianus Huigens)

**74 (1931):** *Josef Strauss, Drei Walzer* (Hugo Botstiber)

**75 (1932):** *Antonio Caldara, Kammermusik für Gesang* (Eusebius Mandyczewski)

**76 (1933):** *Trienter Codices VI* (Rudolf von Ficker)

**77 (1934):** *Italienische Musiker und das Kaiserhaus 1567*–*1625* (Alfred Einstein)

**78 (1935):** *Jacob Handl (Gallus), Sechs Messen* (Paul Amadeus Pisk)


**81 (1936):** *Carl Ditters von Dittersdorf, Instrumentalwerke* (Victor Luithlen)

**82 (1937):** *Christoph Willibald Gluck, L'innocenza giustifcata* (Alfred Einstein)

**83 (1938):** *Florian Leopold Gassmann, Kirchenwerke* (Franz Kosch)

**EdM 2/1 (1942):** *Das Erbe deutscher Musik, Zweite Reihe: Alpen- und Donau-Reichsgaue, Band 1 (1942). Wiener Lautenmusik im 18. Jahrhundert* (Adolf Koczirz)


**86 (1949):***Tiroler Instrumentalmusik im 18. Jahrhundert. Georg Paul Falk, Johann Elias de Sylva, Franz Sebastian Haindl, Nonnosus Madlseder, Stefan Paluselli* (Walter Senn)

**87 (1951):** *Nicolaus Zangius, Geistliche und weltliche Gesänge* (Hans Sachs, Anton Pfalz)

**88 (1952):** *Georg Reutter d.J., Kirchenwerke. Missa S. Caroli, Requiem in C-Moll, Salve Regina, Ecce quomodo moritur* (Norbert Hofer)

**89 (1953):** *Georg Mufat, Armonico tributo 1682. Sechs Concerti grossi 1701* (Erich Schenk)

**90 (1954):** *Niederländische und italienische Musiker der Grazer Hofkapelle Karls II. (1564*–*1590)* (Hellmut Federhofer, Rudolf John)

**91 (1955):** *Antonio Caldara, Dafne* (Constantin Schneider, Rudolf John)

**92 (1956):** *Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber, Harmonia artifciosa-ariosa diversimode accordata* (Paul Nettl, Friedrich Reidinger)

**93 (1958):** *Johann Heinrich Schmelzer, Sonatae unarum fdium 1664. Violinsonaten handschriftlicher Überlieferung* (Erich Schenk)

**94/95 (1959):** *Jacobus Gallus, Fünf Messen zu acht und sieben Stimmen* (Paul Amadeus Pisk)

**96 (1960):** *Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber, Mensa Sonora seu musica instrumentalis, sonatis aliquot liberius sonantibus ad mensam (1680)* (Erich Schenk)

**97 (1960):** *Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber: Fidicinium Sacro-Profanum tam choro, quam foro pluribus fdibus concinnatum et concini aptum (1683)* (Erich Schenk)

**98 (1961):** *Jacobus Vaet, Sämtliche Werke I* (Milton Steinhardt)

**99 (1961):** *Arnold von Bruck, Sämtliche lateinische Motetten und andere unedierte Werke* (Othmar Wessely)

**100 (1962):** *Jacobus Vaet, Sämtliche Werke II* (Milton Steinhardt)

**101/102 (1962):** *Geistliche Solomotetten des 18. Jahrhunderts*  (Camillo Schoenbaum)

**103/104 (1963):** *Jacobus Vaet, Sämtliche Werke III* (Milton Steinhardt)

**105 (1963):** *Johann Heinrich Schmelzer, Duodena selectarum sonatarum (1659). Werke handschriftlicher Überlieferung*  (Erich Schenk)

**106/107 (1963):** *Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber, Sonatae tam Aris quam Aulis Servientes (1676)* (Erich Schenk)

**108/109 (1964):** *Jacobus Vaet, Sämtliche Werke IV* (Milton Steinhardt)

**110 (1964):** *Tiburzio Massaino, Liber primus cantionum ecclesiasticarum (1592). Drei Instrumentalcanzonen (1608)* (Rafaello Monterosso)

**111/112 (1965):** *Johann Heinrich Schmelzer, Sacro-profanus Concentus musicus fdium aliorumque instrumentorum (1662)* (Erich Schenk)

**113/114 (1966):** *Jacobus Vaet, Sämtliche Werke V* (Milton Steinhardt)

**115 (1966):** *Suiten für Tasteninstrumente von und um Franz Mathias Techelmann* (Herwig Knaus)


*Ausgewählte Instrumentalwerke* (Erich Schenk) **125 (1973):** *Frühmeister des Stile Nuovo in Österreich. Bartolomeo Mutis conte di Cesena, Francesco Degli Atti,* 

*Giovanni Valentini* (Othmar Wessely) **126 (1976):** *Hieronymus Bildstein:* 


(Tomas Grifn)

HOLLITZER H

www.hollitzer.at

# **NEW SENFL EDITION 1**

# LUDWIG SENFL **MOTETTEN FÜR VIER STIMMEN (A–I) Herausgegeben von Scott Lee Edwards, Stefan Gasch und Sonja Tröster**

Ludwig Senf – Schlüsselfgur der Komponistengeneration zwischen Heinrich Isaac und Orlando di Lasso – begann 1498 seine Karriere am Hof Kaiser Maximilians I., bevor er ab 1523 am Hof von Herzog Wilhelm IV. in München wirkte. Von seinen Zeitgenossen hoch geschätzt, wurde seine zentrale Position in der frühen Musikhistoriographie durch J.N. Forkel und A.W. Ambros verankert.

Trotz der herausragenden Qualität von Senfs Werk war ein Großteil seines Œuvres bislang noch nicht in einer modernen Edition zugänglich. Die New Senf Edition (NSE) schließt diese Lücke und bietet einen umfassenden Überblick über das Schafen des Komponisten auf Basis der neuesten Forschung. Die ersten beiden Bände der NSE präsentieren erstmals das gesamte erhaltene Korpus der vierstimmigen Motetten, deren große textliche wie kompositorische Bandbreite demonstriert, wie der Komponist die internationalen musikalischen Trends verinnerlichte und auf innovative Weise weiterentwickelte.

# **NEW SENFL EDITION 1**

# LUDWIG SENFL **MOTETS FOR FOUR VOICES (A–I) Edited by Scott Lee Edwards, Stefan Gasch, and Sonja Tröster**

Ludwig Senf—a key fgure in the generation of composers between Heinrich Isaac and Orlando di Lasso—began his career in 1498 at the court of Emperor Maximilian I, before working at the court of Duke Wilhelm IV in Munich from 1523 onwards. Highly esteemed by his contemporaries, his central role in early music historiography was later cemented through the writings of J.N. Forkel and A.W. Ambros.

Despite the outstanding quality of Senf's work, the majority of his œuvre has never been made available in a modern edition. Te New Senf Edition (NSE) aims to close this gap by ofering a comprehensive overview of this composer's œuvre based on the latest fndings in research. Te frst two volumes of the NSE present for the frst time his complete extant body of four-voice motets, which demonstrate how Senf internalised international trends in music composition and developed them in innovative ways.