University of Groningen on the Counting of Mass Books Irving, A

University of Groningen On the Counting of Mass Books Irving, A J M Published in: Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2017 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Irving, A. J. M. (2017). On the Counting of Mass Books. Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft, 57 (2015), 24-48. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 30-09-2021 ALw 57 / p. 24 / 7.11. ANDREW J. M. IRVING ON THE COUNTING OF MASS BOOKS1 Contents: 1. Introduction / 2. Received Narratives / 3. A Material Approach / 4. Mass Book Manuscripts in the Beneventan Zone / Appendix 1 / 1. The Eleventh Century / 2. The Twelfth Century / Appendix 2 / 1. Sacramentaries in Beneventan Script / 2. Cassinese Missals 1. Introduction In the middle of a list of sumptuous „ecclesiastica ornamenta“ that Desiderius, the „bibliophile abbot“ of Montecassino (1058–1087),2 had acquired or ordered to be made between his election and the date of the dedication of his new Abbey basilica in 1071, Leo Marsicanus, abbey librarian, scribe and commissioned author of the Chronicle of Montecassino, inserts a surprising aside: „He ordered a similar treatment [adornment with a silver binding] for one, and a second sacramentary for the altar, and likewise for two gospel books, and one epistolary. For up until that time both the gospel and the epistle were read from a plenary missal; it is now well-known just how disgraceful that practice was back then.“3 In other words, according to Leo the reason that the abbot undertook the con- siderable expense of having bound in silver two sacramentaries, two Gospel books, and one epistolary, was that his confreres at the venerable abbey of St Benedict had up until that time engaged in the „inhonestum“ practice of reading the mass lections from a plenary missal – a book which instead of keeping separate 1 Research for this paper was conducted with the generous support of a post-doctoral research fellow- ship at the Institute of Sacred Music at Yale University. I remain indebted to the ISM faculty and staff and colleagues for the opportunity both to undertake these first steps in my longer term research into the Latin mass book in twelfth-century, and for providing an incomparable interdisci- plinary environment for the rigorous and fruitful exchange of ideas and questions concerning liturgical history, theology, and practice. I wish also to thank the editors of ALw for their meticulous reading, generous suggestions, and helpful questions. 2 The phrase is Francis Newton’s: The Scriptorium and Library at Monte Cassino, 1058–1105. Cambridge 1999 (Cambridge Studies in Palaeography and Codicology 7) 253. 3 Chronica monasterii casinensis 3,18: „Similiter fecit et de sacramentoriis altaris uno et altero et duobus nichilominus evangeliis et epistolario uno. Nam usque ad illud tempus in plenario missali tam evangelia quam epistole legebantur, quod, quam esset tunc inhonestum, modo satis advertitur“; Die Chronik von Montecassino. Ed. Hartmut Hoffmann. Hannover 1980 (MGH.SS [Scriptores in folio 5] 34) 384 (translation and emphasis are my own). References to page numbers of Hoff- mann’s edition are provided hereafter in parentheses following citations of the work. The author- itative study of the composition of the Chronicle is Hartmut Hoffmann, Studien zur Chronik von Montecassino, in: DA 29. 1973, 59–162. See also his introduction to Die Chronik von Montecassi- no, p. VII–XII, and Anna Maria Fagnoni, Un cronista medievale al lavoro. Leone Ostiense e la prima redazione della Cronaca Cassinese. Problemi di analisi, in: Scripta Philologa 2. 1980, 51–129; ead., Storia di un testo. La Cronaca di Montecassino, in: StMed 25. 1984, 813–832; Newton, Scriptor- ium (n. 2 above) 16–30. ALw 57. 2015, 24–48 ALw 57 / p. 25 / 7.11. On the Counting of Mass Books 25 these texts in separate volumes, combined mass readings with prayers and chant repertory in a single volume. Leo’s concise explanation for Desiderius’s initiative rings like a hollow board as one steps down the neat stairs of the librarian’s list. Not only does the brief ex- cursus interrupt the regular rhythm of a straightforward, albeit encomiastic, inven- tory of ecclesiastical treasure, but the tone is oddly vituperative. The intensity of Leo’s disparagement of the earlier practice can be gauged by the only other time that Leo uses the adjective „inhonestum“ in the Chronicle. In his account of the year 1071, Leo writes that, as papal vicar for the reform of monasteries in southern Italy, Desiderius had taken the unusual measure of deposing the powerful abbot of S. Maria in Tremiti because „many disgraceful and unspeakable things (multa inhonesta et nefanda) … were being rumoured about the rectors of the monastery“.4 One is prompted to ask: what lies underneath this brief but passionate inter- ruption? While it is unsurprising that Leo should wish to portray Abbot Desider- ius as the extirpator of disgraceful customs and acts, the question remains why and under what circumstances is the practice of using of a plenary missal instead of the trio of sacramentary, epistle and gospel book deemed „disgraceful“. How and why are different values attributed to old and new patterns in the community’s use of liturgical books that distribute the same texts differently, and what is at stake for the community and its chronicler in the change? Perhaps most interesting of all, this brief remark flies in the face of a consensus of broader historical narratives regarding trends in Western European liturgical book production in the late-eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, according to which missals were not re- jected but increasingly preferred over sacramentaries in this period. Leo’s account of the rejection of a former Cassinese practice („usque ad illud tempus“) that seems elsewhere in Europe to be a new and ever more popular practice invites us to revisit old questions and assumptions regarding the transition from sacramentary to missal as the predominant form of mass book in the medieval West. This paper will treat this subject under three headings: first, we shall reconsider the received narratives regarding the dates and reasons for the transition from sacramentary to missal; second, we shall propose a different approach to the question; and third we shall return to the subject of mass books written in Southern Italian Beneventan script, as a preliminary case study of the usefulness of this approach. No solutions will be proposed here: what I hope to do instead is to make a strong case for the need to revisit the question, and make a modest proposal for a way forward. 4 Chronica monasterii casinensis 3,25: „Preterea cum de rectoribus Tremitensis cenobii, quod nobis antiquitus pertinuisse Romanorum quoque pontificum privilegia pleraque testantur, multa eo tem- pore inhonesta et nefanda diffamarentur, eidem Desiderio ad disquirendum et disponendum illud, prout sibi optimum videretur, data ab apostolico auctoritas est“ (MGH.SS [Scriptores in folio 5] 34,392). ALw 57 / p. 26 / 7.11. 26 Andrew J. M. Irving 2. Received Narratives The received narrative of the development in the history of mass books is usually sketched as follows: between the mid-eleventh century and the early-thirteenth century, the earlier prevailing model of mass book, the so-called „sacramentary“ – often defined somewhat broadly as a book containing the prayers needed by the priest at celebrations of the mass (sometimes in conjunction with chant, or readings, or other ritual material) – began to cede ground to what has been called the „plenary missal“ – that is, a book that combines chant, prayers, and readings together with the „ordo missae“ in a single volume either in distinct sections, or, as will eventually be the dominant form, in integrated, and sequentially ordered series. The precise date of this gradual but significant transition is usually somewhat vaguely defined in the text books of liturgical history. Not infrequently dates that appear to conflict with one another can be found even within a single modern author. In the description of a gradual change much depends, of course, on whether the date refers to the beginning, the middle, or the end of the transition, and this can, at times, be difficult to determine from the summary presentation offered by the standard liturgical manuals. Josef Andreas Jungmann, for instance, describes „a new arrangement

Load more