Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama 1500 - ca. 1620
|
| Inleiding en verantwoording | 1 |
| Register van spelen | 15 |
| Klappers op het register: | |
| Bewaarplaatsen van manuscripten | 281 |
| Auteurs, afschrijvers en eigenaren | 282 |
| Spelende personages | 287 |
| Technische termen voor de soortaanduiding | 339 |
| Gedeeltelijke systematische groepering | 341 |
| Inhoudsoverzichten | 342 |
| Geraadpleegde literatuur | 389 |
| Titelindex | 400 |
Uit het artikel in Dutch Crossing is de volgende passage weggelaten. De voetnoten uit de passage zijn tussen vierkante haken weergegeven:
[pagina 97]
a survey of dutch drama before the renaissance
by HANS VAN DIJK, WIM HUMMELEN, WIM HÜSKEN, and ELSA STRIETMAN
For the greater part Dutch dramatic texts written before the Renaissance have been described in W.M.H. Hummelen's Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama, 1500-ca.1620 (Assen 1968). The first paragraph of this article consists of Hummelen's introduction to his book at the colloquium The Medieval Drama of the Low Countries (Cambridge, 4-6 September 1983); the second one is W.N.M. Hüsken's concerning the newly discovered plays since 1968. In the third section H. van Dijk and E. Strietman are setting out descriptions of the Dutch dramatic texts before 1500 (heading 0), followed by Hummelen's en Hüsken's of the newly found matter (headings 2,4, and 6). Both are in the in the manner of the Repertorium, and, together with it, they form a complete and up to date survey of the Dutch drama before the Renaissance.
Outlines of the Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama, 1500-ca.1620
In 1963 I was given the task to compile an inventory of all dramatic texts of the rhetoricians or rederijkers. From the ‘waning of the Middle Ages’ until the beginning of the seventeenth century practically no plays were written which do not show the unmistakenable signs of the rederijker style, poetically and dramatically. According to all modern handbooks on Dutch literary history the era of the rederijkers began in 1430, the year in which the Duke of Burgundy moved his court from Dijon to Brussels. In political terms, and in the long run, this event was undoubtedly highly significant for the history of the Low Countries. But even though the move to Brussels also brought about a renewed flourishing of the arts in that city, the year 1430 does not have very much to do with the activities of the rederijkers. On the one hand it is possible to discern their activities as early as the beginning of the fifteenth century, on the other hand the tradition in manuscript or in printed form of the most important fruit of those activities, their plays, does not begin until the 16th century.
[pagina 98]
In the present context that fact might not appear particularly important. After all, the literary products of earlier centuries, too, are often preserved in manuscripts of much more recent date. But unfortunately the texts of the rederijkers which have been handed down from the 16th and early 17th centuries contain very little information concerning the date of origin. Neither does dating on the grounds of style or language help us here, because the material is extremely homogeneous in this respect. With a few exceptions, the fifteenth-century plays which are presumably present in the voluminous corpus of surviving manuscripts and printed editions cannot be identified as such. In the case of printed editions, it can usually be shown that the writing of the play and the year of publication are either close together or coincide, but in the case of manuscripts the year in which a work was copied out, or the date in which the paper was made, may be the only ascertainable fact. Since a large number of plays have been transmitted in copies dating from about 1600, there is clearly a fair amount of room for speculation.
When one has to collect the texts of the rederijker plays, this situation does at least have one advantage, and that is that it is not difficult to draw the borderline of rederijker drama at the fifteenth-century end: I included only manuscripts and books written or printed after 1500. At the opposite end, in the 17th century, the line is much more difficult to trace. The influence of the Renaissance does not really make itself manifest until after 1600, but the speed with which this occurs differs according as one is at a smaller or greater distance from the cultural centres, particularly Amsterdam. This also has consequences for the form in which plays have survived. Modern plays are written first and foremost in the cultural centres where they are then printed. Old-fashioned plays, even some that can with certainty be dated as 16th-century, were still being bought, sold, performed, and copied in such far-flung corners of the country as 's-Gravenpolder, a village of a couple of hundred inhabitants in the province of Zeeland, as late as the eighteenth century.
When compiling my Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama I took account of this difference in tempo and the consequent difference between plays in print and those in manuscript form, by excluding printed plays, and including manuscript ones, dating from later than 1620. When sorting them out I started from the overall impression which a play made upon me, and as regards the printed material I included as many borderline cases as possible. On the basis of the Repertorium I today count 274 printed and 365 manuscript texts surviving. Of the total of 639, the forty-six plays of which a second version has also been preserved must be discounted, so that the total number of plays is 593.
I hasten to reduce my statement to more manageable proportions. In the first place, there are the borderline cases mentioned
[pagina 99]
above. Furthermore included as separate plays are the parts of a play, as long as they have their own prologues and epilogues. Then the 593 plays which I have counted are not particularly long. The serious ones are between 1000 and 1500 lines long, the farces (ca.80) between 500 and 600, and the dinner-plays (ca.70) which were performed at meals, only about 200 or 300. Plays of even the average length of the allegorical plays of France, which is 4000 verses, are quite unknown. This has probably got something to do with the limited size of the performing bodies in the Low Countries, and the frequency and social status of the performances.
Of the plays in manuscript, 145 have been published in print since 1838, on average no more than one a year! Of course, plays which were originally printed have also been republished in the course of this century and the last, but that does not make such a big difference to the accessibility of those plays as it does to those originally circulated as manuscripts.
The accessibility of plays is important because it determines the picture which literary historians may have of the rederijkers' work. For many years - indeed even now - the 16th- and 17th-century editions have been the most accessible, gradually supplemented by modern editions. But these most accessible of the rederijkers' plays are by no means representative of the genre as a whole. The plays most often printed were those which were less likely to be performed after their first performance and which had therefore lost their value as objects of exchange with other chambers: competition plays and other occasional plays associated with particular historical events and the like. In all they account for over fifty per cent of all printed rederijker plays. Also printed was the work of the occasional author, such as the influential humanist Dirck Volckertsz. Coornhert, who was unconcerned that in rederijker circles, especially in the 16th century, having one's plays printed was condemned as a sign of ambition and vanity. Quite commonly printed, too, were anti-Catholic plays which could be distributed as pamphlets, and dinner-plays intended for performance in a more intimate circle - at weddings, for instance - which was a fringe area in which others besides the officially organised rederijkers were undoubtedly also active. But in the contemporary printed editions of the 16th century there is a virtually total absence of biblical plays and farces.
It was also certainly not only the best plays which went into print. The publication of a collection of all plays entered for a competition meant of course that the work of all competitors was published, good and bad alike. And if this basis of printed plays upon which the literary historians of the nineteenth century founded their opinions was scarcely representative, both in diversity and in quality, the climate in which those opinions had to be formed could hardly be called particularly favourable either.
[pagina 100]
When considering the 16th century it was common to see things from the point of view of the 17th, our ‘golden age’, and in particular that of a certain group of authors characterized by a strong sense of national self-awareness and a clear orientation on the example of classical antiquity. While developing a 17th-century cultural language these very authors and their immediate forerunners had reacted strongly against the language of the rederijkers, who used a profusion of gallicisms. The same authors, of course, considered the rederijkers' dramatic forms totally passé. It is hardly to be wondered at, then, that literary historians of the nineteenth century generally judged the rederijkers fairly hard. The art of the rederijkers was seen as a transitional phenomenon, happily of relatively short duration because as early as 1580 the first signs of resistance to it might be seen in the work of those who even at that early stage were arguing for a purer use of language.
What happens when one tries to describe the Dutch morality on the basis of the plays preserved in early printed editions is demonstrated in extreme form by Hardin Craig's English religious drama in the Middle Ages (1955, 19782). At the end of the chapter about the morality one finds some remarks about the morality outside Britain. He indicates that there are no German plays but quite a few in France. ‘Holland, if one excepts Elckerlijk, had nothing significant. Dutch moralities seem to have been written on set subjects for prices, apparently in answer to proposed questions; such as, What is the greatest service that God has brought forth for the happiness of man?’. In Craig's defence it must be said at once that twentieth-century handbooks of Dutch literature are scarcely any better at helping to avoid misunderstandings such as his. They are likewise based on what has been printed of the rederijkers' plays. It is true that this basis no longer consists solely of contemporary editions, and it has also been broadened by the addition of editions of plays surviving only in manuscript form, but the process of broadening progresses slowly and largely unsystematically. In so far as there is any system in it at all it does not always constitute a contribution to the greater representativeness of the material available to the writers of handbooks.
As regards the farces, for example, there is much that has been improved. But here, of course, we are dealing with a genre which came to be better appreciated at quite an early stage, and of which the prospective publisher can easily obtain an overall picture because the majority of the plays have been preserved in only a few clusters. But publishers' concentration on plays by individual playwrights such as Cornelis Everaert, Robert Lawet, and Louris Jansz has thrown up practically no better representatives of the biblical plays. For that reason I concentrated my activities as a (co-)editor of rederijker plays on texts of this category.
[pagina 101]
My dream, however, that the Repertorium would direct other editors in their choice is changing into a nightmare. Finding a play that is not mentioned in the Repertorium seems to become a sufficient reason to publish it.
In the Repertorium the texts are arranged in four groups: 1A-1Z (later supplemented with 5A): manuscript collections of plays; 2 01-2 30: single manuscripts; 3A-3Z (later supplemented with 6A-6E): printed collections of plays; 4 01-4 39: single printed plays. In each category the plays are described in the same way as the plays of the period 1400-1500 and the plays found since the completion of the Repertorium, of which a description is given at the end of this article. In the Repertorium then follow indices of the places where manuscripts are deposited; of the authors, scribes, and owners; of the technical terms occuring in the material and used to indicate a play; an enumeration of the farces and of the plays based on (hi)story, among which 80 biblical plays (20 based on parables). The Repertorium finally summarizes those plays in manuscript the contents of which are not available elsewhere, and concludes with a bibliography and a title-index.
(transl. H.S. Lake)
New discoveries
In the last fifteen years since the publication of W.M.H. Hummelen's Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama, 1500-ca.1620 new plays have been discovered, manuscripts and old printings have been edited, and as a result of philological research some plays have turned out to belong to different times. However, from time to time plays or editions that should have belonged to the Repertorium have popped up too. Without broaching the problem of identifying authors of plays anonymously handed down to us, I would now like to provide you with a few addenda to the Repertorium. Most of these facts were collected and noted down by Prof. Hummelen in his own desk-copy of the Repertorium, which I was kindly permitted to make use of.
The most important addition to the Repertorium consists of thirteen newly discovered hitherto unknown plays. Also there are three plays of which the text was already known, but which are now available in earlier versions. Finally eight plays have been discovered earlier versions of which already existed.
All of the plays in the second and third categories were discovered by coincidence by the chapbook-specialist Herman Pleij and his colleague Rob Resoort from Amsterdam. In the Paris Bibliothèque Nationale and the Wolffenbüttel Herzog August Bibliothek they dug up one sixteenth and two early seventeenth century
[pagina 102]
collections of rhetoricians' products, containing (for the greater part) refrains and dinner-plays.
As for the three plays which are now available in earlier versions; in regard to Cornelis Crul's dramatic monologue Een dronckaert die wonder siet (A drunkard who thinks he sees miracles) we now have at our disposal an edition from the Paris copy of the Cruyt-hofken (Botanical Garden; 6H), dated 1600, whereas the oldest known version dated from 1611[(1) See: W.M.H. Hummelen, Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama, 1500-ca.1620, Assen 1968, p. 236 (3X1). Codes like ‘2 31, 6F’ etc. for newly discovered plays refer to the Addenda listed below.]. Similarly the only known edition of the anonymous Een lansknecht die teghen zijn schaduwe vecht (A lansquenet fighting his own shadow) and Een sot met een marot (Fool and bauble) were dated 1596, but in Wolffenbüttel Pleij and Resoort found six year older versions in Een Nieu Refereyn Boeck (A new refrain-book; 6F)[(2) See: Hummelen, op.cit., p. 233 (3U2 and 3U3).]. On top of that the two collections just mentioned contain six different plays in later versions. In the Repertorium these plays are numbered 3C57, 3E1-3, 3V1, and 3W1. The popularity of some of these plays should be sufficiently apparent from the fact that two of them are present in two of these booklets! (3U2 and 3W1)
In Een Nieu Refereyn boeck (6F) there is only one play hitherto unknown: Een kwakzalver int Bonte Huys (A quack in the Gaudy House). The Cruyt-hofken (6H) brings two new texts to light: a Bruyloft-spel van Soet en Suer (A wedding-play of Sweet and Sour), signed ‘Hout dat goet is’, the device or motto of Cornelis Meesz. van Hout (the father of one of our better known rhetoricians Jan van Hout), and Blijden Will en Sotte Cout (Happy Will and Foolish Talk). The third collection that has been discovered by Pleij and Resoort (6G), also contains two new texts: Kees Knol en Neel Jans, signed: ‘Liefd baerdt konst’, and Een Kramer die Vrysters verkoopt (A pedlar selling sweethearts).
Beside these three collections we now have at our disposal seven other newly discovered plays and a fragment of a play only available in a rather difficult to attain 19th-century edition. Four of these plays have come to us in manuscriptform.
In 1870 the Flemish historian and bibliographer Frans de Potter published a fragment from De Menighe, Elc en Deen en Redene (Many, Each and The One, and Reason; 2 31)[(3) See: Frans de Potter, Schets eener geschiedenis van de gemeentefeesten in Vlaanderen, Gent 1870, pp. 123-127.]. Unfortunately enough, neither his transcription of the entire play nor the original manuscript
[pagina 103]
itself can be found. Three other handwritten plays represent more recent rediscoveries. In the Ghent University Library W.L. Braekman found a sixteenth century farce (written approximately in 1567) entitled Twyf, de Neckere en de Gendarme (Wife, Devil, and Gendarme; 2 32) in a manuscript otherwise containing rhetoricians' poetry[(4) See: W.L. Braekman (ed), ‘Een onbekend Gents handschrift met rederijkersteksten’, in: Jaarboek De Fonteine: 27-28 (1976-1977) 1, pp. 61-95.]. In the same library Mrs P. Lammens-Pikhaus came across a dinner-play of Wauter Dicksteert (2 33) in a collection of pious and ascetic poems, as indicated in the title of her edition of the play[(5) See: P. Lammens-Pikhaus (ed), ‘Een nog onbekend tafelspel in een bundel vrome en ascetische gedichten’, in: Jaarboek De Fonteine: 31-32 (1980-1981) 2, pp. 115-128.]. Finally F.C. van Boheemen and Th.C.J. van der Heijden were the lucky finders of Een spel van sinnen van de wortel van Rethoorijka (A morality-play of the root of Rhetoric; 2 34) in the ‘Criminal Papers’ of the Hague Algemeen Rijksarchief[(6) See: F.C. van Boheemen and Th.C.J. van der Heijden, ‘Merct doch dit gruwelijck spectakel van dit gespuis. Uit de geschiedenis van de rederijkerskamer ‘De Hofbloemkens’ uit De Lier, in: Uit het Liers verleden, De Lier 1981, pp. 71-115.]. The play dates back to the year 1604.
Four printed plays remain to be mentioned in order to complete our survey of newly discovered rhetoricians' dramatexts. Shortly after publication of the Repertorium Herman Pleij drew Hummelen's attention to one of the Amsterdam University Libraries new acquisitions, a play by François Guldepoort: Een cort Sinspeelken hoe men aen warachtighe Eere gheraken mach (A short morality-play of how to obtain true honour). It was intended to be performed as a prologue to the spel van sinne of the Malines' rhetoricians' chamber De Peoene on the occasion of the Antwerp landjuweel in 1561[(7) University Library Amsterdam, code 0 67-55. Willem Silvius, the famous printer of the landjuweel's large play-collection, was also responsible for this publication, although it came off his presses a year later, in 1563.]. Prof. Hummelen found a copy of Dirick Schabalie's ‘comedy’ Eyghen Bate (Own Benefit; 4 40) in, again, the Paris Bibliothèque Nationale[(8) Bibliothèque Nationale Paris, code Yi 1256.]. Like the Spel des oproers tot Ephesien (Play on the Ephesian revolt; 4 42) from the same author, it was printed in Haarlem in 1614, although the original edition was mistakenly dated
[pagina 104]
1641[(9) Municipal Library Haarlem, code 73G10. See: Hubert Meeus, Repertorium van het ernstig drama in de Nederlanden 1600-1650, Leuven 1983, p. 148-149.]. Similarly the Spel van de V vroede ende van de V dwaeze maegden (Play of five wize and five foolish virgins; 2 35) cannot be dated back any further than the early sixteenth century, as has been proved by B.H. Erné in his new edition of the Spelen van Gent[(10) Cfr B.H. Erné (ed), De Gentse spelen van 1539, Vol. 2, Den Haag 1982, pp. 477-478. The standard-edition of this play was made by Marcel Hoebeke, Het Spel van de V vroede ende van de V dwaeze maegden, Zwolle 1959.].
To finish our enumeration of texts that should be included in a revised edition of the Repertorium, as undoubtedly wished for by many scholars, we should return to Mrs Lammens-Pikhaus from the Ghent University once more. To her we owe a reference to a dinner-play, hitherto unnoticed, called Clerc, Huys-man, Soldaet en Stierman (Clerk, Farmer, Soldier, and Skipper), performed by four school-children on the occasion of prince William's visit to Monster on June 11th 1589[(11) Municipal Library Rotterdam, code 25E11.].
Sometimes, even after decades, one or more plays the location of which was known in 1774[(12) In this year Willem Kops published his ‘Schets eener geschiedenisse der Rederijkeren’ in the Werken van de Maatschappij der Nederlandsche Letterkunde (Leiden, vol. 2, pp. 212-351), the first general survey on Dutch rhetoricians' drama.] but which vanished afterwards, have been completely by chance retrieved from a lumber-room. In this way Prof. Keersmaekers was able to lay his hands on a collection of four dinner-plays from the early seventeenth century (6A1-6A4), originally bound together with a mid-sixteenth century printing of an Antigone-version (7 08)[(13) See: A.A. Keersmaekers, ‘Gevonden - verloren - gevonden. Cornelis van Ghisteles vertaling van Antigone e.a. weer terecht’, in: Verslagen en Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie: (1982), pp. 128-142. Meanwhile the Leiden University Library has bought these precious documents.]. Unfortunately such a find only occurs very seldom[(14) In a recent letter Mrs Lammens-Pikhaus informed me that the indexnumber of Het beclach van Vlaendren, mentioned in Hummelen's Repertorium (2 23) was completely unknown to the staff of the Ghent State Archives, due to a total renumbering of their manuscripts. Only by sheer chance she was able to find it again, under a new code: Raad van Vlaanderen, hs. 33438.]. Thus the biggest loss is still that of the drama-collections K and L from the Haarlem Chamber of Rhetoric
[pagina 105]
Trou moet blycken (Loyalty must/should be proved). Now and again we even see our chances of regaining missing plays clearly diminishing: for example, two years ago the librarian of the Ieper Municipal Library informed me that their copy of Een batement van IIII personagien, den pastoor, den medecyn, den advocaet ende den sot genoempt onnosel (A joyous play of four characters, the vicar, the doctor, the lawyer, and a fool named Innocent; 4 44) was destroyed in World War I.
There are only fourteen unpublished plays that have been edited for the first time between 1968 and 1983. As in former years there appears to be no apparent policy for the decision to publish one play in preference to another. By and by the Jaarboek De Fonteine, an irregularly forthcoming periodical of one of the former Ghent Chambers of Rhetoric, is occupying a more and more important place in the rhetoricians' study of drama and theatre. A register of editions of rhetoricians' drama published after 1968, supplemented with a few earlier publications that are not yet included in the Repertorium, is listed under ‘Geraadpleegde werken’.
Addenda to W.M.H. Hummelen, Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama, 1500-ca.1620, Assen 1968.
copyright 2003 dbnl / W.M.H. Hummelen
DBNL-nr humm001repe01_02
W.M.H. Hummelen, Repertorium van het rederijkersdrama 1500 - ca. 1620. Van Gorcum & Comp. / Dr. H.J. Prakke & H.M.G. Prakke, Assen 1968.
Hans van Dijk, Wim Hummelen, Wim Hüsken en Elsa Strietman, ‘A Survey of Dutch Drama before the Renaissance.’ In: Dutch Crossing 22 (1984), p. 97-131.
codering DBNL-TEI 1