The Lost Manuscripts of Alamair

Societe Belge de Musicologie
The Unknown Alamire: Lost Manuscripts Reclaimed

Author(s): Honey Meconi
Source: Revue belge de Musicologie / Belgisch Tijdschrift voor Muziekwetenschap, Vol. 71
(2017), pp. 33-84
Published by: Societe Belge de Musicologie
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26623445
Accessed: 18-11-2021 19:25 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26623445?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Societe Belge de Musicologie is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Revue belge de Musicologie / Belgisch Tijdschrift voor Muziekwetenschap
This content downloaded from 185.130.86.10 on Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:25:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Unknown Alamire: Lost Manuscripts Reclaimed*
Honey Meconi
(University of Rochester)
On 9 of
November 1602, the
Spain, signed Gérycompleted
de Ghersem, lieutenant
inventory of music
of the the chapel
booksofbelonging
King Philip
to III
the
previous monarch, Philip II. Philip had died in 1598; his massive collection of music
books, listed as 234 items in the inventory,1 would eventually disappear almost
entirely over the succeeding four centuries. Only thirteen volumes survive today, a
dozen of which contain polyphony.2
While most books in the inventory are without indication of composer, a fair
number of items provide names. The composers identified include the succes
sion of northern chapelmasters who directed Philip II's Flemish choir - Pierre de
Manchicourt,3 Jean de Bonmarché,4 Geert van Turnhout,5 and George de la Hèle6 -
as well as those who served Charles V, Philip's father: Nicolas Gombert,7 Thomas
Crecquillon,8 Adrian Picart,9 and Cornelius Canis.10 Philip's inventory also contains
music books owned by his aunt, Mary of Hungary, and thus Mary's master of choir
* Versions of this essay were read at the Annual Meeting of the American Musicological Society, New
Orleans, November 2012, and the International Medieval and Renaissance Music Conference, University of
Nottingham, July 2012.
1 An excellent modern edition of the inventory, superseding earlier publications, accompanies T. Knighton,
"La mùsica en la casa y capilla del principe Felipe (1543-1556): modelos y contextes", in L. Robledo Estaire,
T. Knighton, C. Bordas Ibânez, and J. J. Carreras (eds.), Aspectos de la cultura musical en la Corte de
Felipe II (Madrid, 2000), p. 35-97; the inventory is Apéndice 22 on p. 380-394. No listing is given for 2/19,
and two entries (a and b) appear under 2/38. This essay follows the inventory's numbering; for example, 2/28
refers to the twenty-eighth item in Section 2 of the inventory. Knighton's article provides the best discussion
of the inventory to date. On the dispersal of Philip's books after 1602, see Knighton, "La müsica en la
casa", p. 79-80, and also D. Pujol, "Manuscrites de Mùsica Neerlandesa conservados en la Biblioteca del
Monasterio de Montserrat", Atti del Congresso Intemazionale de Musica Sacra (Rome, 1950), p. 319-322.
2 The surviving plainchant volume is 1/16 (Chigi C.VII. 205, Vatican Library). Polyphonic manuscripts still
extant are given in Table 5.
3 Manchicourt is named in seven items: the manuscripts 2/18 (an "old and damaged" book), 2/98, 3/9
(= MontsM 768, devoted to his masses, large folio), 3/20 (all Manchicourt), 4/29, and 4/53, and the print 2/92
(15321).
4 Bonmarché appears in items 4/43 and 4/44, both devoted to his works.
5 Turnhout is found in item 4/56 (large folio).
6 De
— la
—■Hèle appears in
— »|/|/v>M>/ item
u. »viu wr4/57 (large
I ^iWgv folio),
1U11Vy5 devoted
UVTVtVU W to
1UOhis works.
«U1IU).
7 Gombert is present in 4/22 and 4/25, the latter devoted to his works.
8 Crecquillon is found in 3/10 (large folio, all Crecquillon), 4/3, and 4/30.
9 Picart appears in 2/75 (all Picart).
10 Canis is named in 2/47 (a single gathering), 4/10, and 4/11.
34 ■ Revue belge de Musicologie / Belgisch Tijdschrift voor Muziekwetenschap
boys and de facto court composer, Benedictas Appenzeller,11 is well represented.

But it is the generation of composers who antedate Appenzeller, almost all of whom
were dead before Mary assumed the leadership of the Low Countries in 1531 and
most of whom had passed away even before Philip's birth in 1527, who are the focus
of this essay.12 Music by Pierre de la Rue, Josquin des Prez, Alexander Agricola,
Hottinet Barra, Antoine Bramel, Nicolas Craen, Anthonius Divitis, Antoine de Févin,
Mathurin Forestier, Matthieu Gascongne, Johannes Ghiselin, Heinrich Isaac, Jean
Lebrun, Lupus, Jean Mouton, Jean Richafort, Philippe Verdelot, and Jheronimus
Vinders appears in Philip's collection, and certain of the now-lost manuscripts con
taining their music should be reclaimed as products of the scriptorium associated
with the Habsburg-Burgundian court in the first third of the sixteenth century and its
one-time chapel member, scribe, and keeper of the books, Petras Alamire. And as it
turns out, Philip's collection, though the most important, is not the only place where
we find references to manuscripts that must surely have originated with the Alamire
scriptorium. Codices in this category are found as well in the inventories of Raimund
Fugger the Younger, the court chapel of Palatine Count Ottheinrich of Neuberg, and
Mary of Hungary, as well as in the bequests of Pierre de la Rue and the records of
Bergen op Zoom; some of these manuscripts have already been cited by scholars for
their parallels with Alamire's known output. This essay will demonstrate how a com
bination of factors such as heraldry, writing support, repertoire, and the amount and
placement of decoration lead to the conclusion of courtly (Habsburg-Burgundian)
origin for many of the volumes singled out below.
As is well known, the so-called "Alamire" manuscripts13 constitute one of
the most impressive gatherings of musical material from their time. Created over
11 The eight manuscripts with Appenzeller are 2/27 (large folio with his mass and motet), 2/69 (all Appenzeller;
= MontsM 765), 2/93 (Appenzeller motets only), 2/100 (large folio; all Appenzeller), 4/9, 4/26 (all
Appenzeller), 4/45, and 4/46.
12 Other composers whose music appears in the inventory but who are not discussed in this essay are Jacques
Arcadelt (4/47 = his 1557 mass print), Carpentras (4/49 = 1532 Liber primus missarum), Rodrigo de Ceballos
(4/15, all Ceballos), Charles Chastelain (4/32), Jacob Clemens non Papa (3/33, large folio, all Clemens; 4/9),
Bartolomé de Escobedo (2/46, large folio), Francisco Guerrero (4/13; 4/14; 4/51; 4/59 = 1582 mass print; all
volumes devoted to Guerrero), Guglielmo de Gonzaga (4/60, all Gonzaga), Fernando de las Infantas (2/105
and 106 = MontsM 774 and 775), Jacquet of Mantua (4/41, print), Cristobal de Morales (2/96, large book,
all Morales; 4/36, print, all Morales), Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina (4/52, print, all Palestrina), Pedro de
Pastrana (2/102, large book; 4/42, large book), Juan Petit (2/60, large folio), Loyset Piéton (4/7), Claudin de
Sermisy (2/81 = print 15343; 4/20; 4/37, print; 4/48 = print 15582, all Claudin), and Philippe Verdelot (4/35).
13 Throughout this essay the collection will be referred to as the "Alamire" or the "court" manuscripts, even
though we cannot associate the earliest manuscripts with Alamire himself. See H. Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre
de la Rue, and Manuscript Production in the Time of Charles V", in A. Zayaruznaya, B. J. Blackburn, and
S. Boorman (eds.), Qui musicam in se habet: Studies in Honor of Alejandro Enrique Planchart (Middleton,
2015), p. 575-613 on the sustained association of Alamire with the Habsburg-Burgundian court. The standard
reference work on these manuscripts is H. Kellman (ed.), The Treasury of Petrus Alamire: Music and Art in
Flemish Court Manuscripts 1500-1535 (Ghent - Amsterdam, 1999), hereafter Treasury.
The Unknown Alamire: Lost Manuscripts Reclaimed ■ 35
approximately three decades at the beginning of the sixteenth century under at least
two main supervisors (Alamire being the only one firmly identified), the elegantly
produced codices are often richly decorated with miniatures, drolleries, borders,
coats of arms, and owner's mottos or other emblems. They transmit a huge repertoire
of masses, individual mass movements, motets, Magnificats, and secular works. In
recent decades, discoveries of fragments previously hidden in book bindings have
expanded the number of surviving manuscripts associated with the scriptorium to
just over sixty. Dozens of composers are represented therein, but as Herbert Kellman
demonstrated years ago, the composer most frequently featured is La Rue,14 the
leading musical creator under the rule of, successively, Maximilian, Philip the Fair,
Juana of Castile, Margaret of Austria, and the Archduke Charles (later to become
Charles V).
The precise nature of the scriptorium that produced these manuscripts remains
unknown, though before 1517, the year that the Archduke Charles departed for
Spain, it is highly likely that Alamire and his predecessors relied at least in part,
and probably quite heavily, on the musicians of the Habsburg-Burgundian court.
The nature of the manuscripts' production, which typically involved multiple scribes
working closely together, the heavy reliance on the music of court composer Pierre
de la Rue, and Alamire's own employment as a member of the chapel, identified as
both its "scribe" and its "keeper of the books", argue for this interpretation. After
1517 such close collaboration was rarely possible, though Alamire continued his
association with the court and his use, at times extensive, of the court's repertoire.15
The full extent of the scriptorium's production has never been fully estimated, and
it is the purpose of this essay to pull together the multiple sources that argue for a
scriptorium more active than previously thought. An overview of the known archival
references to Alamire's production is followed by a perusal of documents connected
with Raimund Fugger the Younger, Palatine Count Ottheinrich of Neuberg, Pierre
de la Rue, and Bergen op Zoom - in other words, documents not originating at
the Habsburg-Burgundian court. Each of these cites one or more volumes likely to
come from Alamire's circle, some already flagged by scholars but never considered
in the context of the overall scriptorium production. We then provide a detailed
examination of two inventories from key figures in the Habsburg-Burgundian dynasty,
returning first to the extended list of Philip II's music books and then proceeding to
the inventory of Mary of Hungary. The result is a greatly amplified picture of the
music manuscripts generated by Alamire and his cohorts during the first third of the
sixteenth century.
14 H. Kellman, "Josquin and the Courts of the Netherlands and France: The Evidence of the Sources," in E. E.
Lowinsky and B. J. Blackburn (eds.), Josquin des Prez: Proceedings of the International Josquin Festival
Conference (London - New York - Toronto, 1976), p. 181-216.
15 Detailed in Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre de la Rue" [fh. 13].
Alamire in the Archives
The idea
will)that losthave
could codices listed in inventories
originated or other
under Alamire's documents is
supervision (e.g. La Rue's by the
supported
myriad archival references that attest to his scribal activity. All of these are known
and have been discussed before, but they warrant a review in light of both the most
recent research and this essay's goal of identifying lost manuscripts.16
Table 1 lists published references to Alamire's production; I have assigned a
letter of the alphabet to each manuscript or group of manuscripts in order to ease
identification.17 If an archival citation mentions more than one manuscript, the
manuscript letter is followed by numbers (e.g., A 1-3). This list of commissioned
manuscripts matches surviving Alamire manuscripts in neither number nor
description. We are missing documentation for most of what survives, and most
of what is listed in Table 1 finds no counterpart in what survives. This archival
mismatch supports the idea that entries in inventories such as Philip's capture some
of this documented yet now-lost production on Alamire's part.
TABLE 1. Archival References to Alamire
s = sous
sc = schelling
st = stuiver
Al-3 1496 August 15 :- Alamire

O"*w *—
paid r ■ c 12st for three paper choirbooks
14 gulden
's-Hertogei
of polyphony for 's-Hertogenbosch confraternity18
B 1498/1499 Alamire
9 Alamire
paid 3£
paid
for
3£a for
booka boot
of motets and Magnificats etc. for
Antwerp Church of Our Lac
Lady19
C 1503 Alamire paidAlamire

50£ bypaidcourt
50£ byfor large parchment choirbook of
court
twenty-sixquires
twenty-six quires (masses
(masses ar and other liturgical music)20
l7 illnminatpH nnrrhmpint nnlv
1506/1507 illuminated parchment polyphony for Antwerp costing 7£ 16sc
3denier: no documented connection to Alamire2^
16 Since the completion of this essay, Serafina Beck has noted the existence of "songbooks and compositions"
prepared by Alamire for the Nuremberg Town Council. See S. Beck, "Petrus Alamire: Music Copyist, Singer,
Musician, Composer, Merchant, Spy and Courier," in Petrus Alamire: Polyphony in the Picture (Ghent,
2015), p. 2-5, at 5.
17 Table 1 and much of the discussion of these archival references are drawn from E. Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire:
Music Calligrapher, Musician, Composer, Spy", in Treasury, p. 15-27. I have made slight corrections as
necessary. A somewhat less detailed version of Table 1 is interspersed with surviving Alamire manuscripts
and other material in Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre de la Rue" [fn. 13], Appendix 1.
18 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fh. 17], p. 15 and 23 #1.
19 Ibid., p. 23 #2.
20 Ibid., p. 23 #3.
21 Ibid., p. 23 #4
Dl-2 1511 Alamire paid 20£ by Maximilian commission for two large
parchment choirbooks of masses, one for Maximilian and one
for Margaret's New Year's gift22
[D ms.] March 7 : Margaret sends Alamire and music book to Maximilian23

El-2 1512/1513 Alamire paid 17£ 4sc for two manuscripts for Antwerp
Confraternity of Our Lady24
1514 January 10: Alamire paid 1£ lOsc to begin a "coostelick" book of
5v motets for Antwerp Confraternity of Our Lady25
1514/1515 Alamire paid 2£ 20sc for copying parchment "Virgo" book for
Antwerp Confraternity of Our Lady26
Hl-2 1515 May: Alamire, writing from Lorraine, sends six small partbooks
and a 5v composition to Henry VIII27
by December 23: Alamire commissioned by Jan van Reth to
make Marian Matins book28
1516 Alamire paid 2£ 2sc for parchment book of polyphony (twelve
quaterns) for Antwerp Church of Our Lady29
Kl-5 1517 undated letter: Alamire has sent five music books (one of
parchment, K5) to Henry VIII30
for Antwerp Church of Our Lady, Alamire completes book of
polyphony (including four masses) begun earlier by Peter/Petrus
Piersson; paid 30sc31
M 1518 February 27: estate of François de Taxis (postmaster in Mechelen)
cites music book belonging to Alamire intended for presentation
to the Emperor32
N 1519-1520 Alamire receives thirty sheets of parchment for music book for
Antwerp Church of Our Lady33
O 1520 April 3: Alamire paid 1£ 15sc to write six and a half quires of
discant for Antwerp Confraternity of Our Lady34
August 22: Alamire paid 1£ by Antwerp Confraternity of Our

Lady to write four quires of polyphony for Lof35
22 Ibid., p. 23 #5.
23 Ibid., p. 23 #6.
24 Ibid., p. 23 #7.
25 Ibid., p. 23 #8.
26 Ibid., p. 24 #9.
27 Ibid., p. 20, Table 3; J. S. Brewer (ed.), Letters and Papers. Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII,
vol. 2, Parts 1 and 2 (London, 1864), #541.
28 Brewer, Letters and Papers [fh. 27], #1339.
29 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fh. 17], p. 24 #10.
-j — ■£ L — - J7 - -JTI *
30 Brewer, Letters and Papers [fh. 27], Appendix #39.
31 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fn. 17], p. 24 #11.
32 G. Van Doorslaer, "Calligraphes de musique à Malines, au XVIe siècle," Bulletin du Cercle archéologique
littéraire et artistique de Malines, 33 (1928), p. 91-101, at 98.
33 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fh. 17], p. 24 #12.
34 Ibid., p. 24 #13.
35 Ibid., p. 24 #13.
Q October 28: Alamire paid 5£ 5sc by Antwerp Confraternity of

Our Lady for book of seven Requiem masses36
R November 17: Alamire receives twelve sheets of parchment from
Antwerp Confraternity for Our Lady37
S (= R?) December 8: Alamire paid 15sc by Antwerp Confraternity of Our

Lady for unspecified songbook38
T 1523 April 15: Alamire paid 200£ for several music books for Charles
(in Spain)39
U/D2? 1523/1524 Margaret's inventory includes music book Emperor gave to her;
begins with "Kirieleyson"; first mass "de...saincte Anne" by
Pirechon de La Rue40
1525/1526 Alamire paid 200£ for large music book with masses and other
"suffraiges" for Charles in Spain41
W 1529 Alamire paid 20£ for "other books for the chapel" of Margaret42
X 1530 March: Alamire paid 20£ by Margaret for several books of masses
and other "suffraiges" for Charles (in Italy and Germany)43
[Y 1-2] July 26: Alamire commissioned by 's-Hertogenbosch to copy
sixteen masses in two choirbooks for 12 Rijnsgulden44
Yl-3 1531 January 28: Alamire delivers two books plus a third, "better",
book to 's-Hertogenbosch; receives 9 Rijnsgulden45
Z July 22: Alamire delivers new book of eight masses to
's-Hertogenbosch; receives 18 gulden46
AA 1533 Dec. 10: Alamire paid first installment of300£ total for choirbooks
for Mary's chapels47
BB 1535 April 17: Alamire paid 40s by court for a gift of a beautiful music
book48
[AA] May 21: Alamire paid final installment of 300£ total for "a good
number of beautifiil music books" for Mary's chapel49
1536 June 26: Alamire dies
36 Ibid., p. 24 #13.
37 Ibid., p. 24 #13.
38 Ibid., p. 24 #13.
39 Ibid., p. 24 #14.
40 M. Debae, La Bibliothèque de Marguerite d'Autriche: Essai de reconstitution d'après l'inventaire de 1523
1524 (Louvain - Paris, 1995), p. 61.
41 The payment was delivered in two parts, first £ 150 (Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fh. 17], p. 24 #16) and then
£50 (ibid., p. 24 #17). The latter payment took place in February 1527 n.s. (ibid., p. 22, Table 5). The full
payment was recorded again; see ibid., p. 24 #15 (the court had multiple systems of accounting).
42 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fii. 17], p.25 #18.
43 Ibid., p. 25 #19.
44 Ibid., p. 25 #20.
45 Ibid., p. 25 #20.
46 Ibid., p. 25 #21.
47 Ibid., p. 25 #22.
48 Ibid., p. 25 #23.
49 Ibid., p. 25 #23.
The earliest documentation is for the famous confraternity of 's-Hertogenbosch -

three paper choirbooks of polyphony, Items Al-3 - and those three are joined decades
later (1530 and 1531) by four other books, Items Y1-3 and Z. Surviving today from
's-Hertogenbosch are precisely three paper choirbooks of polyphony - 's-HerABA, B,
and c - but those cannot be the books from the 1490s because the repertoire is far
too late (e.g. Courtois, Willaert). Nor do the scribal hands fit with the 1490s. And
in fact, the books that survive match only imperfectly the late archival references.50
Another institution for which Alamire provided music is the Antwerp Church
of Our Lady.51 For more than two decades that church turned to him for a series
of books whose descriptions are tantalizing. The book of 1498/1499 is a somewhat
unusual combination of "motets and Magnificats etc." The expensive collection from
1514 is an early example of a book with the rather specific repertoire of five-voiced
motets. The parchment "Virgo" book was quite possibly a collection of Salves
similar to Alamire's MunBS 34 (although the Munich manuscript is paper) or what
we will see later as the lost book of Salves for Frederick the Wise, while on 22
August 1520 Alamire is paid specifically for polyphony for the Salve service. On 28
October of the same year he is paid for a highly unusual - if not unique - book of
seven Requiem masses, this at a time when barely seven are known to have existed
(Dufay, Ockeghem, La Rue, Févin, Brumel, Prioris, Richafort, and Paulus de Roda
are candidates for this collection). This leaves a series of tersely described books
or quires of polyphony: two from 1512/1513, one from 1516 (parchment), another
from 1517, and a series from 1519/1520. The church's archives contain as well an
intriguing reference to an illuminated parchment book of polyphony paid for in
1506/1507 - exactly the sort of production for which Alamire is famous - but no
connection to the scribe is documented.52 Material from the Alamire scriptorium
survives today in Antwerp, but only in the form of parchment fragments53 from
three presumably separate manuscripts used to bind later printed books. Thus, a
great deal has been lost.
Two striking archival records mention Henry VIII. In 1515, Alamire sent six small
books (Item HI, apparently partbooks) to the English king; they presumably included
some music by Agricola.54 Partbooks are hardly unknown by this date, but this is surely
the earliest instance of a group of six, and it is also the earliest record we have of partbooks
by Alamire; all others are from the 1520s. The collection was obviously very special; in
50 See V. Roelvink, "'s-Hertogenbosch, Archief van de Illustre Lieve Vrouwe Broederschap, MS 72c," in
Treasury, p. 82-83, and Ead., "The Alamire Manuscripts of the Illustre Lieve Vrouwe Broederschap in
's-Hertogenbosch: New Facts and Considerations," in B. Bouckaert and E. Schreurs (eds.), The Burgundian
Habsburg Court Complex of Music Manuscripts (1500-1535) and the Workshop of Petrus Alamire (Leuven
- Neerpelt, 2003; "Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation" 5) [hereafter BHCC], p. 203-213.
51 See K. K. Forney, "Music, Ritual, and Patronage at the Church of Our Lady, Antwerp," EMH, 7 (1987),
p. 1-57.
52 Forney, "Music, Ritual" [fn. 51], p. 36, was the first to posit a connection.
53 AntP B948IV and AntP M18.13/1 (originally part of the same manuscript), AntP M18.13/2, and AntP
R43.13.
54 "[S]ex parvos libres, ubi multa bona intra sunt cum magistro Allexandro Aurifabri"; see the discussion in
Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fh. 17], p. 20.
1515 six-voice works, whether sacred or secular, were still not overly common, with La
Rue, Josquin, and Isaac (all present, of course, in surviving Alamire manuscripts) being
the most important figures in the expansion of texture to six voices. The production by
Alamire of this kind of specialized repertoire is completely in keeping with what we
know of his work; we have just seen the reference for a collection of Requiem masses,
the Fugger family will turn to him for collections of bicinia (VienNB Mus. 18832) and
five-voice chansons (VienNB Mus. 18746), he created the Salve collections MunBS 34
and the one(s) just seen for Antwerp, and so on.
Alamire's 1515 envoy to Henry also included Item H2, a single five-voice
composition.55 Although relatively few examples of this kind of manuscript survive
today, the general assumption is that a great deal of music circulated in this manner.
From Alamire's scriptorium we have only a few works of this kind surviving, all
found in VienNB 9814.56
The other entry connected to Henry VIII is K, from 1517: in a letter to the King,
Alamire mentions five music books, including one of parchment, that he sent to
him. This is a substantial number of books, and it is interesting that four are paper,
with the implication that these four (at least) were intended for general use. Even
more striking about these manuscripts, though, is that they were evidently dispatched
entirely on Alamire's initiative rather than as a response to a commission (either
from Henry himself or from Charles, Margaret, or Maximilian).
The manuscripts of H and K, of course, are of interest in comparison with
surviving Alamire codices with links to England and Henry. The one we know that
reached Henry is LonBLR 8 G.vii, whose dating has been the subject of many
hypotheses; some have suggested it as identical with parchment manuscript K5.57
The others connected to Henry are JenaU 4 (the many images in the volume include
Henry and Katherine), JenaU 9 (with their arms and emblems, and music of English
composer Fayrfax), JenaU 22 (with possible veiled references to an alliance between
England and Habsburg-Burgundy via another marriage for Margaret of Austria), and
MunBS F (again with emblems of Henry and Katherine). Little or no overlap thus
55 On this composition see D. Fallows, "Alamire as a Composer", in BHCC, p. 247-258.

56 On this collection of performing parts see H. Meconi, "Plus oultre, Pierre de la Rue, and the Emperor's
Music", JAF, 6 (2014), p. 12-32. For more on performing parts in general, see J. Milsom, "The Culture of
Partleaves: Peterhouse and Beyond" (forthcoming). I am grateful to Dr. Milsom for sharing his essay prior to
publication.
57 David Skinner (personal communication); and T. Neal, "LonBL Royal 8 G.vii and Anglo-Burgundian
Relations at the Early Tudor Court", paper presented at the conference Sources of Identity: Makers, Owners,
and Users of Music Sources before 1600, University of Sheffield, October 2013. Most recently Aaron James
has suggested that the London manuscript comes only after Henry VIII's 1521 treatise Assertio septem sacra
mentorum with its specific reference to the biblical Absalom. James's hypothesis is supported by the well
known codicological parallels between the London manuscript and MunBS F. See C. A. James, Transforming
the Motet: Sigmund Salminger and the Adaptation and Reuse of Franco-Flemish Polyphony in Reformation
Augsburg (Ph.D. diss., University of Rochester, 2016), p. 256-259. Two other court manuscripts are cur
rently in England, both parchment and both fragmentary. OxfBA 831 is too early (it is from the Habsburg
Burgundian manuscripts that precede Alamire's appointment to the court, informally known as the "Scribe
B" manuscripts). OxfBLL a.8 is from Alamire's time, but it includes a motet to which Margaret of Austria's
name has been added, making it less likely to have been intended for Henry.
exists between what survives for Henry and what the archives tell us. Missing today
as well is the Marian matins book (manuscript I) commissioned by Jan van Reth,
evidently a musician in Antwerp.
Possibilities for identification pick up when we turn to the Habsburg-Burgundian
court itself, yet even here no consensus exists. Manuscript C is the earliest record we
have of a court commission for Alamire, several years before he became a regular
member of the chapel.58 Again, no surviving collection matches this description,
as none have the correct number of gatherings. For manuscripts D1 and 2, various
candidates have been proposed - BrusBR 6428 and 15075, MechAS s.s., and
JenaU 7 - but the first three are all known to postdate 1511. As for manuscript M,
no clues tell us what that might have been, although the roundabout way that the
book seems to have been headed for its recipient is curious. Perhaps this was another
of Alamire's unanticipated 'gifts' created in hope of a reward.
The T volumes were obviously attractive books, and the V manuscript even
more so, given that the same sum was paid for the "several" music books of 1523
and the single book of V Each of these references is highly significant because
they demonstrate that Charles continued to order his music books from Alamire
even when he was not in the Low Countries. In both instances he was in Spain. Of
surviving Alamire volumes, only MontsM 766 might be part of the T commission.59
Manuscript U, whose description we know from an inventory of Margaret's
books, is another tricky volume. The description indicates that the volume opens
with a Kyrie and that the first mass is La Rue's Missa de SanctaAnna. Three Alamire
collections include that mass: JenaU 7, MontsM 773, and VienNB Mus. 15496. None
of these match the description. JenaU 7 opens with the mass, not an independent
Kyrie; it is also possibly one of three manuscripts Maximilian (who died in 1519)
said he would send to Frederick the Wise in a letter of 1518.60 MontsM 773 likewise
opens with the Missa de Sancta Anna but not an independent Kyrie. The first mass
in VienNB Mus. 15496 is a different one altogether (Missa Alleluia) and again no
opening Kyrie is present; further, this was a manuscript prepared for Charles before
he became King of Spain in March 1516.
58 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fn. 17], p. 20, erroneously places Alamire at the court during the time of manus
cript C. For full documentation of Alamire in court paylists, see Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre de la Rue" [fn. 13],
Appendix A.
59 It is present in Philip's inventory but not Mary's, suggesting ownership by Charles rather than Margaret
(or Mary); see the suggestion in H. Kellman, "Montserrat, Biblioteca del Monestir MS 766", in Treasury,
p. 114-115. Interestingly, a volume universally considered tobe from Mary's court, MontsM 771, is also pres
ent in Philip's inventory but not Mary's. It is tempting to see this as one of the X manuscripts, especially given
its copying by Alamire Scribe K and the fact that some of its repertoire is found in Alamire manuscripts, i.e.
Appenzeller's Missa Ad placitum, Gascongne's Missa Es hat ein sin, and Moulu's Missa de Sancto Stephano.
Jacobijn Kiel, however, suggests that MontsM 771 represents a later, rather than earlier, version of K's script;
see J. Kiel, "Terminus Post Alamire?: On Some Later Scribes", in BHCC, p. 97-105.
Was MontsM 771 thus handed off to Charles before Mary's death, precluding its appearance in her inven
tory? And could that be the case for MontsM 766 as well? On the other hand, MontsM 766 is noted for its
odd construction (one parchment folio taken from another manuscript and inserted into an otherwise paper
volume), suggesting haste in compilation - a rush job to be sent to Charles?
60 See H. Kellman, "Jena, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek MS 2", in Treasury, p. 84.
One possibility is that the mass intended in the reference was not Missa de Sancta
Anna but rather La Rue's Missa Conceptio tua,61 But if the scribe meant to refer to
Missa Conceptio tua, we still find no surviving Alamire volume to match the inventory
description. Missa Conceptio tua appears in eight Alamire manuscripts. Two are
fragmentary and were unlikely to have been owned by Margaret: AntP B948IV, surely
leftover from one of the many books Alamire prepared for the Antwerp Church of our
Lady, and the Büdingen fragments,62 likely prepared for a German patron. None of
the other six manuscripts opens with an independent Kyrie (BrusBR 6428 and 15075,
JenaU 4 and 5, MechAS s.s., and VatS 34). In only the first two of these is Missa
Conceptio tua the first mass, and BrusBR 15075 was compiled after Maximilian's
death (its images of John III of Portugal and Catherine of Austria indicate that it was
prepared after their marriage in 1524). BrusBR 6428, with its use of later Alamire
scribes, is likely to postdate the emperor's death as well. Manuscript U is thus a lost
volume, possibly equivalent with D2, Maximilian's New Year's gift (though Charles
could be the gift-giving Emperor cited in Margaret's inventory).
The W manuscripts are another cache of Alamire books, this time for Margaret's
chapel, and a separate group, the X manuscripts, were for Charles, who was in Italy
and Germany at the time of their compilation.63 Of surviving codices, only BrusBR
6428 might have been one of the W manuscripts. BrusBR 6428, despoiled today,
was at one time one of the most lavishly decorated of the Alamire creations; further,
it is an exceptionally large parchment codex, and size alone contributes to cost.
Would the £20 payment for the entire group of W manuscripts have been enough to
cover the cost of BrusBR 6428? Certainly the W books and those of X (also worth
£20) were not on the scale of manuscript V and the T volumes.
The W and X manuscripts were not the last books Alamire produced for Habsburg
Burgundian rulers. The codices of AA are an unspecified number of books for Mary
of Hungary's chapel prepared over several years (1533-1535), for which Alamire
received the considerable sum of £300. And, finally, the "beautiful music book"
manuscript BB (for which Alamire received 40s, the equivalent of ten days' pension
pay) is further documentation of his business practice of preparing manuscripts
on his own initiative and then sending them to those from whom he might expect
compensation, as we saw in the interaction with Henry VIII (manuscripts Kl-5),
the 's-Hertogenbosch Confraternity (manuscript Z), and possibly Maximilian
(manuscript M).
As noted, Table 1 chronicles dozens of Alamire creations that do not appear to
survive today, while providing no information on dozens of those that do. But we
61 See H. Kellman, "Brasseis, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique MS 15075", in Treasury, p. 74-75, at 74.
62 On the Büdingen fragments see A. Brinzing, Fragmente mit mehrstimmiger Musik des 16. Jahrhunderts im
Fürstlich Ysenburg- und Büdingischen Archiv Büdingen, Kleinüberlieferang mehrstimmiger Musik vor 1550
in deutschem Sprachgebiet II (Göttingen, 2001), p. 1-58.
63 Schreurs, "Petrus Alamire" [fh. 17], p. 21, suggests that the W and X payments may have been for the same
order, but this is unlikely given the two different recipients indicated for the manuscripts. For a chronology of
Charles's whereabouts in relation to manuscript production, see Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre de la Rue" [fh. 13],
Appendix A.
must remember that (1) not all of the documents connected with the Habsburg
Burgundian court survive; (2) not all of those that do have been examined; (3) if
singers at the court were expected to copy manuscripts as part of their duties, as has
been suggested,64 then we would lack references to at least some of the volumes they
produced; and (4) throughout Alamire's formal employment with the court he acted
as a free agent when it came to manuscript production, working on commission from
patrons not at the Habsburg-Burgundian court and preparing choirbooks on his own
initiative to generate income - meaning in the latter case that no reference to their
production might have existed in the first place.
In terms of point (4), we see that some of the fragments that survive today are
in cities that were likely within Alamire's professional orbit. The Antwerp fragments
were already mentioned as being survivors of recorded commissions; those in
Bruges (BrugRA Aanw. 756), Ghent (GhentR D 3360b), andTongeren (TongerenSA
183) probably reflect commissions as well. The fragments in Brussels (BrusSG 9423
and 9424) come from the files of the Cathedral of St. Gudule in that city, a major
site for music-making and another likely candidate to have commissioned work
from Alamire.65 The Büdingen fragments, meanwhile, perhaps resulted from one
of Alamire's many German contacts. While additional manuscript fragments and
archival references concerning Alamire are likely to appear in future years, however,
formal documentation of the full extent of his activity will never be possible if his
court colleagues copied material as a matter of course.
Finally, Table 2 highlights the issue of missing books. It shows the surviving
"Alamire" manuscripts that we can link to court rulers Philip the Fair, his sister
Margaret, and Philip's son Charles - a very small number indeed. The books in
Table 2 are overwhelmingly - though not exclusively - parchment, with decoration;
obviously this combination held great appeal. Yet it seems unlikely that all of the
court's books were at this level,66 and we will see that the section of Philip II's
inventory devoted to books used by the chapel includes both illuminated parchment
volumes as well as paper manuscripts. In any event, it hardly needs to be pointed
out that the music in the few surviving collections of Table 2 could scarcely account
for the courtly liturgy where the Grande chapelle sang a daily polyphonic mass,
daily Vespers, and daily Compline, with all remaining offices sung on twenty-one
important feasts as well as on each day of Advent and Lent. Is it even vaguely
plausible that the half-dozen sacred manuscripts listed in Table 2 sufficed for the
chapel's needs over the course of the three decades of the scriptorium's activity?
64 See for example H. Kellman, "Openings: The Alamire Manuscripts after Five Hundred Years - Keynote
Address Delivered at the Alamire Conference in Leuven, 25 November 1999", in BHCC, p. 11-29, at 14.
65 Henri Vanhulst has recently discovered a new fragment, BrusCPAS H1135, that comes from the same manus
cript as BrusSG 9424; see H. Vanhulst, "Un fragment inconnu d'un livre de chœur de Pierre Alamire",
RBM-BTM, 68 (2014), p. 7-18.1 am grateful to Professor Vanhulst for kindly sharing his discovery with me
before publication of his essay.
66 The fact that MontsM 766 is mostly of paper, and that the parchment insert with its stray folio side left over
from another manuscript makes it somewhat unsightly, shows that appearance was not the only consideration
in courtly books. Corrections in the volume itself argue for use rather than display.
TABLE 2. Alamire Manuscripts with Presumed Ownership by Philip the Fair,

Margaret, or Charles
BrusBr 228 parchment chansonnier; Margaret
BrusBR 6428 parchment mass collection; likely for Margaret
BrusBR 9126 parchment sacred music collection; Philip the Fair
MechAS s.s. inent mass collection; f
parchment for Margaret? for Charles?
for Maximilian?67
laximilian?67
MontsM 766 paper/parchment mass
/parchment mass music collection; likely for Charles
music
MontsM 773 mpnt macc pnllppttnn' 1i
parchment mass collection; likely for Margaret
VienNB Mus. 15496 parchment mass collection; Charles
The World of Parchment
One other realmmanuscripts:

lost Alamire needs notingthebefore weparchment.
world of examine other documents
In a recent study Ifor possible
provided
an overview of surviving parchment books of polyphony from ca. 1450 to 1600.68
Manuscripts came from Iceland, Poland, France, German-speaking lands, Spain, and
England, but more came from the Low Countries - and specifically the Alamire
scriptorium - than anywhere else. Overwhelmingly, parchment codices were created
in or near their intended destinations - with the single exception of manuscripts
from the Low Countries, which were often exported to other lands. And, again, the
Alamire scriptorium was responsible for most of those exports.69
Table 3 lists parchment manuscripts from a restricted period and geographical
area: continental Europe between ca. 1500 and ca. 1540. This period covers the
time that the extant Alamire manuscripts were produced (including the "Scribe B"
creations) and extends a few years after Alamire's death in 1536. In addition, the use
of parchment for polyphony fades rapidly (though does not completely disappear)
after 1540, reinforcing that as a cut-off point. Table 3 excludes England, as there is
no evidence that English parchment manuscripts were exported to the Continent.
Secular books are also excluded (even though chansonniers were frequently made
of parchment), as no secular manuscripts present themselves as candidates for lost
Alamire creations. Likewise excluded are collections that mix secular music with
something else, such as CambriP 1760. Finally, Table 3 presents "undecorated"

parchment manuscripts as well as "decorated" volumes. Decoration is defined here
67 On MechAS s.s. as being likely for Maximilian, see H. Meconi, "Range, Repertoire, and Recipient in the
Alamire Manuscripts"; JA F (forthcoming).
68 H. Meconi, "Power, Prestige, and Polyphony: The Use of Parchment in Music Manuscripts ca. 1450-1600",
in T. Shephard and L. Colton (eds.), Sources of Identity: Makers, Owners, and Users of Sources before 1600
(Turnhout, in press). For a general typology of manuscripts of polyphony for a slightly shorter period of time,
see T. Schmidt-Beste, "Private or Institutional - Small or Big?: Towards a Typology of Polyphonic Sources
of Renaissance Music", JAF, 1 (2009), p. 13-26.
69 See Meconi, "Power, Prestige, and Polyphony" [fh. 68].
as extending beyond the calligraphic initials or rubrication found in numerous

collections - thus painted initials, illumination, arms, borders, and the like.
TABLE 3. Parchment Manuscripts of Sacred Polyphony from the Continent, ca.

1500-1540
The term "(frag)" appended to a siglum indicates that the manuscript is fragmentary.
The use of italics indicates that a book is from the Low Countries but not from the
Habsburg-Burgundian court UU1L
scriptorium.
aV^lipLUllUIll.
Undecorated
FRANCE: AmiensBM 162 62
GERMANY: Mainz 368 (frag),70 Mainz

! (frag),70 Mainz898
898(frag)71, VatP 1347
(frag)71, Vj
LonRC
ITALY: CapePL 3.b,12, LonRC 2037,
2037, MilA
MilA 46,46, ParisBN1431 (frag)
ParisBNC
rntP
LOW COUNTRIES: AntP B948IV/AntPM18.13/1
B948IV/AntP M18.13/1 I(frag), AntP M18.13/2 (frag),
AntP Ml8.13/3 (frag), AntP
<\ntP
R43.13
R43.13
(frag),
(frag),
BrugRA
BragRA
Aanw.
A 756 (frag), BrusSG 9423
(frag), BrusSG 9424/BrusCPAS
•usCPASHI HI
135135
(frag),
(frag),
Büdingen
Budinge(frag),72 OxfBLL a.8 (frag),
TongerenSA 183 (frag), UtreC
UtreC47/1
47/1& &2 2(frag)
(frag)
Decorated
GERMANY: FrankSU 2,73:,73 MunBS
MunBS 510,510, MunBS
MunBS C, Mui Lat. 29775/1 l(frag), WolfA
C, MunBS
A
ITALY: FlorL 666, ModE M.1.2,

E M.1.2,
OxfBLL
OxfBLL
a.6a.6
(a) (a)
(frag)74
(frag)7
LOW COUNTRIES: BrusBR rusBR215-16,
215-16,BrusBR 6428,] BrusBR 9126, BrusBR 15075,
BrusBR 6428,
BrusBR IV922, GhentR D 3360b
D 3360b
(frag),
(frag),
JenaU
JenaU
2, 2,
JenaU
JenaU
3, JenaU 4, JenaU 5, JenaU 7,
JenaU 8, JenaU 9, JenaUU12,12,JenaU
JenaU20,
20,JenaU
JenaU22,
22,LonBLR
Lon 11 E.xi, LonBLR 8 G.vii,
MechAS s.s., MontsM 765, MontsM 773, MunBS F, ToleF 23, VatC 234, VatP 1976-79,
VatS 34, VatS 36, VatS 160, VerBC 756, VienNB 1783, VienNB Mus. 15945, VienNB
Mus. 15496, VienNB Mus. 15497
The dominance of manuscripts from the Low Countries is very striking here, and
the frequent association of parchment and decoration is also noticeable. Most of the
supposedly undecorated parchment books are, in fact, fragmentary (all of those from
Alamire are), raising the possibility that the collection from which the fragments
came once included some kind of decoration.
The designation "Low Countries" does not, of course, mean Alamire exclusively,
and three of the decorated parchment volumes are not considered his: LonBLR 11
E.xi, MontsM 765, and ToleF 23. Of these three, the London manuscript contains
70 Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, II m 368 Rarasammlung. On this fragment, see J. LOdtke, Fragmente und versprengte
w r O - V o—> />r L—J i-"j L^vj

Überlieferung des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts im nördlichen und westlichen Deutschland, Kleinüberlieferung
mehrstimmiger Musik vor 1550 in deutschen Sprachgebiet VI (Göttingen, 2001), p. [30]-[31] and [50],
Mainz, Stadtbibliothek, XIII o 898 Rarasammlung. On this fragment see LOdtke, Fragmente [fn. 70], p. [27]
[30] and [49],
72 On the Büdingen fragments see Brinzing, "Fragmente" [fh. 62],
73 The decorations have been removed from this manuscript.
74 On this manuscript and its likely Italian provenance see Meconi, "Power, Prestige, and Polyphony"
(fh. 68],
music by composers never found in the Alamire cohort, while the other two have
connections with Habsburg-Burgundy. MontsM 765, a collection of Appenzeller,
used one of Alamire's own scribes (Scribe K) as well as a new scribe, Scribe S. The
lavish ToleF 23 was written mostly by Scribe S. Jacobijn Kiel, who first recognized
Scribe K's hand in various "post-Alamire" manuscripts, has suggested that these two
volumes (as well as others) be seen as a continuation of Alamire's scriptorium under
the "sustained patronage" of Mary of Hungary.75
Elaborate parchment manuscripts originating outside of Alamire's sphere
sometimes contain composers whose work also appears in the Alamire complex,
including Josquin, Févin, Mouton, and La Rue himself. Could the centers that
produced such collections thus possibly have generated some of the manuscripts
that we will see in Philip's inventory, for example? That scenario is unlikely. Non
Alamire collections were, with few exceptions, produced for their own institutions
or cities, not for export.76 Exceptions - where a manuscript originated one place
but was intended for somewhere else - typically involve production for a not-very
distant recipient, such as the Medici Codex (FlorL 666) and MunBS C. When we
find an elaborate parchment manuscript that was produced one place and sent far
away, the manuscript originated either in the Low Countries or what was probably
the Burgundian court itself. We must therefore acknowledge the dominant role of the
Low Countries as producers not merely of the performers and composers, but also
of fine polyphonic music manuscripts.
Basically, then, the preponderance of Alamire's output in Table 3 demonstrates
that a parchment codex from the continent at this time, especially a decorated one,
is as likely if not more so to have come from Habsburg-Burgundy as from anywhere
else. With this in mind, and remembering as well the many now-lost manuscripts of
Table 1 along with the extensive liturgical needs of the Habsburg-Burgundian court,
the stage is set for an examination of the relevant documents.
The Fuggers
The survey of lost

Burgundian manuscripts
court with
begins with likely
the musicorigins fromofAlamire
collection Raimundand the Habsburg
Fugger the Elder
(1489-1533). The wealthy Fugger banking family, based in Augsburg, supplied funds
to the Habsburgs on more than one occasion. They were music lovers to boot,77
and four of the surviving Alamire manuscripts are directly linked to the family: the
Fugger arms are found in VienNB 4809 (a collection of Josquin masses), VienNB
Mus. 15941 (motets), VienNB Mus. 18825 (Paschaltide motets), and VienNB Mus.
18832 (bicinia). Four other Alamire manuscripts thought to have been owned by the
75 Kiel, "Terminus Post Alamire?" [fh. 58], Post-Alamire manuscripts share not just a scribal hand but also
some repertoire with Alamire creations, as noted above with MontsM 771.
76 For full details see Meconi, "Power, Prestige, and Polyphony" [fh. 68].
77 See L. Nowak, "Die Musikhandschriften aus Fuggerschem Besitz in der Österreichischen National
bibliothek", in J. Stummvoll (ed.), Die Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Festschrift herausgegeben zum 25
jährigen Dienstjubiläum des Generaldirektors Univ.-Prof Dr. Josef Bick (Vienna, 1948), p. 505-515.
Fuggers include VienNB 4810 (four-voice masses), VienNB 11778 (Josquin masses),
VienNB 11883 (a fascicle compilation likely derived from the court scriptorium's
holdings), and VienNB Mus. 18746 (a five-voice chansonnier).78 Connections
between the Fuggers and the court are thus plentiful.
An inventory of the music library of Raimund Fugger the Younger (1528-1569)
drawn up in 156679 opens with a listing of seventy-eight manuscripts and prints
owned by his father.80 Many enticing descriptions appear here, including those for
Item 14, six four-voice masses of Ockeghem (the major and often only source for
Ockeghem's masses is VatC 234, one of the earliest of the court complex); Item
5, seven four-voice masses of Agricola (who worked for the court, and whose
manuscripts remain important sources for his work); and Item 4, eight three-voice
masses by Févin, Verbonnet, Pipelare, Bramel, and "Jo. Posoris". Verbonnet's three
voice Missa sine nomine survives in court manuscript VerBC 756. No three-voice
masses by any of the other composers survive, though a three-voice mass by Févin
is listed in the Heidelberg inventory, to be discussed shortly.81 Curiously, if the
cryptic "Jo. Posoris" is meant to represent the composer Priorts, it would provide
an interesting link to the Alamire scriptorium. Thanks to the work of Theodor
Dumitrescu, we now know that the first name of the composer Priorts was Denis, not
Johannes as was formerly believed.82 The sole place to identify the composer with
the first name of Johannes, though, was Habsburg-Burgundy, in two of its books
(VienNB Mus. 15497 and VienNB 11883).
Two items in the Fugger inventory were first noted for their similarities with
Alamire books by Herbert Kellman.83 Item 3 is a book of Salve regina settings
by "diverse authors". The authors listed are "Josquin, Noe, Paulus and others".
Josquin is self-explanatory; a great deal of his music appears in court sources. Noe
is possibly Noel Bauldeweyn, many of whose works appear in court manuscripts; he
also worked in Mechelen at the time the court was based there. Paulus is potentially
identifiable as the composer Paulus de Roda, who worked in Bergen op Zoom;
he might also be the organist and composer Paul(us) Hofhaimer, who worked for
(among others) Maximilian. These court connections are important in the context
of the collection: books devoted to Salve settings are extremely rare and in fact, the
only one that survives is the Alamire collection MunBS 34 (we should remember
as well Alamire archival manuscripts G and P, two other possible Salve collections).
Interestingly, MunBS 34 contains Salves by both Josquin and Bauldeweyn (an organ
78 A fifth collection once considered to have a Fugger connection, VienNB 9814 (performing parts for motets and
net _ . . . _ — ■ - -
a chanson), is likelier to have remained in imperial hands; see Meconi, "Plus oultre, Pierre de la Rue" [fh. 56],
79 The inventory is given in R. Schaal, "Die Musikbibliothek von Raimund Fugger d. J.: Ein Beitrag zur
Musiküberlierferung des 16. Jahrhunderts", AcM, 29 (1957), p. 126-137.
80 Most prints are segregated into a separate section. A few volumes not appearing in that section are identified
-J date
by J . .w
and.VHVVUHV.V UUUU111(/UW1>
sometimes by publisher. lu U1UV
The reasonable uiv i is
assumption viiiuiiilllg UUVIVO books
that the remaining CUV UiailUOUipiO.
are manuscripts.
81 On f. 98v; see J. Lambrecht, Das "Heidelberger Kapellinventar" von 1544 (Codex Pal. Germ. 318): Edition
und Kommentar, 2 vols. (Heidelberg, 1987), p. 232.
82 T. Dumitrescu, "Who Was 'Prions'? A Royal Composer Recovered", JAMS, 65 (2012), p. 5-65,298-299.
83 Kellman, "Josquin and the Courts" [fn. 14], p. 202.
Salve by Hofhaimer survives; no vocal setting is known. Paulus de Roda is not

known to have composed a Salve setting).
Another compelling entry in the Fugger inventory noted by Kellman is Item 2,
a book of twenty-two Magnificats on all eight tones by "diverse authors". The
compiler of the index identifies these authors as Robert Févin, Mouton, Le Brun, La
Rue, Divitis, Pipelare, Prioris, Obrecht, Thérache, Loyset [Compère], and Reingot.
The similarity of this collection to Alamire codex JenaU 20, a collection of nineteen
Magnificats sent to Frederick the Wise, is striking. Six composers appear in both
Magnificat collections: Mouton, La Rue, Divitis, Pipelare, Prioris, and Compère.
Of the composers appearing only in the Fugger Magnificat manuscript, Reingot was
employed at the court, and music by him as well as by Robert Févin, Le Brun,
Obrecht, and Therache (though not Magnificats) appears in other court manuscripts.
This very strong répertoriai similarity suggests a shared origin for the two Magnificat
collections: the workshop of Alamire.84
Heidelberg
In of
1544 the repertoire
Neuberg of the disbanded
was inventoried. court chapel
The inventory (Codex of
Pal.Palatine
Germ. Count
318) is Ottheinrich
extremely
valuable (and unusual) in that the specific contents of each manuscript are listed
- titles of the works included, the numbers of voices, and the composer identification -
rather than just a generic indication of masses, motets, and so on, as is much more
usual in inventories. The Heidelberg inventory, though, rarely indicates whether a
volume is of paper or parchment.
Knowing the contents of the Heidelberg volumes is useful as it lets us make
comparisons with the contents of the Alamire manuscripts. The comparison cannot
be an exact one. The Heidelberg collection extends to 1544 while the Alamire books
stop about a decade before, and the Heidelberg volumes were for a single court
chapel whereas the Alamire manuscripts were sent across Europe. Nonetheless, we
can safely assume that Alamire frequently drew on the repertoire of the Habsburg
Burgundian court chapel even for his extramural ventures, and we are thus essentially
comparing the repertoire of two northern courtly chapels. This comparison will come
into play when we examine the contents of Philip II's inventory.
84 As a point of comparison, the "post-Alamire" manuscript MontsM 769, a collection of Magnificats for Mary
of Hungary, mixes an earlier generation with some later composers, i.e. Appenzeller, Clemens non Papa, and
Jacotin.
The music of Pierre de la Rue - already noted as the dominant composer in the
Alamire complex - is well-represented in the Heidelberg account.85 Its popularity
in German lands is unsurprising, given the Habsburg relationship,86 and his works
show up in seventeen of the sources given in the 1544 inventory: three prints, ten
mass manuscripts, three motet collections, and one volume of secular music. The very
first manuscript in the inventory (parchment) includes both La Rue's popular Missa
Incessament and his Requiem mass, but the presence of a German mass in the contents
effectively precludes this from being an Alamire production. Another parchment source,
a collection of five partbooks, includes La Rue's lost motet Petre amas me, but it also
includes a work of Carpentras, a composer absent from Alamire collections.87 Most of
the other Heidelberg manuscripts that contain La Rue's music are likewise disqualified
as possible Alamire productions by virtue of similar répertoriai disjunctions with
Alamire's known repertoire. Two mass volumes do feature composers - and some
repertory - well known in Alamire's production: Items 109 (La Rue, de Orto, Josquin,
and Obrecht) and 110 (La Rue, Févin, Josquin, and Brumel).88 This composer and
partial repertoire overlap, though, is insufficient for a claim of origin via Alamire.
Such hesitation vanishes, however, in the case of one manuscript later in the
inventory: a volume devoted exclusively to six of La Rue's five-voice masses.89
The practice of devoting an entire collection to a single composer was unusual at
85 See H. Meconi, Pierre de la Rue and Musical Life at the Habsburg-Burgundian Court (Oxford, 2003),
p. 192-193 and 281. More information can be added to that overview. One of the copies of La Rue's Missa
Ave Maria listed in the inventory was contained in the 1522 Giunta print Liber Decern missarum (inventory,
f. 36; Lambrecht, Das "Heidelberger Kapellinventar" [fn. 81], p. 107) while one of the copies of his Missa
Sub tuum presidium in the inventory occurs in the 1515 Févin mass print (inventory, f. 37v; Lambrecht,
ibid., p. 110). Ottheinrich's chapel owned not one copy of Missa Incessament, as indicated in Meconi, Pierre
de la Rue, but three, listed on f. lv, 3V, and 90v in the inventory (Lambrecht, ibid., p. 38,42, and 216). The
mass is listed anonymously on f. 3V and given to Mouton on f. 90v, but that last ascription is in error. Mouton
is not known to have written any five-voice Missa Incessament; further, the entries on both f. lv and 3V
indicate that the piece is also found in the other two manuscripts of the inventory, confirming the identity.
Ottheinrich's chapel also likely owned two copies of La Rue's Missa Cum iocunditate, a four-voice mass
that expands to five voices for the Credo. References to this mass appear in the inventory on f. 4, 6, 95, and
104v (Lambrecht, Das "Heidelberger Kapellinventar" [fn. 81], p. 43, 47, 225, and 241); the last named is
a second reference to the manuscript on f. 95. These last two references identify the mass as being for five
voices and cite Lupus as the composer, and one of these references indicates that the mass is in "quinti toni".
These last two references, then, apparently belong to a now-long Lupus mass. The first two references, on
the other hand, are more promising. Neither lists a composer. The first one indicates that the mass is for four
voices and that the Credo (which is for five voices in La Rue's mass) is missing. The second citation similarly
indicates that the mass is for four voices but that the Credo and Gloria are for five voices. If this statement is
accurate, that mass at least is not by La Rue (unless someone added a si placet voice to the Gloria), but if the
statement that the Gloria is for five voices is an error, we have an accurate description of La Rue's mass.
Finally, the inventory cites a previously overlooked - and now lost - motet by La Rue, Clare sanctorum. The
number of voices is »»V/V
»WWW« .U not &.»w.
given.
86 See Meconi, Pierre de la Rue [fh. 85], p. 191-194.
87 Manuscript "H" on f. 58-60; Lambrecht, Das "Heidelberger Kapellinventar" [fh. 81], p. 151-155.
88 F. 90™; Lambrecht, Das "HeidelbergerKapellinventar" [fh. 81], p. 215-216.
89 Item 120 on f. 92; Lambrecht, Das "Heidelberger Kapellinventar" [fn. 81], p. 219. The information is
repeated in a later section of the inventory (f. 104v; ibid., p. 244). In the first listing, only four of the six
masses are named as La Rue's; in the later recounting, all are cited as the composer's. The Heidelberg/Alamire
connection was first hypothesized in Meconi, Pierre de la Rue [fn. 85], p. 193.
the time, and La Rue is one of the few musicians for whom such manuscripts exist.
All surviving codices devoted to him originated in the Habsburg-Burgundian court
scriptorium. That fact alone strongly suggests courtly origin for the lost chapel
manuscript, but even more striking are the contents of that five-voice collection:
almost all appear in four other Alamire creations - MechAS s.s. (overlap of four
masses) VatS 34 (ditto),90 BrusBR 15075 (overlap of six masses), and BrusBR 6428
(overlap of five masses), as seen in Table 4. And even more striking is that the order
in the lost chapel manuscript is almost exactly the same as the order of the masses
in BrusBR 15075. The sole difference is the insertion of the six-voice canonic Missa
Ave sanctissima Maria in the Brussels volume. It seems hardly conceivable that
the choice and order of contents here was coincidentally matched in a manuscript
originating outside of Alamire's workshop; rather, the volume of Count Ottheinrich
surely originated in Alamire's scriptorium.
TABLE 4. Contents of the Heidelberg La Rue Manuscript Compared with Alamire

Collections
MechAS s.s. VatS 34 Ms. in HeidU 318 BrusBR 15075 BrusBR 6428
[Pipelare mass] [2 works]
M. Pascale M. Pascale
M. Conceptio M. Conceptio o M. Conceptio
M. Conceptio M. Conceptio
M. Conceptio M. Conceptio
M. Ista est M. Ista
M. Ista est est M. Ista est est
M. Ista M. Ista est
M. Ave Maria
M. Ave sanct. Maria
M. de77doloribus
M. de doloribus M.M.
dede7 7doloribus
doloribus M. de 7 doloribus
M. Ave sanct. Maris
Maria
[Isaac mass]
M. de s. cruce M. desancta
M. de sanctacruce
cruce M.
M.de
de sancta cruce M. de sancta cruce
sancta cruce
M. de feria M. de feria M. dede
M. feria M. deM. feria
feria de feria
M. Alleluia M. Pascale
La Rue's Bequest
When La Rue
the retired
church of from the Habsburg-Burgundian
Onze-Lieve-Vrouw court in
in Kortrijk, where he 1516,
held ahe moved to
prebend. Among
the possessions he brought with him were a series of music books. A parchment
book of discant, "complete and not torn", went to Vicentius de Fossatis, one of the
executors of his estate; de Fossatis eventually gave it to the chapter.91 La Rue gave
six songbooks directly to the church, one "written on parchment in maxima forma".92
90 JenaU 4 also shares four masses with the Heidelberg manuscript, but the Jena collection has a large number
of works - eight - not present in the Heidelberg source.
91 Meconi, Pierre de la Rue [fn. 85], p. 47.
92 Ibid.
We have no way of knowing the repertoire these books contained or how many folios
each held, but that they consisted primarily and perhaps exclusively of La Rue's own
music is a reasonable assumption. His compositions include some forty-odd masses
and mass movements, eight Magnificats, six Salves, various additional motets - not
all of which would have been suitable for use in a collegiate church - and about forty
secular works, all inappropriate for a collegiate church. Seven volumes could well
contain the sacred repertoire. Interestingly, La Rue endowed a daily Salve service at
the Onze-Lieve-Vrouw church, where his six Salves (more than any other composer)
would have had regular use.
Regardless of repertoire, his manuscripts' origin is unlikely to have been anywhere
other than the court where the composer spent the bulk of his professional life, and
from which he retired, especially given that two were on parchment, with one in the
"maxima forma" of many court-generated volumes.93 It is, of course, possible and
perhaps even likely that La Rue did his own copying for these codices; it is also
possible and again perhaps likely that he was one of Alamire's scribes as well.94
But La Rue surely did not do his composing in bound volumes, especially not those
of parchment in maxima forma. These books are undoubtedly fair copies - perhaps
even very fine copies - created at the court.
Bergen op Zoom
Rob owned
Wegmanat has
leasthypothesized
one Alamirethat the
book. Guild
The of Our
guild's Ladybooks
account in Bergen op Zoom
of 1525/1526
include a payment to an individual "for fetching the songbook of Our Lady in
Mechlin". Mechelen was Alamire's residence at this time, making this new songbook
a likely product of his workshop.95
Philip's Inventory
Overview
The music books owned by Philip II are by far the largest cache of possible lost
Alamire manuscripts. They came to him from multiple sources, and the royal court
of Spain had its own scribes since at least the time of Ferdinand and Isabella.96
93 The Appendix in "Power, Prestige, and Polyphony" [fh. 68] provides dimensions for all surviving parchment
manuscripts of vocal polyphony from ca. 1450 to 1600. Manuscripts exceeding 600mm. in height include
four from German lands, four from England, five from Alamire (JenaU 2,4,7, and 9, and BrusBR 6428), and
all the manuscripts from the Toledo Cathedral from the 1540s on. The largest surviving parchment collection
from anywhere is JenaU 4, at 785 x 550mm. A dozen more Alamire parchment manuscripts exceed 500mm.
in height; some are just shy of 600mm.
94 On La Rue as scribe see Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre de la Rue" [fh. 13].
95 See R. C. Wegman, "Music and Musicians at the Guild of Our Lady in Bergen op Zoom, c. 1470-1510",
EMH, 9 (1990), p. 175-249, at 196.
96 See Knighton, "La müsica en la casa" [fn. 1], p. 75 and Apéndice 23, p. 395-408. The inventory is discussed
on p. 79-83; a detailed study by Knighton is forthcoming.
Nonetheless, various volumes stand out as very likely early and possibly from
Alamire by virtue of their repertoire and construction.
The inventory of the collection is divided into four sections: "Libros de offiçio
divino y de devociön", "Libros de canto del serviçio de la capilla", "Libros que
fueron de la Reyna Maria"97 (music books acquired by Philip in 1571 and once
owned by his aunt, Mary, previously Queen of Hungary and then regent of the Low
Countries), and "Libros que tiene el maestro de la capilla". This last section is itself
subdivided into four sections: an untitled opening group, "De Visperas", "De Missa",
and "Pequenos" (although a "libro grande", 4/39, is found in this final section).
Philip's massive collection included prints as well as manuscripts, monophony as
well as polyphony, secular as well as sacred music (predominantly masses but also
motets, Magnificats, and other sacred works), choirbooks, partbooks, and fascicles.
Books are of parchment, paper, and in one instance, cambric. The Appendix provides
a selection of items from the inventory; it includes all thirteen surviving manuscripts,
all parchment manuscripts, all decorated manuscripts, all manuscripts with internal
heraldry (thus not those whose arms are on the binding), and all collections
containing music by composers who appear in surviving Alamire sources, as well as
one source containing the suggestive Missa Carolus ymperator (2/70). It does not
include plainchant volumes (some of which are decorated parchment) except for
1/16, which survives today in the Vatican.
Because a number of volumes in Philip's inventory survive today, we are able
to test the completeness of the inventory's descriptions.98 Table 5 lists the dozen
manuscripts of polyphony that survive, arranged by place of origin. We see
immediately that all but the last two likely originated at court: two from Alamire's
workshop, four if not five from Mary of Hungary's court (four of which use one
of Alamire's scribes),99 and three from Philip II's court in Madrid. This fact thus
strengthens the logical supposition that many, if not most, of the books in Philip's
collection would have originated at the successive Habsburg-Burgundian courts.100
We also see exactly what we would expect in terms of repertoire. The composers
included in these collections gradually shift over time, with older ones falling away
97 Not all of the books in Philip's collection that were previously owned by Mary appear in this section; some
are in Sections 2 and 4. Were the books in Section 3 no longer being used? Or were Mary's books supposed
to be kept together, but some found their way into other places?
98 Chapter 1 of C. G. Manns, The Manuscripts Montserrat 774 and 775 (Master's Thesis, University of Illinois,
1977) discusses the means by which the surviving manuscripts were identified.
99 MontsM 768, the manuscript without any of Alamire's scribes, is the one that might have been copied
away from Mary's court. Possibilities are suggested in G. G. Thompson, "Spanish-Netherlandish Musical
Relationships in the Sixteenth Century: Mary of Hungary's Manuscripts at Montserrat", in P. Becquart and
H. Vanhulst (eds.), Musique des Pays-Bas anciens/Musique espagnole ancienne (±1450 - ±1650) (Louvain,
1988), p. 69-113.
100 Knighton, "La müsica en la casa" [fii. 1], Apéndice 22, p. 390, identifies 3/35 (a book in the Mary of
Hungary section) as having been copied in Spain, not the Low Countries base of her court, while 2/105 and
106 were copied in Rome. Doubtless other non-court items are present as well, but the basic premise is not
only the most likely one but fits with what we know of courtly manuscript production.
and newer ones taking their place. Again, this bolsters the idea that a manuscript
containing the music of an older composer is, in fact, an older volume.101
TABLE 5. Origins of Surviving Polyphonic Manuscripts in Philip IPs Inventory
Workshop of Alamire
2/87 MontsM 766 mass music by Barbireau, Forestier, La Rue, Pipelare, anon;
mostly paper
3/16 MontsM 773 nine masses by La Rue; parchment
Court of Mary of Hungary ✓
2/69 MontsM 765 (including Alamire

(including A1 Scribe K): Appenzeller sacred music;
parchment
2/73 MontsM 771 (Alamire(Alamire
ScribeScril
K): eight masses by Appenzeller, Gascongne,
Hesdin, Lupi, Moulu, Vereist, anon; paper
twelve Manet
?3/9 MontsM 768 twelve Manchicourt masses; paper
3/11 MontsM 769 (Alamire ScribeScri
(Alamire K): twenty-five Magnificats by Appenzeller,
Clemens non Papa, Divitis or Richafort, Jacotin, La Rue,
Mouton, anon; paper
4/34 MontsM 776 (including Alamire Scribe K) eight masses of Lupus
Hellinck; paper
Court of Philip II
2/22 MontsM 767 six masses (Morales, Clemens, Guerrero, Palestrina); paper
2/23 MadN 2431 five masses (Clemens and Morales); paper
2/98 MontsM 772 Manchicourt masses and motets; paper
Rome (copied as gift for Philip II)
2/105 MontsM 774 twenty-five motets by Infantas; paper
2/106 MontsM 775 twenty-eight antiphons by Infantas; paper
When we analyze the contents of the manuscripts in Table 5 we see that the
descriptions in Philip's inventory are in general accurate but not necessarily complete.
MontsM 766 (2/87) begins with an independent Kyrie that is not acknowledged
in the inventory description, while MontsM 772 (2/98) contains motets as well as
masses of Manchicourt. For the Table 5 manuscripts, the inventory is accurate when
labeling the writing support. The two parchment volumes (MontsM 773 and 765)
are indicated as such, while four of the paper collections (MontsM 768, 769, 767,
101 The question of how long music circulated after its composition, and to what extent antiquarian impulses
prompted the inscribing of music, remains important and incompletely explored in the discipline. Extant
troubadour and trouvère manuscripts, for example, were largely generated after the music's heyday, and the
most elaborate volume of trecento music, the Squarcialupi Codex, is famously retrospective as well. In prin
ted music we can point to well-known antiquarian examples such as Attaingnant's 1550 collection of Josquin
chansons and 15722, Le Roy and Ballard's Mellange de chansons. Sixteenth-century manuscript collections
emphasizing older music are harder to come by. For the transmission of La Rue's music, the last manuscripts
containing complete masses come from mid-century: DresSL Pirna IV (1554, with La Rue's popular Missa
de beata virgine) and LeipU 51 (ca. 1555, with his famous Missa L'homme armé I). In each manuscript, the
music of La Rue's contemporaries is mingled with that of more recent composers. Josquin's enormous popu
larity insures that he is the exception to any rule of fading repertoire (discussed in more detail below), but in
general, sixteenth-century manuscripts do not eschew music of their own generation in favor of composers
long departed.
and MadN 2431) are marked as being paper. Codices whose material is unspecified
are all paper collections, suggesting that the inventory scribe was less inclined to
indicate that writing support. The description of MontsM 766 underscores this. It
is mostly paper but includes one parchment fascicle, and the description does not
name material except to indicate an illuminated R [K] on the seventh folio, "of
parchment". Today, the place where this initial would be is f. 6V, but the illuminated
letter has been cut out. Either the inventory scribe miscounted folios or the very
first folio of the manuscript has been lost, but in any event, he took the trouble to
count in to mark the illumination and the use of parchment, which begins only with
the illuminated folio. We will see that Philip's inventory, in comparison with that of
Mary of Hungary, might mislabel a manuscript's writing support, but the example
of MontsM 766 suggests that the compiler normally took a fair amount of care in
describing these books that were about to be dispersed.
Four of the books in Table 5 have special decoration, and the compiler flagged
this for three of them: the aforementioned illuminated letter in MontsM 766, the
extensive decoration (now missing) in MontsM 773, and some illuminated letters
(also now missing) in MontsM 765. The compiler did not remark on the painted
initials found on the first opening of MontsM 768, and this suggests that he may
have ignored similar decoration in other books.
Philip's inventory is far from the only one documenting music in a sixteenth
century Spanish institution. Emilio Ros Fâbregas has compiled an extensive list of
music books from sixty-eight Spanish libraries of the sixteenth century, including
Philip's.102 This detailed list provides yet another point of comparison for the volumes
in Philip's collection. As we shall see, it documents comparatively little presence
for most of the Franco-Flemish composers from the first part of the century, the
ones with the greatest likelihood of representing the work of Alamire in Philip's
collection.
We turn now to specific groups of manuscripts within Philip's inventory. The
accompanying figures include sigla that estimate the general degree of likelihood
that a collection originated with Alamire's team. The sigla are fairly straightforward.
The only one requiring some comment is "P-". This indicates that a volume might
have come from the Alamire scriptorium, but no compelling evidence tips it toward
that scenario.
Manuscripts Containing La Rue
Of composers from the first quarter of the sixteenth century, the group that concerns
us in this essay, the one who appears most often in the inventory's manuscripts is
Pierre de la Rue, the same composer whose music appears most often in the Alamire
102 E. Ros Fâbregas, "Libros de müsica en bibliotecas espanolas del siglo XVI, [Parts] I—III," Pliegos de biblio
filia 15 (2001), p. 37-62; 16 (2001), p. 33-46; 17 (2002), p. 17-54.1 would like to thank Dr. Ros Fâbregas for
bringing this work to my attention and kindly supplying a copy.
complex - unsurprisingly in the case of the Alamire collections, given that he was
employed by the court for at least twenty-four years and was the most prolific of
the many composers connected to the court.103 In fact, though, in the manuscripts
owned by Philip II, La Rue is the most frequently mentioned of any sixteenth-century
figure, not just composers from the earliest part of the century. Table 6 shows the ten
items that mention La Rue: three parchment codices, three paper manuscripts, and
four sources of unspecified material.104
TABLE 6. La Rue in Philip IPs Inventory
The original wording for each entry is found in Knighton, "La mûsica en la casa"
[fn. 1], Apéndice 22.
(M) indicates that the manuscript is also found in Mary's inventory.
EL Manuscript is extremely likely to have an Alamire origin.

L Manuscript is likely to have anive
Alamire origin.
an Alamire origin,
Y Manuscript is from the Alamire scriptorium.
lamire scriptorium.
seven masses
EL 2/3 parchment, folio; seven masses of Pedro
of Pedro <
de larrue, with six illuminations
at the beginning off each
each one
one (M)
(M)
i masses
EL 2/4 paper, folio; seven masses of Poof de
Po de la Ri (M)
la Rue
EL 2/28 parchment, folio menor;lienor;
ten masses of Pedro
ten masses of Pi delà Rua, four illuminated
wofolios
paintings on first two folios
L 2/32 paper, folio [algo menor]; Magnificats
menor]; ononeight tones by Pedro de larrua
Magnificats
with some hymns (M)
L 2/66 unspecified material; "Regina
al; "Regina
salbe" and
salbe"
motets
and iby many authors; the first
de la Rue; also Josquin
isquinPrefer
Prefer reum
reum
EL 2/72 unspecified material; another bookbook
al; another of Pedro
of Pedide la Rue that begins with the
8v patun
L 2/77 unspecified material; another book of many authors; the first mass tous les
Regrets Po la Rue
L 2/88 paper, libro grande; motets of diverse authors; the first, salbe Jesu 6v by
Pedro delà Rue; the first folio in parchment, "yluminado y cortada la
ymagen con cuchillo"
Y 3/16 [MontsM 773] parchment; nine masses of P° delà Rua, illuminated at the
beginning of each; the folios gilded (M)
EL 4/28 unspecified material; another book of Pedro delà Rue; the first mass con
Jocundrate 4v; illuminated R on first folio (M)
The inventory entry for Item 3/16 refers to La Rue as F (Pedro), though in the
manuscript itself (MontsM 773, one of the few from the inventory that survives) La
Rue's first name is given as either Petrus or "P." We can thus safely assume that the
designation of "Pedro" in other inventory entries doesn't necessarily mean that a
specific volume used that exact word.
103 See the discussion of composers at the court in Meconi, Pierre de la Rue [fn. 85], p. 64-77.
104 The La Rue manuscripts in Philip's and Mary's inventories were pointed out in Meconi, Pierre de la Rue
[fh. 85), p. 187, without an examination of their possible origins.
At least six of the manuscripts are devoted exclusively to La Rue's music,

including all of the parchment codices. As noted, 3/16 (MontsM 773) survives
today, with nine of the composer's masses, each one originally accompanied by an
illumination (since excised). Of the other two manuscripts known to be parchment,
2/3 has seven masses, six of which have illuminations on their openings; the other,
2/28, contains ten of La Rue's masses and is smaller in format, though with a lavish
first opening. 2/4, a paper collection, has seven La Rue masses; 2/72, "another book
of La Rue", is of unspecified material and content beyond the opening eight-voice
Credo (surely La Rue's Credo Angeli Archangeli). 4/28, yet another book of La Rue,
is likewise of unspecified material; it opens with his Missa Cum iocunditate. The
initial that illuminates the first folio is unlikely to be an R; K, for "Kyrie", is the
standard at the opening of a mass. What immediately comes to mind here is the
almost psychedelic K that opens Févin's Requiem in JenaU 2.105 At first glance it is
easy to read that as an R, and if a similar initial were used in 4/28, such a misreading
is very plausible, as we will see in various other inventory descriptions. Four of the
"all La Rue" manuscripts, are, significantly, almost certainly found in the inventory
of Mary of Hungary as well, which means that they came to Philip's collection
from the Low Countries. 3/16 (MontsM 773) is obviously one of these four, since
it appears in the "Mary" section of Philip's inventory, but 2/3, 2/4, and 4/28 also
have probable identifications among Mary's books, the last likely the same as her
manuscript containing eight four-voice masses of the composer.106
2/32, with La Rue's Magnificat cycle, probably does not consist exclusively of La
Rue's works (this volume is likely manuscript 482 [11J/491 [7] in Mary's collection),
while La Rue definitely shares space with other composers in volumes 2/66, 2/77,
and 2/88. In each of those he has pride of place (at least in the inventory reading),
a position that is common though not universal in Alamire manuscripts. We see that
the parchment illumination that opened 2/88 had already been excised by 1602,
demonstrating that manuscript vandalism dates back at least four centuries. It is worth
noting that the two motet collections, 2/66 and 2/88, are both choirbooks rather than
partbooks. Of the few surviving Alamire books that are devoted to motets (LonBLR 8
G.vii, MunBS 34, VatP 1976-79, VienNB Mus. 15941, and VienNB Mus. 18825)107
the latter three are partbooks; archival manuscript HI, from 1515, was a set of
partbooks as well. The London volume, generally considered earlier, is a choirbook, as
is the Salve collection MunBS 34. This small complex suggests a move on Alamire's
part towards partbooks for motets, and certainly partbooks play a much bigger role in
sixteenth-century music transmission than in the previous century. At the same time
105 p 33V ^ picture appears in Treasury, p. 85.

106 In this essay, items from Mary's inventory are identified by their page number in E. Vander Straeten, La
Musique aux Pays-Bas avant le XIXe siècle, 8 vols. (Brussels, 1867-1888; R New York, 1969), vol. VII, as well
as the (editorial) number of the item on an individual page. 2/3 looks to be 480 [9]/488 [12]; 2/4 is probably
481 [2]/489 [7], where it is identified as "seven masses and other works" of La Rue; and 4/28 is likely 480
[8]/488 [11], eight La Rue masses for four voices.
107 OxfBLL a. 8 and AntP R43.13, each with motets, are fragmentary manuscripts that may or may not have been
motets alone.
we can find choirbook collections of motets among later volumes in Philip's collection,
e.g. 2/93 (Appenzeller motets), 4/3 (a parchment volume including Crecquillon), and
the still later book 2/105 (MontsM 774, Infantas motets). The point here is to note that
a choirbook motet volume is consistent with earlier Alamire practice.
Philip's inventory is not the only one in Spain to include La Rue's music; ten
others do. But in every case the volume is a printed one, not a manuscript. Tess
Knighton has suggested that La Rue's music in Philip's inventory was as likely to
have come from the collection of Juana la Loca as from those of Mary or Charles,108
but although possible, this was probably not the case. The music volumes in Juana's
collection are identified only vaguely and list no music by La Rue explicitly;109
more significantly, court organist Henry Bredemers sent the books owned by Juana's
husband Philip the Fair back to the Low Countries after his death.110 And the books
in Philip's inventory are remarkably akin to those made by Alamire.
A comparison with La Rue-intensive manuscripts from the Alamire scriptorium
shows the similarities with those found in Philip II's inventory. Table 7 lists the ten
Alamire collections devoted exclusively or almost exclusively to compositions of La
Rue.111 All but one are parchment; all but the paper manuscript feature extensive
decorative schemes. In addition to MontsM 773 (present in Philip's inventory, with nine
La Rue masses), BrusBR 15075, SubA 248, and VienNB 15496 are each composed
solely of La Rue masses112 (like 2/3, 2/4, 2/28, and probably 4/28), seven in each
codex. SubA 248, of paper without illumination, is a parallel to 2/4. The other two
108 Knighton, "La müsica en la casa" [fh. 1], p. 83.

109 Ros Fàbregas, "Libres de müsica III" [fh. 102], p. 18-19.
110 See Meconi, "Pierre de la Rue" [fh. 85], p. 39. Were some books left behind? If so, their origin would still
have been the northern court of Habsburg-Burgundy.
111 Many of the Alamire fragments that survive (all of which are parchment) also emphasize La Rue, though their
partial state makes it impossible to determine the original contents of a collection. However, two fragmen
tary manuscripts that are promising candidates for "all La Rue" or "La Rue + one" status are the Büdingen
fragments, which have parts of four La Rue masses and one Pipelare mass, and the fragments AntP B948IV
/ AntP M18.13/1, which were originally part of the same collection and which contain bits of five La Rue
masses. Both the Büdingen and the Antwerp manuscripts date from the time of Alamire proper, 1509 forward,
rather than the earlier "Scribe B" group of manuscripts coming from the court. This is significant in terms of
repertoire, for Scribe B manuscripts tend to be largish collections mingling several genres (in keeping with
manuscript norms of the time) while Alamire's productions are more often boutique-type creations concen
trating on a single genre with fewer works overall, surely influenced by Petrucci's mass prints. That difference
increases the likelihood that the Büdingen and Antwerp manuscripts were largely or exclusively devoted to La
Rue, for, with one exception, all other post-1509 manuscripts that have four or five La Rue masses are indeed
"all-La Rue" or "La Rue + one" manuscripts. The exception is JenaU 4, with six La Rue masses but three
masses and two Credos by other composers. JenaU 4, of course, is exceptional is many aspects, including its
size, physical composition, and decorative scheme.
112 VatS 36 is sometimes considered to be an "all La Rue" collection, but the five-voice Te decet laus motet ap
pended without attribution to his six-voice canonic Missa Ave sanctissima Maria therein as a "loco deo gracias"
movement is stylistically unlike La Rue. Similarly, JenaU 12 has been a candidate for an "all La Rue" manus
cript, given the possibility that the anonymous sine nomine mass appearing as the fourth mass of that collection
was La Rue's. Its stylistic affinity to La Rue, however, has always been questionable, and my recent discovery
that the mass's Sanctus is completely out of character for La Rue's handling of that movement pushes it firmly
into the inauthentic camp; see H. Meconi, "La Rue's Requiem: Chronology, Anomaly, Affinity", paper pres
ented at 2014 Euromac (European Musical Analysis Conference), Leuven, September 2014.
are (or were) richly decorated (like 2/3, 2/28, and at least the beginning of 4/28), with
heraldry in the case of VienNB 15496. Of the nine parchment volumes, seven are (or
were) decorated on the initial opening (like 2/3,2/28,2/88, and 4/28), and all nine have
(or had) interior miniatures or arms as well. Like MontsM 773, BrusBR 6428 appears to
have had miniatures to accompany every mass.113 In addition to Alamire's compliations
that emphasize La Rue, Alamire manuscript JenaU 20, a Magnificat collection, suggests
some similarities with 2/32, though the former is of parchment and contains only five of
La Rue's Magnificat settings, while the latter is paper and includes all eight.
TABLE 7. Alamire Manuscripts featuring La Rue (not including fragments)
BrusBR 6428: parchment, 735 x 500mm

six La Rue masses + one Isaac mass
miniatures likely for all seven masses (all removed from manuscript)
likely prepared for Margaret in the 1520s
BrusBR 15075: parchment, 569 x 387mm
seven La Rue masses
miniatures for three masses
asses
(three
(three
onon
first
first
opening;
opem one each for fifth and sixth
mass)
prepared for John of Portugal and Catherine of
o Austria (sister of Charles V)
1524 or later
JenaU 5: parchment, 565 x 395mm mm
five La Rue masses + one
oneFévin
Fevinmass
mass
miniatures likely for four masses(two
four masses (twoonon first opening; one for sixth mass;
first
missing for second andd third masses)
third masses)
prepared for Frederick: the Wise; before September
Septen 1517?
JenaU 12: parchment, 560 x 380mmImm
seven La Rue masses + one

+ oneanonymous
anonymous mass
mass
miniatures likely for five masses
ive masses (one
(one each
each for for
1 masses 3, 4, and 8; missing for
2 and 5)
fnr FrpHprirV thp Wisp
prepared ca. 1518-1525 for Frederick the Wise
MechAS s.s.: parchment, 343/55 x 432/37
six La Rue masses + one Pipelare mass;
eleven miniatures for first four masses
prepared between January 1515 and March 1516, likely for Charles or
Margaret or Maximilian
MontsM 773 = Inventory 3/16: parchment, 565 x 390mm
nine La Rue masses
miniatures likely for all masses (all removed from manuscript)
prepared before March 1516, likely for Margaret of Austria
113 Miniatures and other decoration were never applied at random but rather purposefully; see for example the
overview in B. Blackburn, "Messages in Miniature: Pictorial Programme and Theological Implications in
the Alamire Choirbooks," in BHCC, p. 161 -184, as well as the detailed discussion of the Jena manuscripts in
H. H. MowREY, The Alamire Manuscripts of Frederick the Wise: Intersections of Music, Art, and Theology
(Ph.D. diss., University of Rochester, 2010). VatS 34 provides a good example of court practice. The pieces
whose miniatures were evidently removed (nos. 3,4, and 5) were La Rue's Missa Pascale, Missa Conceptio
tua, and Missa Ista est speciosa, each of which readily calls to mind a sacred image (the Resurrection for the
first; Marian themes for the latter two). Without miniatures are the Credo that opens the manuscript, a mass
on L'homme armé, and a ferial mass - all works not readily associated with visual themes.
SubA 248: paper, 396 x 282mm

seven La Rue masses
no miniatures
prepared ca. 1521-1525 for an unknown recipient, possibly Italian
VatS 34: parchment, 594 x 405mm
five La Rue masses + one Pipelare Credo
miniatures likely for pieces 3, 4, and 5 (all removed from manuscript)
prepared between January 1515 and March 1516, presumably for Pope Leo X
VatS 36: parchment, 490 x 345mm
six La Rue masses + two La Rue Credos + one anonymous motet
miniatures likely for 3 masses (one for mass 6; missing for masses 1 and 2)
prepared for Pope Leo X, probably soon after March 1516
VienNB Mus. 15496: parchment, 515 x 365mm
seven La Rue masses
no miniatures; arms for first five masses
compiled between July 1515 and March 1516 for Archduke Charles
Table 7 also underscores the similarity in general size, i.e., number of masses
per manuscript, between known Alamire creations and the suggestive listings in
Philip II's inventory. In the surviving Alamire manuscripts of La Rue's masses,
three have seven masses (BrusBR 15075, SubA 248, and VienNB Mus. 15496). The
fourth collection devoted to his masses is MontsM 773 (nine masses), which is of
course in Philip's inventory. In this inventory we see two collections of seven masses
(2/3 and 2/4), one possibly of eight (4/28, if this is the same book cited in Mary's
inventory), and one of ten (2/28, one mass more than MontsM 773). This is not to
claim that only the Alamire scriptorium prepared manuscripts containing seven to
ten masses, but simply to note that the codices in Philip's inventory are consistent
with Alamire's known practices.
One question that arises when looking at Philip's inventory is the matter of
duplication. We know of thirty-two masses written by La Rue, of which thirty-one
are extant today and one is lost. Philip's inventory contains forty-one masses, if 4/28
held eight masses, as suggested by the entry in Mary's inventory. This means either
we are missing nine more masses by La Rue (possible) or Philip's collection had
at least some duplication of repertoire. This latter scenario is extremely likely once
we remember that the contents of his library came from several conduits, of which
two were his Aunt Mary's library and his father's. In fact, if we total the number of
masses in the four volumes that were likely from Mary's library, we have exactly
thirty-one masses.
Almost 200 sources for La Rue's music survive today, but manuscripts that are
devoted exclusively or almost exclusively to his music are exceedingly rare and come
from a single place: the Alamire scriptorium. We can thus confidently add the five
new "all La Rue" collections from Philip's inventory to the output of the scriptorium.
Given La Rue's prominence in the Alamire manuscripts, his long-term employment
at the court, and the fact that Philip II was the son, grandson, and great-grandson of
La Rue's employers, each of which was his predecessor's heir, it is highly likely that
the other four lost volumes containing La Rue's music are also of courtly origin.114
And we already know that 3/16, MontsM 773, is an Alamire production.
Manuscripts Containing Josquin
Josquin is cited almost as often (nine times) as La Rue (ten times) among Philip's
manuscripts; see Table 8.115 He thus appears more frequently than even Mary of
Hungary's court composer Appenzeller (eight items) and Philip II's chapel master,
Manchicourt (seven items). And after La Rue, Josquin is the most prominent
presence among surviving Alamire sources as well.116 But Josquin's situation is
more complicated than La Rue's.
TABLE 8. Josquin in Philip II's Inventory
The original wording for each entry is found in Knighton, "La müsica en la casa"
[fn. 1], Apéndice 22.
The letter "M" indicates that the manuscript is also found in Mary's inventory.
L Manuscript is likely to have an Alamire origin.

P Manuscript possibly has an Alamire origin.
U Manuscript is unlikely to have an Alamire origin.
P 2/7 parchment, folio; folio;

ten masses of Jusquin,
ten masses of Jusqi with four illuminations at the
f the
beginning of the first
first two
two folios
folios
P 2/31 parchment, folio folio
algo menor;
algo menor;
sevenseven
masses of Josquin with some
illuminated paintings
paintings
L 2/66 unspecified material;material;
"Regina"Regina
salbe" and
salbe"
motets
ar by many authors; the first
de la Rue; also
ilsoJosquin Preferreum
Josquin Prefer reum
P 2/82 unspecified material; masses;masses;
material; the first, 4v ecçe
the first, '■ panis by Hotinet barra; also
mis sa pangue<xelingua
lingua by Josquin
by Josquin
P 2/84 unspecified material; motets
material; andand
motets Salbe
SalhRegina-, the first Aue maria and
salbe by Josquin
squin (M?)
(M?)
P 3/28 paper, folio grande; five
grande; masses
five ofJosi
masses of Josquin (M)
P 4/4 paper, folio grande; many
o grande; manyauthors;
authors: motets, salue Regina, hymns,
; the
Magnificats; the first
first motet,
motet, estabat
estabat ofof
Josquin
U 4/10 unspecified material; motets
material; by many
motets authors;
by many ai first, canis 4v Sancta Maria;
also in egito>of
of Josquin
Josquin
P 4/31 unspecified material; another
material; book
another of <Josquin de près; first mass,
book
gaudamus (M?)
114 La Rue's music is found in parchment (and sometimes decorated) manuscripts from places other than the
Habsburg-Burgundian court, including decorated parchment manuscripts FrankSU 2 (including six masses
by La Rue), WolfA A (two La Rue masses), and MuncBS C (ditto) as well as the plain parchment MilA 46
(two masses) and the fragment AntP 18.13/3 (one mass). Further, as we shall see, court collections did include
manuscripts from German lands. Yet it seems highly unlikely that the Habsburg-Burgundian court would need
or want to turn to other venues to acquire copies of music by La Rue, their most productive composer for
almost a quarter century.
115 Josquin appears in one print, Item 3/21, which is possibly 15161, Antico's famous mass publication. That
print includes La Rue as well, but La Rue's name is not mentioned in the inventory description. Discussion of
composer appearances in Philip's inventory is largely restricted to names associated with manuscripts.
116 See Kellman, "Josquin and the Courts" [fta. 14].
At least one of the nine collections is unlikely to be Alamire's: Item 4/10 (a

choirbook of motets) opens with a work by Cornelius Canis, a composer active after
Alamire's death.117 Four of the other items are indicated as devoted to Josquin; at
least three of these are for his masses. In the vast array of Renaissance manuscripts,
only three surviving volumes are devoted exclusively to Josquin: the copy of a single
mass in the Vatican (on paper)118 and two collections from Alamire (also paper).119
Of Philip's volumes, both 2/7 and 2/31 are illuminated manuscripts, a combination
that we have seen is, if not unique to Alamire and Habsburg-Burgundy, still closely
associated with its manuscript production.120 Item 2/66, because of its La Rue
connection, is likely to come from Alamire, and Item 2//82 is striking because it
contains both Barra's Missa Ecce panis and Josquin's Missa Pange lingua; these
works appear side by side in Alamire's Occo Codex (BrusBR IV922).121 Another
promising entry is Item 3/28. This was part of Mary of Hungary's collection (in
her own inventory it appears as 481 [8]/490 [1]), brought to Spain from the north
upon her retirement, increasing the likelihood that this codex is of Alamire or "post
Alamire" origin.
Two other Josquin volumes in Mary's inventory may have their counterparts in
Philip's. Is Mary's volume with nine Josquin masses (481 [7]/489 [12]) the same as
Philip's Item 4/31? Is Item 2/84 (another choirbook of motets), which opens with
Josquin's Ave Maria and Salve regina, the same as Mary's 481 [3]/489 [8], a volume
of motets and other works by Josquin? If so, these would also be strong possibilities
as coming from Alamire or his successors.
Despite all of this, though, Josquin's unparalleled popularity, and specifically
his popularity in Spain, makes it difficult to determine the origin of manuscripts
featuring his music. Robert Stevenson demonstrated that Josquin's music was
ubiquitous in Spain and Portugal, citing archival records that show multiple
institutions copying and recopying books of his compositions.122 Tess Knighton has
117 It is possible, of course, that the Canis work was added to a manuscript compiled before his time (and thus
perhaps an Alamire manuscript). In the Alamire complex, though, additions are most often found at the end
of a collection, the end of a manuscript section, or on blank openings between masses. But occasionally a
work is added at the very beginning; see for example Habsburg-Burgundian ("Scribe B") manuscript FlorC
2439. The goal of this essay, however, is to determine the volumes with the greatest likelihood of originating
in Habsburg-Burgundy under Alamire or his predecessors, which means eliminating those that would require
the scenario of a later addition to one of Alamire's creations.
Another possibility is that some of the manuscripts in Philip's collection were fascicle manuscripts pulling
together originally disparate pieces. In general such manuscripts do not match the profile of the ones with the
greatest likelihood of an Alamire origin: a unified repertoire (e.g. works of a single composer), parchment
writing support, and the use of special decoration.
118 VatS 197."
119 VienNB 4809 and 11778. The latter, however, wrongly ascribes the Missa Gaudeamus therein to Ockeghem,
and thus the manuscript does not present the appearance of being devoted exclusively to Josquin's works.
120 It is worth observing that part of the description of 2/7, "four illuminations at the beginning of the first two
folios" matches the opening (a Josquin motet, as it happens) of parchment manuscript ToleF 23, a "post
Alamire" production from Flanders (though not one devoted exclusively to Josquin).
121 As demonstrated in Table 4, Alamire manuscripts repeated side-by-side pairings in some collections.
122 See R. Stevenson, "Josquin in the Manuscripts of Spain and Portugal", in Lowinsky and Blackburn (eds.),
Josquin des Prez [fn. 14], p. 217-246, especially, p. 226-227.
62 ■ Revtje belge de Musicologie / Belgisch Tijdschrift voor Muziekwetenschap
shown how frequently Josquin appears in Spanish intabulations, in striking contrast

to his northern contemporaries.123 We thus have evidence for a rich Spanish tradition
of copying Josquin, in sharp contrast to the treatment of La Rue's music in the
Iberian penisula. And Josquin was certainly copied widely elsewhere in Europe as
well. Alamire's workshop is thus far from an inevitable choice for the origin of
Philip's Josquin volumes; at best, most of them can be considered as only possibly
coming from the Alamire scriptorium.
Manuscripts by Category
Paper Manuscripts: Undecorated

We will examine the remaining manuscripts of interest in Philip's inventory by the
category of writing support and the sub-category of decoration. Table 9 lists paper
books; the first section gives those lacking indication of decorative elements in
the inventory. The two manuscripts with La Rue, 2/4 and 2/32, have already been
discussed; 2/4 is extremely likely to come from court and 2//32 is highly likely to
have the same origin. The two collections with Josquin, on the other hand are more
problematic, though the presence of 3/28 in Mary of Hungary's collection increases
the likelihood of a northern courtly origin.
We know that the four manuscripts that survive today - 2/22, 2/23, 3/9, and
3/11 - are not considered products of Alamire's scriptorium, though both 3/9
and 3/11 are from Mary of Hungary's court and the latter was copied by one of
Alamire's own scribes, making this a "post-Alamire" collection. Interestingly, 3/11
contains one of La Rue's Magnificats, showing that his music was still being copied
piecemeal at Mary's court. The work, however, is transmitted anonymously, unlike
the compositions in the volumes flagged in Philip II's inventory.
TABLE 9. Paper Manuscripts in Philip II's Inventory
[fh. 1], Apéndice 22.
EL Manuscript is extremely likely to have an Alamire origin.

N Manuscript is not from the Alamire
it from scriptorium.
the Alamire scriptorium,
P Manuscript possiblyibly
hashas
ananAlamire origin.
Alamire origin,
P- Manuscript could possibly
d possibly have
havecome
come from the Alamire scriptorium, but no
from the
compelling evidence
;nce tips it toward
tips it towardthat
that scenario.
scenario,
PA Manuscript has a "post-Alamire" origin.
i "post-Alamire" origin.
U Manuscript is unlikelyilikely
to have an Alamire
to have an Alamireorigin.
origin.
■\m thp« Alamirp crrintnrinm
123 See Knighton, "La mûsica en la casa" [fta. 1], p. 76-77.
Undecorated
EL 2/4 paper, folio; seven masses of Po de la Rue (M)
N 2/22 [MontsM 767] paper, folio comun; masses by diverse authors
N 2/23 [MadN 2431] paper, [folio comun]; masses by diverse authors
P 2/30 paper, folio [menor]; seven masses of muton (M)
L 2/32 paper, folio [algo menor]; Magnificats on eight tones by Pedro de larrua
with some hymns (M)
P 2/37 paper, folio; masses of muton; old (M)
P- 2/68 paper; many authors; the first is mouton
PA? 2/70 paper; many authors; the first mass carolus ymperator by Lupus
PA? 3/9 [MontsM 768] paper, folio grande; twelve masses of [Manchi]court (M)
PA 3/11 [MontsM 769] paper, folio grande; twenty-five Magnificats by diverse
authors; [Scribe K] (M)
P 3/24 paper, folio; masses of Juanes de Verbune (M)
P 3/28 paper, folio grande; five masses of Josquin (M)
P 4/4 paper, folio grande; many authors; motets, salue Regina, hymns,
Magnificats; the first motet, estabat of Josquin
Decorated
P- 2/54 paper, folio grande; three masses and some motets; royal arms on first
folio
P 2/71 paper; many authors; illuminated R on nine folios; the first mass quirt
laymeroit, lebrufn], 6v
U 2/75 paper; book of Adrian Picart; first mass, 5v Veni creator, illuminated
L 2/88 paper, libro grande; motets of diverse authors; the first, salbe Jesu 6v
by Pedro delà Rue; the first folio in parchment "yluminado y cortada la
ymagen con cuchillo"
U 2/97 paper, libro grande; motets by many authors; the first, Domine ostende;
royal arms on first folio
PA? 3/17 paper, folio grande; Magnificats; arms of the Queen of Hungary at the
beginning (M)
EL [3/18] paper? [parchment?], folio grande; salbes by diverse authors; the arms of
the Duke of Saxony on the first folio (M)
U 4/19 paper; many authors; the first [motet?] pecata mei; two folios with four
illuminated letters
The other five manuscripts all include music by composers whose works were
known or copied by the Alamire team, making them potentially of great interest. The
shadowy figure Lupus is present in 2/70, where his Missa Carolus ymperator shows
an obvious relation with Charles V The mass was possibly created in connection
with his imperial coronation in Bologna in 1530. Among the Alamire manuscripts,
Lupus is present only once, with his Missa Quam pulchra es appearing in VienNB
11883, a motley collection of originally separate fascicles that appear to have served
as models for the scriptorium's use.124 Lupus presents a somewhat stronger profile
in the Heidelberg inventory - two masses and two motets, with a total appearance
124 See E. Jas and M. Friebel, "Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Handschriftsammlung, MS 11883",
in Treasury, p. 150-151. The motet lam non dicam in VienNB 9814, sometimes attributed to Lupus, is by
Richafort.
in five manuscripts. He is absent from other Spanish inventories. Perhaps 2/70 is a

post-Alamire production, given the connection with Charles via the dedicatory mass.
Item 3/24 is a collection of masses by Johannes Ghiselin, also known as Verbonnet.
Ghiselin is a significant presence in several early court manuscripts, and he plays an
especially important role in the mass collection VerBC 756.125 Certainly no other
mass codex gives Ghiselin such prominence. In addition, Item 3/24 was part of
Mary of Hungary's collection and thus likely inherited from Margaret of Austria - a
very promising connection for an Alamire origin. By comparison, the Heidelberg
inventory contains the Petrucci mass print, but no Ghiselin in manuscript. He is
absent from other Spanish inventories.
Table 9 includes three books that name Jean Mouton - Items 2/30, 2/37, and
2/68, the last of which opens with an unidentified work by Mouton. Items 2/30 and
2/37 are noted as mass collections, the latter described as old. Of the composer's
fifteen surviving masses, eight appear in Alamire sources, along with twenty-one or
so motets (the number is difficult to determine because of conflicting attributions),
two Magnificats, and one chanson. Only one of Mouton's masses appears exclusively
in sources connected to Habsburg-Burgundy, and no Alamire manuscripts devoted
to Mouton exist (although 's-HerAB 72c assigns all of its masses to Mouton). The
Heidelberg inventory, meanwhile, contains seven Mouton masses and thirty-one
motets appearing in five prints - including the Petrucci mass collection - and ten
manuscripts, confirming widespread distribution of his music (in Spanish inventories
he appears in prints). However, two of these Mouton manuscripts remain possible
as Alamire productions because of the suggestive presence of both 2/30 and 2/37
in Mary of Hungary's inventory (respectively 482 [7]/491 [3] and 479 [5]/488 [1],
described as seven Mouton masses for four voices).
Paper Manuscripts: Decorated

Decorated paper volumes in Philip's inventory appear in the second portion of
Table 9. As it turns out, the practice of decorating paper manuscripts was more
common than one might expect. Perusal of post-1450 sources in the Census
Catalogue reveals well over 100 paper manuscripts with decoration beyond normal
calligraphic initials. Of the eighteen known paper Alamire manuscripts, for example,
thirteen include decorations beyond the standard calligraphic initials.126 We have
already noted 2/88 in connection with La Rue, though we should mention that the
125 Five of the collection's eleven masses are his. The composer is identified in court manuscripts as both Ghiselin
and Verbonnet, and it was the Basevi Codex (FlorC 2439), an early court manuscript, that confirmed the equi
valence of these names.
126 These are 's-HerAB 72a, b, and c; JenaU 21; MontsS 766; MunBS 6, 7, and 34; VienNB 4809 and 11778;
andVienNB Mus. 15941,18825, and 18832. Undecorated paper manuscripts from the scriptorium are SubA
248; VienNB 4810, 9814, and 11883; and VienNB Mus. 18746. The use of decorative elements in paper
manuscripts remains little explored, as does comparison between paper and parchment when it comes to the
nature and extent of decoration.
practice of a parchment opening for an otherwise paper manuscript is not the norm
for Alamire's work.
Table 9 includes three collections - 2/54, 2/97 (a motet choirbook), and 4/19 —
whose descriptions are so anodyne (unspecified royal arms not withstanding) that
we can assume no specific origin. In fact, the motets named in 2/97 and 4/19 are
not found in surviving Alamire collections, and the combination of three masses
and some motets of 2/54 is not one found there either. 2/75, meanwhile, cites one
of Charles's musicians, Adrian Picart, but he is of a later generation than Alamire's
composers.
Jean Lebrun, by contrast, who is named in 2/71, appears in Alamire collections.
He is far from a major player therein, however, with a mere three works, none
of which is the otherwise unknown mass named in 2/71.127 Nor is he much of a
presence in the Heidelberg inventory, with two motets in a manuscript and a print,
neither one in a prime position. He is absent from other Spanish inventories. At the
same time, the level of decoration in 2/71 is quite high, with the illuminated "R"
(surely a K, as noted above) appearing on nine folios, likely at the beginning of nine
masses. One wonders whether the inventory's scribe, in fact, let his mind wander
when describing as paper what might actually have been a parchment volume, a
possibility we will discuss further below.
Item 3/17 is very firmly linked to Mary of Hungary, not merely by its presence
in the "Mary" section of the inventory but by the inclusion of her arms. 3/17 is
likely a post-Alamire manuscript, though Mary's arms were sometimes added to
books she inherited from Margaret of Austria (e.g. BrusBR 228). In contrast, Item
3/18 has already been noted by scholars for its contents - a collection of Salves
reminiscent of Alamire's Salve compilation, MunBS 34 - as well as its arms, those of
Frederick the Wise, assiduous collector of Alamire creations.128 Item 3/18, a "folio
grande" manuscript, falls in the section of volumes from the collection of Mary of
Hungary, Philip's aunt (to be discussed in more detail below). In Philip's inventory
it is described as being of paper, but in Mary's earlier inventory it is listed (twice)
as being of parchment (482 [16J/492 [1]). The latter is more likely, given that all six
surviving Alamire music books with Frederick's arms are of parchment.129 Frederick
the Wise was the most frequent recipient of the surviving Alamire manuscripts,
and Item 3/18 was obviously prepared before Frederick's death in 1525. Whether
his death or another reason kept it from being sent to the elector is unknown. The
codex in Mary's collection was doubtless inherited from Margaret of Austria, and is
virtually certain to have come from Alamire's scriptorium.
127 Congratulamini michi in VienNB Mus. 18825, Salve regina in MunBS 34, and Dung aultre aymer/Cela sans
plus in VienNB Mus. 18746.
128 E. Jas and H. Kellman, "Jena, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek MS 20", in Treasury, p. 102.
129 JenaU 2,3,5,8,12, and 20.
Manuscripts of Unspecified Material: Undecorated

A large number of books in the Appendix lack specification of writing support and
appear to be without decoration; they are given in the first part of Table 10. Our
earlier perusal of manuscripts from Philip's inventory that survive suggests that the
writing support for many of these lost sources was paper.
Manuscripts in Table 10 that include La Rue (2/66, 2/72, and 2/77) and Josquin
(2/66, 2/82, 2/84, 4/10, and 4/31) have already been discussed. Five others survive
today and we know exactly what they are: 2/73, 2/98, 2/105, 2/106, and 4/34, none
ascribed to Alamire's scriptorium. All are paper volumes. 2/105 (MontsM 774) and
2/106 (MontsM 775) are late collections, copied in Rome as a gift for Philip II
and containing motets of Infantas.130 2/98, a collection of music by Manchicourt
(MontsM 772), is believed to have been copied around 1560 in Madrid. Both 2/73
(MontsM 771; many authors) and 4/34 (MontsM 776; masses by Lupus Hellinck),
though, are much earlier, and their use of scribes employed by Alamire puts them
into the "post-Alamire" category of manuscripts. 2/73 is also notable for its Missa
Plus Ultra131 by Johannes Lupi that takes its title from the motto of Charles V
Neither Lupi nor Hellinck appear in Alamire collections.
TABLE 10. Manuscripts of Unspecified Material in Philip II's Inventory
[fh. 1], Apéndice 22.
The letter "M" indicates that the manuscript is aiow
maiiuov/iipi id also found
luuirn in Mary's inventory.
EL Manuscript is extremely likelyikely

to have an an
to have Alamire
Alamireorigin.
c
ve an Alamire origin,
N Manuscript is not from the Alamire scriptorium.
e Alamire scriptorium,
P Manuscript possibly has an Alamire
n Alamire origin.
origin.
P- Manuscript could possibly have come
ly have come from
fromthe
theAlamire
. scriptorium, but no
compelling evidence tips itittoward
toward that
that scenario,
scenario.
lamire" origin.
U Manuscript is unlikely to have an
haveAlamire origin.
an Alamire origin,
Y Manuscript is from the Alamireamire
scriptorium.
scriptorium.
Undecorated
P 2/2 unspecified material, folio grande marca mayor; 12v Missa Ecçe terremotus
[= Bramel] (M)
L 2/66 unspecified material; "Regina salbe" and motets by many authors; the first
de la Rue; also Josquin Preter reum
EL 2/72 unspecified material; another book of Pedro de la Rue that begins with the
8v pa tun
PA 2/73 [MontsM 771] unspecified material [paper]; many authors; the first mass
Plus Vitra by lupi, [Scribe K]
L 2/77 unspecified material; another book of many authors; the first mass tous les
Regrets Po la Rue
130 See Manns, The Manuscripts Montserrat [fn. 98], p. 18-19 and passim.
131 The title is a contrafact for Lupi's Missa Mijn vriendinne. On this mass, see B. J. Blackburn, The Lupus
Problem (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1970), p. 134-137 and 398.
P- 2/78 unspecified material; another book of many authors; first mass ut re mi fa

sol la [Bramel?]
P 2/82 unspecified material; masses; first, 4v ecçe panis by Hotinet barra; also
missa pangue lingua by Josquin
P 2/84 unspecified material; motets and Salbe Regina-, the first Aue maria and
salbe by Josquin (M?)
P 2/89 unspecified material, pequeno; salve regina and motets by diverse authors;
first, Nicolao craem
P 2/90 unspecified material; Magnificats by diverse authors; first, divitis
P- 2/91 unspecified material; six books of motets by diverse authors; the first,
optime divino, by ysac
PA? 2/93 unspecified material; motets by benedictus [Appenzeller]; the first, 6v
delegi [Dilexi]
N 2/98 [MontsM 772] unspecified material [paper]; masses, the first Reges terre
of Manchicourt
PA? 2/100 unspecified material, libro grande; benedictus [Appenzeller]; begins Kirie
pascali
N 2/105 [MontsM 774] unspecified material [paper], libro grande yn follio; motets;
made for hernando delas ynfantas
N 2/106 [MontsM 775] unspecified material [paper], [folio grande]; antiphons
P 2/107 unspecified material; 4, 5, and 6v masses by chissilini; a cross on the first
folio
P- 4/8 unspecified material; motets by many authors; first, Henrricas ysac regina
celi
PA? 4/9 unspecified material; Magnificats, the first 4v by benedictus [Appenzeller];
also clemens
U 4/10 unspecified material; motets by many authors; first, canis 4v Sancta Maria;
also in egito of Josquin
P- 4/12 unspecified material; motets and Magnificats by many authors; the first,
Rica fort
PA? 4/26 unspecified material; benedictus [Appenzeller]; first mass, 5v Beata Virgo
Maria
P 4/27 unspecified material; many authors; first, 6v missa quam pulchra; missa
estabat mater, hieronimus buyndos
P 4/31 unspecified material; another book of Josquin de près; first mass, gaudamus
(M?)
P 4/33 unspecified material; another book of mouton; first mass, de allemania;
second, tua es potençia
PA 4/34 [MontsM 776] unspecified material [paper]; masses of lupus Helluk; first
mass 5v Su Regit bonus [Scribes K, II] (M)
U 4/35 unspecified material; many authors; first mass 4v Philomena of Verdelot
PA? 4/45 unspecified material; Magnificats; the first by Venedictus [Appenzeller]
PA? 4/46 unspecified material; hymns, the first condictor by Benedictus [Appenzeller]
Decorated
U 2/47 unspecified material, fascicle, menor; 6v mass by cornelio canis; two
shields with the royal arms [of Charles?]
PA? 2/74 unspecified material; many authors; first mass, 4v Plus Vitra, illuminated
P 2/83 unspecified material; seven masses, illuminated at the beginning; the first
dictemoi Antonius Febin (M)
P 2/85 unspecified material; diverse authors; the first mass eçce partis by Hotinet
Barra; illuminated
Y 2/87 [MontsM 766] unspecified material [paper]; diverse authors; first, Bayses
Moya, 5v; an R illuminated on the seventh folio of parchment; Matheus
Forastier
U 4/13 unspecified material; hymns and masses of guerrero; royal arms [of
Philip II?] on first folio
U 4/15 unspecified material; hymns, fabordon, and Magnificats of cauallos; royal
arms [of Philip II?] on first folio
P- 4/23 unspecified material; seven masses by many authors; royal arms and
"salutation" on first folio
PA 4/25 unspecified material; Gonuert [Gombert]; the first mass Sancta maria;
eleven folios illuminated with an R (M?)
EL 4/28 unspecified material; another book of Pedro delà Rue; the first mass con
Jocundrate 4v; illuminated R on first folio (M)
U 4/30 unspecified material; six masses, many authors; first mass Dominus deus,
chriquilon; royal arms [of Charles?] at the beginning
P 4/40 unspecified material, libro grande; masses, the first, adjuturium; royal
arms on first folio
U 4/53 unspecified material, two books; fabordon of manchicourt; royal arms [of
Philip II?] on first folio
Item 2/2 in Table 10 is surely the famous work by Antoine Bramel. This specific
mass does not appear in any Alamire source; few of Brumel's masses do.132 Inter
estingly, Item 2/16 in the inventory consists of twelve partbooks that contain a mass
(Brumel's?) and motets. Bramel was not the only one to write for twelve voices,
though; to cite just one example, a twelve-voice mass once thought to be Palestrina's
appears in VatS 469. At the same time, Item 2/2 is quite likely the paper "libro muy
grande" book containing a twelve-voice mass found in Mary of Hungary's inventory
(Item 484 [7]/493 [9]). If so, the book was probably inherited from Margaret of Aus
tria given the composer's generation, increasing the likelihood of an Alamire origin.
As for other works by Bramel in Philip's inventory, the composer is specifically
mentioned in connection with the print 2/103, and Tess Knighton has speculated that
the four-voice Missa Ut re mi fa sol la named in 2/78 might be Brumel's composi
tion.133 That mass does not appear in any Alamire manuscript, however.
Item 2/89, a collection of Salves and motets, opens with a work by a composer
even less well-represented in the Alamire codices, Nicolas Craen. He has a single
work in the complex, but it happens to be his sole Salve setting, whose unique
source is MunBS 34 - thus, an interesting potential overlap with 2/89. The "libro
pequeno" choirbook format would be consistent with an earlier court production.
Craen is absent from the Heidelberg inventory and other Spanish inventories.
132 Of Bnunel's works, three masses, two chansons, one motet, and perhaps two Credos and one Magnificat
appear in Alamire manuscripts. He is not a big presence in Heidelberg, either, with four masses and one
motet. In other Spanish inventories he is represented in prints.
133 Knighton, "La müsica en la casa" [fn. 1], Apéndice 22, p. 386.
In Item 2/90 we find a composer who was one of La Rue's colleagues at the
court, Antoine Divitis. Alamire manuscripts contain five of his works: a Credo, a
mass, a Salve Regina, and two Magnificats. Divitis wrote at least three Magnificats,
and the one appearing at the head of 2/90 is not necessarily either of those appearing
in JenaU 20, the Magnificat collection copied by Alamire's team. But Divitis's
sometime employment for Habsburg-Burgundy makes his appearance in 2/90
suggestive nonetheless. By comparison, he has a minor presence in the Heidelberg
inventory of one mass (in a print) and one motet, neither taking pride of place, and
he is absent from other Spanish inventories.
Heinrich Isaac is mentioned twice in Philip's inventory, in Items 2/91 (partbook
motets) and 4/8 (choirbook motets), each time with a motet that does not appear in
an Alamire book. Overall, Isaac's presence in the Alamire manuscripts is smaller
than one might expect (eleven masses, three motets, and one secular work) given
both his massive output and his direct connection with Maximilian, father of both
Philip the Fair and Margaret of Austria. In contrast, he is well-nigh ubiquitous in the
Heidelberg inventory, with dozens and dozens of works cited.134 In other Spanish
inventories, he is present only in a print.
Six of the volumes containing the work of Benedictus Appenzeller are present
in Table 10. Given that he was Mary of Hungary's court composer, it is no surprise
to find his music in the inventory. In fact, one of his masses appears in an Alamire
manuscript (VienNB 4810; four motets are found in the Heidelberg inventory, but
nothing in other Spanish inventories). Because of the Habsburg connection, it is
possible that one or more of the group 2/93,2/100,4/9,4/26,4/45, or 4/46 originated
with Alamire. Nothing compels us in that direction, though, and the presence in 4/9
of Clemens (who never appears in Alamire manuscripts) argues against it for that
source at least. These volumes are more likely to be post-Alamire creations.
Rather different is the situation with 2/107, which is surely a collection of the
masses of Ghiselin, even though no five or six-voice masses by that composer survive
today.135 As already noted, he is an important figure among early court manuscripts
(those by the team of Scribe B, which preceded Alamire's cohort). Further, the
cross on the first folio in Item 2/107 calls to mind the cross indicating a deceased
composer found in various Alamire collections and, to my knowledge, not in other
music manuscripts of the time.136
Jean Richafort, Hieronimus Vinders, and Philippe Verdelot each put in a single
appearance in Philip's inventory, in Items 4/12, 4/27, and 4/35 respectively. Verdelot
134 In Lambrecht, Das "Heidelberger Kapellinventar" [fn. 81], the index of Isaac's works runs from p. 565 to
572.
135 Knighton, "La müsica en la casa" [fn. 1], Apéndice 22, p. 388, does not identify 2/107's composer as
Ghiselin.
136 Compère, Antoine de Févin, Robert de Févin, Jo. de Pratis (= Johannes Stockhem), Josquin, Pipelare, and
de Vorda are all indicated as deceased in various manuscripts. The ascription to Divitis in BrusBR IV922,
marked with a cross, is an error; the mass is by Antoine de Févin.
is a minimal presence in the Alamire sources, with only a single motet having a firm
placehold.137 He appears in two manuscripts in other Spanish inventories.
An unspecified work by Jean Richafort is found in Item 4/12. This collection
of motets and Magnificats by multiple authors is described in the inventory as
"old". Eight or so of Richafort's works circulated in Alamire collections; conflicting
attributions make it difficult to determine exactly which are his. By comparison, the
Heidelberg inventory show one of his masses and sixteen of his motets, a stronger
presence overall. Richafort appears in three manuscripts in other Spanish inventories.
Item 4/27 names Hieronimus Vinders, whose Missa Stabat Mater cited in the
entry is found in Alamire source MunBS 6. Three Salve reginas and another mass
appear as well in Alamire manuscripts. Vinders is absent from the Heidelberg
inventory and from other Spanish inventories.
This leaves Item 4/33 in Table 10, a volume of Mouton. 4/33 is the third volume
of Mouton in the inventory, after 2/30 and 2/37 (both collections of masses) discussed
earlier. 4/33 names two Mouton masses. The first is his Missa d'allemagnaP8 The
second is the Missa Tua est potentia, which appears in two Alamire compilations.
Curiously, each of them appears in the late Alamire manuscript 's-HerAB 72c, where
Tua est potentitia is the first mass and the Missa d'allemagne is the last.139 The
overlap with the inventory codex is intriguing even if inconclusive.
Manuscripts of Unspecified Material: Decorated

Just over a dozen books appear in Philip's inventory with unspecified writing support
but indication of some kind of decoration, including the royal arms; they are listed in
the second part of Table 10. More than half of these can be dismissed immediately
as candidates for an Alamire origin. The composers Canis (2/47), Guerrero (4/13),
Ceballos (4/15), Gombert (4/25, a manuscript with much decoration and quite
possibly a post-Alamire product),140 Crecquillon (4/30) and Manchicourt (4/53)
never appear in an Alamire volume. The description of Item 4/23, meanwhile, is too
vague to suggest a specific origin. For most of these manuscripts, the presence of
royal arms constitutes the inventory's description of decoration. In the case of 2/47,
the arms would likely be those of Charles, given that Canis served as his maistre des
enfans. Crecquillon was another of Charles's chapel members, so 4/30 likely bears
his arms as well. Guerrero and Ceballos, meanwhile, are Philip's contemporaries,
137 Infirmitatem nostrum, in the very late 's-HerAB 72c. It is not clear that the Gaude Maria virgo in VatP 1976
79 is the same as the Verdelot motet that appears in much later prints. Other "Verdelot" works in the Alamire
volumes have conflicting attributions and are unlikely to be his. One mass, sixteen motets, and a dozen madri
gals are named in the Heidelberg inventory, with two works leading their respective sources.
138 This mass is known as Missa Regina mearum in two of its sources (Petrucci's Mouton mass print and
StuttL 46) but it appears in its three Alamire sources (and seven other sources as well) as Missa d'allemagne.
139 Veronique Roelvink has suggested that 's-HerAB 72c is the manuscript most likely to correspond to the one
that Alamire prepared on speculation for the Confraternity rather than on commission; in other words, from
music he already had at his disposal; see Roelvink, "'s-Hertogenbosch" [fn. 50].
140 Mary's inventory contains a volume with six Gombert masses (479 [7J/488 [3]), which might refer to 4/25.
4/25, though, has eleven folios with an illuminated "R" (doubtless K), which suggests eleven masses rather
than six.
so the arms of 4/13 and 4/15 are surely his, and given that Manchicourt served as
Philip's chapel master, 4/53 surely sported his arms as well. 4/23, meanwhile, offers
no clues as to whose arms are presented.
Item 2/74 presents a direct link to Charles V in its Missa Plus Vitra, whose
composer is not named. "Plus oultre" was the motto adopted by Charles in 1516; it
was used in few musical compositions141 and appears with only one known mass,
that by Lupi. The mass in 2/74 is thus likely the one by Lupi that appears in the
immediately preceding inventory entry, 2/73. The latter collection, which survives
as MontsM 771, is a post-Alamire production, and perhaps the illuminated 2/74 is
as well.
The volume of La Rue, 4/28, has already been discussed as a source very likely
to have originated with Alamire. Another promising candidate is Item 2/83, whose
description is a little vague. "Seven masses illuminated at the beginning" could
indicate either a manuscript each of whose masses is illuminated at the beginning, or
a codex illuminated only at the beginning. The former is more elaborate, of course,
but even the latter happens in an Alamire manuscript. This is germane here because
of the composer whose Missa Dictes moy opens the collection: Antoine de Févin, for
whom the Alamire volumes are of prime importance in the transmission of his work.
All but one of his masses appear in Habsburg-Burgundian sources, for a total of nine
(along with seven or so motets and two Magnificats) and some of those manuscripts
provide the only or the only complete source for a work. Oddly enough, Févin's
Missa Dictes moy is the one mass not found in a surviving Alamire collection. In
Heidelberg by comparison, six of Févin's masses and six of his motets appear, with
some of the masses found in a copy of the Petrucci mass print; in other Spanish
inventories Févin is found in three manuscripts as well as prints. The likelihood that
2/83 originated with Alamire is increased by the book's presence in Mary's inventory
(481 [13]/490 [6]). A manuscript with a Févin mass is not especially likely to have
been copied during the time of Mary's Netherlandish rule, and it surely represents
something inherited from Margaret - and thus, a possible Alamire product.
Item 2/85 contains Hottinet Barra's Missa Ecce panis. As noted earlier, this mass
also appears in 2/82 along with Josquin's Missa Pange lingua, calling to mind their
juxtaposition in the Occo Codex.142 Barra's mass is his only work to appear in the
Alamire sources, and he is completely absent from the Heidelberg inventory. In other
Spanish inventories he appears in one manuscript.
Item 2/87 presents a special case. The description does not specify the writing
support but does include the phrase "la primera Bayses Moya A çinco voçes
yllumminada Vna R en la setima hoja de pergamino Matheus Forastier". As noted
above, 2/87 is one of the rare manuscripts that survives today; it is MontsM 766,
and it contains Mathurin Forestier's five-voice Missa Baises moy, as the inventory
promises. The survival of MontsM 766 proves that a description in Philip II's
141 See Meconi, "Plus oultre, Pierre de la Rue" [fn. 56].

142 In the Occo Codex (BrusBR IV.922), a manuscript devoted to works for the Blessed Sacrament, Barra's piece
appears as Missa de venerabili Sacramento. The mass survives as well in three non-Alamire manuscripts.
inventory of an illuminated volume containing a composer and music known at court

can, indeed, equal a manuscript copied by Alamire's scribes. That connection makes
similar inventory descriptions so promising. Forestier, incidentally, is completely
absent from the Heidelberg inventory and other Spanish inventories.
No composer is listed in Item 4/40, but it is of possible significance here. The
collection opens with a Missa Adiutorium, the title of an anonymous mass appearing
in three separate collections connected to Alamire,143 and, to my knowledge,
nowhere else - thus making 4/40 another manuscript with a possible origin from
Alamire's scriptorium. The royal arms could be those of Charles or perhaps Margaret
of Austria, each of whom was commissioning music books from Alamire during the
time that he was copying a Missa Adiutorium into various collections.
Parchment Manuscripts: Undecorated

Parchment codices in Philip's inventory that lack decoration are listed in the first part
of Table 11. We have seen that, whether decorated or not, parchment manuscripts
from the first four decades of the sixteenth century are most likely to come from
the Low Countries, and specifically the Alamire scriptorium. Nonetheless, most of
the manuscripts here lack any special claim in that direction. Items 2/5 and 2/6 have
vague descriptions, while the fabordon named for 4/5 is a genre lacking in Alamire's
codices. Crecquillon, whose motet appears in 4/3, does not appear in Alamire's
manuscripts. Appenzeller is present, as noted above, and his "folio grande" mass
and motet in 2/27 immediately call to mind the mass and motet, both probably
by Fayrfax, that constitute JenaU 9, another volume in large format. Appenzeller's
music was, of course, also copied by Mary of Hungary's scribes. 3/27 was owned
by Mary, but its vague description could apply as readily to a book compiled post
Alamire as it could to an earlier manuscript.
TABLE 11. Parchment Manuscripts in Philip II's Inventory
22.
[fil. 1], Apéndice 22.
The letter "M" indicates thatthe
dicates that themanuscript
manuscript is also found in Mary's inventory.
EL Manuscript is extremely
t is extremelylikely totohave
likely havean Alamire origin.
L Manuscript is likely to have
t is likely an Alamire
to have an Alamiiorigin.
P Manuscript possibly has
t possibly hasan
an Alamire
Alamire 01 origin.
P- Manuscript could possibly
t could possiblyhave
have come
con from the Alamire scriptorium, but no
compellingI evidence tipsitittoward
evidence tips toward
thathat scenario.
+ Uoo o "rvrvrt A lomiro" r\« m
143 MunBS F, VienNB Mus. 18832 (only a portion of the mass appears), and VienNB 11883.
Undecorated
P- 2/5 parchment, folio; eight masses by diverse authors
P- 2/6 parchment, folio; nine masses by diverse authors
PA? 2/27 parchment, folio grande; mass and motet by Benedictus [Appenzeller]
PA? 3/27 parchment, folio; six masses of diverse authors (M)
L 3/30 parchment, folio; masses and Magnificats; Alexander and other authors (M)
U 4/3 parchment, folio; motets by diverse authors; the first motet Pecante me by
chriquilon
U 4/5 parchment; fabordon and motets
Decorated
EL 2/3 parchment, folio; seven masses of Pedro de larrue, with six illuminations
at the beginning of each one (M)
P 2/7 parchment, folio; ten masses of Jusquin, with four illuminations at the
beginning of the first two folios
P 2/9 parchment, folio grande; two illuminated pictures at the beginning of nine
masses by diverse authors
EL 2/28 parchment, folio menor; ten masses of Pedro delà Rua, four illuminated
paintings on first two folios
P 2/31 parchment, folio algo menor; seven masses of Josquin with some
illuminated paintings
U 2/62 parchment, three "librillos"; masses; gilded folios
L 2/63 parchment; "canto"; first folio with illuminated salutation of Our Lady and
arms of Luxembourg
PA 2/69 [MontsM 765] parchment; Benedictus [Appenzeller]; some letters
illuminated; [Scribes K, S, III] (M)
P 2/76 parchment; a book of gascuine, illuminated; the first [work], 4v nigra sunt;
the illuminated image on the first folio is cut
PA [2//86] parchment?; a book of lupus Hellench; first mass de Resurrections,
illuminated on the first folio; missing the first folio with the Resurrection
that was cut
Y 3/16 [MontsM 773] parchment; nine masses of P° delà Rua; illuminated at the
beginning of each; the folios gilded (M)
EL [3/18] paper [parchment]?, folio grande; salbes by diverse authors; the arms of
the Duke of Saxony on the first folio (M)
Far more striking is Item 3/30, a parchment manuscript of masses and Magnificats
from Mary's collection that contains at least one of Alexander Agricola's works. Four
of his masses and two of his Magnificats were known at Habsburg-Burgundy, where
he worked for the last six years of his life, while he is completely absent from
the Heidelberg inventory and appears in other Spanish inventories only in a print.
Agricola's works appear thirteen times in the complex, and court manuscripts are the
only parchment sources for his masses. The fact that this volume was part of Mary's
collection - and thus likely inherited from Margaret of Austria - strengthens the
likelihood of a court origin. Tess Knighton has suggested that, like the compositions
of La Rue, Agricola's works could well have come from Juana la Loca rather than
the libraries of Mary or Charles.144 Though that scenario is possible, Agricola was
144 Knighton, "La müsiea en la casa" [fh. 1], p. 83.
never one of Juana's singers (dying before Philip the Fair did), and, as noted above,
the books for Philips's chapel were returned to the Low Countries immediately after
that ruler's death.
Parchment Manuscripts: Decorated

The items listed in the second part of Table 11 all have some kind of notable
decoration on a special writing support, though the description of 2/62 is vague,
and Alamire did not use partbooks of any material for his masses. We have already
discussed the volumes of La Rue (2/3, 2/28, 3/16) and Josquin (2/7, 2/31), the
former group surely originating at Alamire's scriptorium (3/16 is unquestionable),
the latter with no such certainty of origin. Also already discussed is 3/18, with the
arms of Frederick the Wise, described in Philip's inventory as a paper book but in
Mary's inventory as a parchment one. The latter is likelier. Arms are also found in
Item 2/63; "Luxembourg" - discussed in greater detail below - almost certainly
refers to Charles, and the parchment/illumination combination with those arms
strongly suggests the Alamire scriptorium. Another manuscript, Item 2/9, also has
the parchment/illumination combination so closely linked with Alamire, but provides
no clues as to content.
The description of Item 2/86, a book of Lupus Hellinck's music, makes it difficult
to tell whether the entire volume was parchment or only the opening. It is also
a bit unclear about the opening, though it seems as if the very first folio is gone
(implying, of course, that it was decorated) and that the remaining 'first' folio was
likewise illuminated. In any event, no music by Hellinck appears in the Alamire
manuscripts. Given the appearance of post-Alamire scribes in 4/34, the book of
Hellinck masses discussed earlier, perhaps 2/86 was a post-Alamire production at
court as well.145 We know that 2/69 [MontsM 765], a book of Appenzeller owned
by Mary, falls into that category.
Item 2/76 is an illuminated parchment codex dedicated to the music of Matthieu
Gascongne, whose eight masses would fill a collection nicely. Alamire sources
include a Gascongne Magnificat, four of his motets, and three masses/mass sections;
in contrast, Heidelberg has one mass and two motets and other Spanish inventories
show him in a single manuscript. Gascongne's Missa Nigra sum was not one of
his masses in an Alamire collection, but it does appear, also with illumination, in
ToleF 23, written by a scribe who collaborated elsewhere with Alamire's Scribe K,
continuing the Alamire connection.146
145 Hellinck appears once more in the inventory, in 4/39, a book of unspecified material and no decoration that
opens with his Missa Christus resurgens.
146 On the scribe, see Kiel, "Terminus Post Alamire?" [fn. 59], p. 103.
Mary's Inventory
Mary Countries
of Hungary was Margaret
after Charles's sister, Philip's
of Austria's aunt,
death in and regent
1530. of 3the
Section of Low
Philip's
inventory is categorized as being books that belonged to Mary, but her volumes
can be found in other sections as well, including the surviving manuscripts 2/69
(MontsM 765, filled with the music of her court composer Benedictas Appenzeller),
2/73 (MontsM 771, a miscellaneous collection of masses), and 4/34 (MontsM 776,
with masses of Lupus Hellinck). We can also identify further items by reference to
Mary's own inventory.147 To cite just one of many examples, Item 2/30 in Philip's
inventory, found in the section with books for the chapel service and containing seven
Mouton masses, is surely the same compilation as Item 482 [7]/491 [3] in Mary's
inventory. This inventory is less specific overall than Philip's, rarely mentioning
whether a volume is paper or parchment. Vague descriptions such as "motets" or
"seven masses by diverse authors" provide little help in finding concordances, and it
is not always possible to find ready correlations with Section 3 of Philip's inventory.
We have already seen this in connection with Mary's "Josquin" manuscripts.
Table 12 lists several codices in Mary's collection not readily traceable to Philip's
inventory whose descriptions cite composers found in Alamire manuscripts or are
suggestive in other aspects. Item 481 [4]/489 [9] showcases the music of Adrian
Willaert, a composer not named in Philip's inventory but one who appears in very
late Alamire sources with a few masses and motets. In general, though, Alamire is
not especially important in the transmission of Willaert's music.
TABLE 12. Selected Manuscripts from the Inventory of Mary of Hungary

L
Manuscript is likely to have an Alamire origin.
L 480 [13]/489 [3] unspecified material; libro grande, eleven masses of
"Oreguen" and other antiq
antique authors
U 481 [4]/489 [9] unspecified material; sevi
seven masses and other things of
"Huvillart"
L 481 [11J/490 [4] parchment;seven
parchment; seven
or or eight masses of "Oreguen"; illuminated
eight
at the beginning
L 481 [16]/490 [9] parchment;nine
parchment; nine masses of diverse authors; arms of
masses
Luxembourg at the beginning
L 482 [l]/490 [10] parchment; nine masses of diverse authors; arms of
Luxembourg and other things illuminated at the beginning
L
482 [3]/490 [12] parchment; eight masses; arms of Luxembourg at the
beginning
147 The term "Mary's inventory" refers in fact to two separate versions. The first, dated 9 March 1559 in its hea
ding, is published in Vander Straeten, La Musique aux Pays-Bas [ffa. 106], vol. VII, p. 476-485; it consists
of an inventory dated 12 November 1558 (p. 476-479) and an Appendix (books kept at Guadalajara in charge
of her chapelmaster) dated 9 June 1559 (p. 479-485). A second inventory by Rogier Pathie of all of the pre
ceding material, undated, is on p. 485-493.
482 [4]/490 [13] unspecified material; ten masses of different authors; arms
of Luxembourg; "very well illuminated" at the beginning
482 [5]/491 [1] parchment; seven masses of different authors; arms of
Luxembourg
482 [8]/491 [4] unspecified material; six or seven masses of different
authors; illuminated at the beginning; arms of Luxembourg
483 [ll]/492 [12] parchment, three "cançioneros" of Agricola of motets and
masses; arms of Luxembourg
In contrast, court sources are of enormous importance for the music of Johannes
Ockeghem. Item 480 [13]/489 [3], a libro grande with eleven masses of Ockeghem
and other "antique" composers, is highly suggestive. Even more striking is the
illuminated parchment collection of seven or eight Ockeghem masses, Item 481
[11]/490 [4], which fits the court manuscript profile in terms of material, repertoire,
and decoration.
The remaining items in Table 12 share one characteristic: they contain the arms
of Luxembourg. The individual to whom these arms belonged since 1437 was none
other than the Duke of Burgundy148 or his direct heirs. The title was bestowed by
Philip the Fair on Charles at his baptism on 7 March 1500; he retained it until his
abdication, at which point it passed to his son.149 Given Mary's ownership of these
collections, the arms in them are surely not referring to Philip II. If they refer to
Charles, however, why were they in Mary's collection? If they refer to Philip the
Fair, the collections would be incredibly early - in fact, the first that we would
know of from his court. It is perhaps most likely that the reference is, however,
to Charles, and that the manuscripts, like others from Alamire's scriptorium, either
never reached their intended recipient (e.g. BrusBR 15075, which may not have been
sent to Portugal) or were bandied about from ruler to ruler (e.g. Alamire archival
manuscript D that Margaret was willing to give back to Maximilian, or volumes
that Charles may have left in the Low Countries on one of his sojourns home). This
possibility of handing off manuscripts seems especially likely, not only because of
the obvious record of inheritance in the inventories themselves but also because
Mary's inventory includes two books specifically identified with "alemania", a term
sometimes used as an imperial reference.150
148 Luxembourg, lacking a male heir, was sold by the Duchess Elisabeth to Philip the Good in 1437 and remained
part of the territory of Burgundy and Habsburg-Burgundy thereafter. Why the arms in the inventories are
designated specifically as those of Luxembourg, however, is unclear. The arms of both Philip I and Charles
changed over the course of their lifetimes as they acquired new titles and territories. Perhaps "the arms of
Luxembourg" refer to those used at a specific career stage, for example before Charles became King of Spain.
149 E. E. Rosenthal, "The Invention of the Columnar Device of Emperor Charles V at the Court of Burgundy in
Flanders in 1516", Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 36 (1973), p. 198-230, at 222.
150 Items 483 [3]/492 [4], hymns and other things in a "very old" book from Alemania; and 483 [9]/492 [10], a
libro grande volume, an "old" book with music of Alemania. Could these have been books once owned by
Maximilian? Some of the music books he owned, of course, were produced by Alamire. Mary's inventory
describes other books as old, including 483 [6J/492 [7] (very old; masses and other things); 483 [ 10]/492 [11]
(very old; diverse masses and motets); and 484 [2J/493 [4] (old; four-voice masses).
Three of the "Luxembourg" manuscripts have further illumination, with

482 [4]/490 [13] singled out as "very well illuminated". Five codices are parchment,
including 483 [11 ]/492 [12] with its collection of Agricola, who served the court
from 1500 until his death in 1506. This last item is rather oddly described as being
three "cançioneros" - songbooks - yet the contents are given as masses and motets.
This somewhat puzzling description notwithstanding, Mary's inventory presents
again a cache of highly suggestive manuscripts.151
To draw all of this together: we know from archival records that Alamire created
many music books that no longer survive today, and we know that many of the ones
that do survive have no equivalent in the records documenting his scribal activity.
We know that, in general, composers gradually fade from sources in the years after
their demise - Josquin being the strongest exception to this basic rule - which
means that volumes that feature the work of an older composer are likely to be
older themselves.
We know, too, that certain types of manuscripts - collections devoted to Salves,

manuscripts featuring the music of La Rue - are associated exclusively with Alamire's
scriptorium, with works of other composers (Ockeghem, Agricola, Ghiselin) very
strongly associated with the scriptorium as well. We now know that parchment
sources of polyphony and especially decorated ones in the period between 1500 and
1540 are more strongly correlated with the Alamire scriptorium than with anywhere
else, and that only the Low Countries - and again, predominantly Alamire's crew -
appeared to export luxury music manuscripts during this period.
This is not to say that the repertoire and composers found in the manuscripts
of Alamire and his courtly predecessors are restricted to those manuscripts; that
the use of parchment for polyphony is confined to either Alamire's manuscripts or
codices created before his death; or that Alamire 's books are the only ones to employ
extensive decoration, either during his lifetime or after his death. Yet a Venn diagram
of repertoire (composers active primarily before 1525), the use of parchment, and
the presence of decoration generates an overlap that corresponds most strongly
to the compilations of Alamire and his predecessors at the Habsburg-Burgundian
court. Given that correspondence, the various combinations of repertoire, manuscript
layout, writing support, and decoration suggest that selected volumes known today
only through La Rue's bequests, the records of Bergen op Zoom, the 1566 Fugger
inventory, the 1544 Heidelberg inventory, and most especially the inventories of
Philip II and Mary of Hungary originated in the Alamire scriptorium, its predecessor
at the court of Habsburg-Burgundy, or the extension of the scriptorium under Mary
of Hungary's patronage.
151 Some may be in Philip's inventory but not readily identifiable, e.g. Item 2/63, the illuminated parchment
"canto" book with the Luxembourg arms (could this be 482 [1] or 482 [4]?), or the vague 4/23 with its royal
arms.
78 ■ Revue belge de Musicologie / Belgisch Tiidschrift voor Muziekwetenschap
This is not to claim that all manuscripts surveyed here have that origin; for
Josquin, or for composers appearing only very late in the Alamire complex, other
origins are easily possible. But in the case of a parchment codex, the older the
repertoire and the fancier the decoration, the greater the likelihood of an Alamire
origin becomes. The key role that Alamire's manuscripts play in the dissemination of
certain composers and the overall falling away of both La Rue and his generation in
surviving sources after the death of Alamire in 1536 support this claim. So too does
the fact that as far as decorated parchment manuscripts of polyphony go, one place
towered above all others in terms of production as well as export: the scriptorium
associated with the court of Habsburg-Burgundy and its designated scribe, Alamire.
The strongest candidates for this origin are the music books of La Rue's bequest,
the Salve collection of the Fuggers, the book of La Rue's five-voice masses in the
Heidelberg inventory, all books containing La Rue's music in Philip's inventory, the
collection of Salves intended for Frederick the Wise (3/18), the parchment collection
of Agricola and others (3/30), the two collections containing Ockeghem in Mary's
inventory (480 [13] and 481 [11]), and her parchment collection of Agricola (483
[11]). Manuscripts with the arms of Luxembourg are highly likely as Alamire
products as well, especially given their use of parchment and often decoration: 2/63,
481 [16], 482 [1], 482 [3], 482 [4], 482 [5], and 482 [8],
The predominantly paper volume MontsM 766, an Alamire product, is present
in Philip's inventory as Item 2/87; its citation of a composer (and piece) known
elsewhere in Alamire's output strengthens the possibility that other such composers
and pieces found in Philip's inventory might too have come from Alamire, especially
when the composer does not appear to have a strong presence in other Spanish
inventories. The most important candidates here are 3/24 and 2/107 (both Ghiselin),
2/89 (Craen), 2/90 (Divitis), 4/27 (Vinders), 2/71 (Lebrun), 2/30, 2/37, and 4/33 (all
with Mouton), 2/76 (Gascongne), 2/83 (Févin), 2/82 and 2/85 (Barra, the former
with Josquin as well), 4/40 (Missa Adiutorium), and perhaps 2/2 (Bramel) and 3/28
(the Josquin masses from Mary's collection).
The répertoriai connection is present as well in the Fugger manuscripts of Mag
nificats, three-voice masses, Ockeghem masses, and Agricola masses. Meanwhile,
Alamire's documented connection to Mechelen provides the impetus behind the
identification of the Bergen op Zoom codex with his work.
Finally, the presence of several surviving "post-Alamire" manuscripts within
Philip's inventory (MontsM 765 as 2/69; MontsM 771 as 2/73; MontsM 769 as 3/11;
and MontsM 776 as 4/34) suggests that other collections might indeed by "post
Alamire" as well. A combination of repertoire, material, and decoration propose
this category for the volumes that contain Appenzeller (2/27, 2/93, 2/100, 4/9, 4/26,
4/45, 4/46), as well as 3/17 (Magnificats with Mary's arms), 4/25 (Gombert, highly
decorated), and 2/86 (Hellinck, highly decorated). The parchment manuscript 3/27
(six masses, diverse authors), 2/70 (with Lupus's Missa Carolus ymperator), and
2/74 (illuminated, with a mass on Charles's motto) are perhaps post-Alamire as well.
We can turn to the archival Alamire books outlined in Table 1 to find many
possible origins for the likely Alamire manuscripts in Philip's and Mary's inventories:
the collections of C, D, T, U, V, W, X, AA, and BB. And we have already seen
that Table 1 presents only an incomplete picture of Alamire's and his predecessors'
activity. Sixty-one manuscripts, complete or in part, survive today from the court
scriptorium, and we can add at least two dozen more volumes from Table 1 to this
total. Even these two dozen would not account for all of the sources suggested above
as likely or possibly coming from the court. How plausible, then, is such a level of
production?
Here it is best to reconsider how we have viewed Alamire. Rather than considering
him as a 'scribe' per se, we would do better to see him as the craftsman or even
artist that in many ways he truly was. The material objects for which he and his
predecessors were responsible were in so many ways works of art themselves -
not just via their use of miniatures or borders, for whose production visual artists
were hired, but in terms of their overall (quite beautiful) design as well as the fine
music and text copying involved. And here the parallel between Alamire and certain
contemporary artists comes truly into play. An artist preparing a fresco - a time
sensitive production - was never responsible for the entire manufacture of the finished
product, but rather was the mastermind behind the art - the one who planned exactly
what would happen where but who delegated others to help bring the end product
to fruition. Alamire and his predecessors served the same guiding function for their
numerous commissions. An Alamire manuscript was a type of artistic brand in terms
of a certain level of quality and production (admittedly sometimes compromised),
regardless of however many hands (parchment maker, painters, calligraphers, music
scribes, text scribes, binder) created the finished volume. We should remember, too,
that numerous hands found in the surviving court compilations appear in only a few
manuscripts. In other words, various of the codices suggested here as coming from
the court scriptorium could be the products of scribes otherwise known for only a
small number of volumes.
Further, MontsM 766 suggests a constant readiness on Alamire's part to provide

new material. This manuscript has long been noted for its insertion of a single
illuminated parchment gathering into an otherwise paper volume, but the inserted
gathering is not a single independent piece: it rather contains the conclusion of one
work and then the entirety of a new one. In other words, Alamire dismantled part
of what was either a manuscript in progress or a completed one - a parchment
illuminated one, at that - to help generate a new, different collection. Perhaps he even
aimed for a steady stream of production of relatively high-end material prepared on
speculation. In any event, it was precisely because Alamire worked with a team152
that he was able to produce so many volumes. Was this in response to the rise of
mass production via prints, or recognition of the business opportunity of a 'niche'
152 Albeit a team that did not always function flawlessly; see the discussion of the post-1517 scriptorium in
Meconi, "Alamire, Pierre de la Rue" [fn. 13].
market to distinguish his product, or because Alamire knew which patrons preferred
the prestige of manuscripts, decoration, and parchment, or because the singers for
whom he was copying preferred handwritten books themselves? This essay only
begins to touch on what we can learn from inventories, but we already see that in
certain circles, at least, manuscripts continued to outnumber prints in the collections
of major patrons of the time.
To conclude: repertoire and strong similarities to existing Alamire collections
suggest that various now-lost items detailed among La Rue's bequests, a document
from Bergen op Zoom, the Fugger and Heidelberg inventories, and the inventories
of Philip II and Mary of Hungary originated in the court scriptorium of Alamire and
his predecessors. Of these new volumes suggested as Alamire's, the largest number
are music books owned by Philip and Mary. With these books specifically we must
remember that we are looking not at inventories originating in, say, Bohemia, France,
or Italy, but rather from the court that is the direct successor of the one for which
Alamire worked. Philip II was the heir of Charles V; Charles the heir of Philip
the Fair. That each son inherited the music books of the father is virtually certain.
Philip II also inherited the library of Mary of Hungary, who had in turn received the
books of Margaret of Austria. Philip the Fair, Margaret, and Charles were Habsburg
Burgundy's rulers at the time of Alamire and his scribal predecessors. Further, all
but two of the dozen volumes of polyphony that survive from Philip's inventory
are likely to have a courtly origin, strongly suggesting that such an origin was
the norm for music books in his collection. These facts argue very strongly that
numerous other manuscripts within Philip and Mary's inventories, especially those
featuring the work of earlier composers, and most especially those using parchment
or showing elaborate decoration, came from Alamire's workshop. The alternative is
that the court disregarded its own tradition as producer of fine music codices and
imported its music from elsewhere - carrying coals to Newcastle, as it were. The
court archival entries from the 1520s and 1530s demonstrate clearly that this was not
so, and in any event the norm was for institutions - not just the court of Habsburg
Burgundy - to produce their own manuscripts.
Thus, given the notorious archival mismatch between what Alamire was paid
for and what survives, the significance of numerous composers in the inventories -
especially La Rue - to the repertoire of the court chapel during Alamire's time, and
the premiere importance of Alamire and Habsburg-Burgundy in the production of
music books for its own use and for export, it is virtually certain that some of the
manuscripts used in the daily round of court activity, both paper and parchment,
eventually entered the collections of Mary of Hungary and Philip II, and that they
await us there to be reclaimed - even if only in spirit.
APPENDIX
SELECTED MANUSCRIPTS FROM

THE INVENTORY OF PHILIP II'S MUSIC BOOKS
Numbering and descriptions are taken from Knighton, "La mûsica en la casa" [fh. 1],
Apéndice 22.
LIBROS DE OFFIÇIO DIVINO Y DE DEVOCIÔN

1/16 [Vatican, Chigi C.VII.205] = Antiphonale
LIBROS DE CANTO DEL SERVIÇIO DE LA CAPILLA

2/2 unspecified material, folio grande marca mayor; 12v Missa ecçe terremotus
[= Brumel] (M)
2/3 parchment, folio; 7 masses of Pedro de larrue, with 6 illuminations at the begin
ning of each one (M)
2/4 paper, folio; 7 masses of Po de la Rue (M)
2/5 parchment, folio; 8 masses by diverse authors
2/6 parchment, folio; 9 masses by diverse authors
2/7 parchment, folio; 10 masses of Jusquin, with 4 illuminations at the beginning of
the first 2 folios
2/9 parchment, folio grande; 2 illuminated pictures at the beginning of 9 masses by
diverse authors
2/22 [MontsM 767] paper, folio comun; masses by diverse authors
2/23 [MadN 2431] paper, [folio comun]; masses by diverse authors
2/27 parchment, folio grande; mass and motet by Benedictus [Appenzeller]
2/28 parchment, folio menor; 10 masses of Pedro delà Rua, 4 illuminated paintings on
first 2 folios
2/30 paper, folio [menor]; 7 masses of muton (M)
2/31 parchment, folio algo menor; 7 masses of Josquin with some illuminated paintings
2/32 paper, folio [algo menor]; Magnificats on 8 tones by Pedro de larrua with some
hymns (M)
2/37 paper, folio; masses of muton; old (M)
2/47 unspecified material, fascicle, menor; 6v mass by cornelio canis; two shields with
the royal arms
2/54 paper, folio grande; 3 masses and some motets; royal arms on first folio
2/62 parchment, three "librillos"; masses; gilded folios
2/63 parchment; "canto;" first folio with illuminated salutation of Our Lady and arms
of Luxembourg
2/66 unspecified material; "Regina salbe" and motets by many authors; the first de la
Rue; also Josquin Prefer reum
2/68 paper; many authors; the first is mouton
2/69 [MontsM 765] parchment; Benedictus [Appenzeller]; some letters illuminated;
[Scribes K, S, III] (M)
2/70 paper; many authors; the first mass carolus ymperator by Lupus
2/71 paper; many authors; illuminated R on 9 folios; the first mass quin laymeroit,
lebru[n], 6v
2/72 unspecified material; another book of Pedro de la Rue that begins with the 8v
patun
2/73 [MontsM 771] unspecified material [paper]; many authors; the first mass Plus
Vitra by lupi; [Scribe K]
2/74 unspecified material; many authors; first mass, 4v Plus Vitra, illuminated
2/75 paper; book of adrian picart; first mass, 5v Veni creator, illuminated
2/76 parchment; a book of gascuine; illuminated; the first [work] 4v nigra sunt; the
illuminated image on the first folio is cut
2/77 unspecified material; another book of many authors; the first mass tous les Regrets
Po la Rue
2/78 unspecified material; another book of many authors; first mass ut re mi fa sol la
[Bramel?]
2/82 unspecified material; masses; first, 4v ecçe panis by Hotinet barra; also mis s a
pangue lingua by Josquin
2/83 unspecified material; 7 masses, illuminated at the beginning; the first dictemoi
Antonius Febin (M)
2/84 unspecified material; motets and Salbe Regina; the first Aue maria and salbe by
Josquin (M)
2/85 unspecified material; diverse authors; the first mass eçce panis by Hotinet Barra;
illuminated
2//86 parchment?; a book of lupus Hellench; first mass de Resurrectione; illuminated
on the first folio; missing the first folio with the Resurrection that was cut
2/87 [MontsM 766] unspecified material [paper]; diverse authors; first, Bayses Moya,
5v; an R illuminated on the seventh folio of parchment, Matheus Forastier
2/88 paper, libro grande; motets of diverse authors; the first, salbe Jesu 6v by Pedro
delà Rue; the first folio in parchment "yluminado y cortada la ymagen con
cuchillo"
2/89 unspecified material, pequeno; salve regina and motets by diverse authors; first,
Nicolao craem
2/90 unspecified material; Magnificats by diverse authors; first, divitis
2/91 unspecified material; 6 books of motets by diverse authors; the first, Optime
divino, by ysac
2/93 unspecified material; motets by benedictus [Appenzeller]; the first, 6v delegi
[Dilexi]
2/97 paper, libro grande; motets by many authors; the first, Domine ostende; royal
arms on first folio
2/98 [MontsM 772] unspecified material [paper]; masses, the first Reges terre of
Manchicourt
2/100 unspecified material, libro grande; benedictus [Appenzeller], begins Kirie pascali
2/105 [MontsM 774] unspecified material [paper], libro grande yn follio; motets; made
for hernando delas ynfantas
2/106 [MontsM 775] unspecified material [paper], [folio grande]; antiphons
2/107unspecified material, folio; 4, 5, and 6v masses by chissilini; a cross on the first folio
LIBROS QUE FUERON DE LA REYNA MARIA

3/9 [MontsM 768] paper, folio grande; 12 masses of [Manchi]court (M)
3/11 [MontsM 769] paper, folio grande; 25 Magnificats by diverse authors; [Scribe K]
(M)
3/16 [MontsM 773] parchment; 9 masses of P° delà Rua, illuminated at the beginning
of each; the folios gilded (M)
3/17 paper, folio grande; Magnificats; arms of the Queen of Hungary at the beginning
(M)
3/18 paper? [parchment?], folio grande; salbes by diverse authors; the arms of the
Duke of Saxony on the first folio (M)
3/24 paper, folio; masses of Juanes de Verbune (M)
3/27 parchment, folio; 6 masses of diverse authors (M)
3/28 paper, folio grande; 5 masses of Josquin (M)
3/30 parchment, folio; masses and Magnificats; Alexander and other authors (M)
3/34 cambric, quarto; imperial crown and emblems on first folio (M)
LIBROS QUE TIENE EL MAESTRO DE LA CAPILLA

4/3 parchment, folio; motets by diverse authors; first motet Pecante me by chriquilon
4/4 paper, folio grande; many authors; motets, salue Regina, hymns, Magnificats; the
first motet, Estabat of Josquin
4/5 parchment; fabordon and motets
4/8 unspecified material; motets by many authors; first, Henrricas ysac regina celi
4/9 unspecified material; Magnificats, the first 4v by benedictus [Appenzeller]; also
clemens
4/10 unspecified material; motets by many authors; first, canis 4v Sancta Maria; also
in egito of Josquin
4/12 unspecified material; motets and Magnificats by many authors; the first, Rica fort
4/13 unspecified material; hymns and masses of guerrero; royal arms on first folio
4/15 unspecified material; hymns, fabordon, and Magnificats of cauallos; royal arms
on first folio
4/19 paper; many authors; the first [motet?] pecata mei\ two folios with four illuminated
letters
4/23 unspecified material; 7 masses by many authors; royal arms and "salutation" on
first folio
4/25 unspecified material; Gonuert [Gombert]; the first mass Sancta maria-, 11 folios
illuminated with an R (M)
4/26 unspecified material; benedictus [Appenzeller]; first mass 5v. Beata Virgo maria
4/27 unspecified material; many authors; first, 6v mis s a quam pulchra; mis s a estabat
mater, hieronimus buyndos
4/28 unspecified material; another book of Pedro delà Rue; the first mass con Jocundrate
4v; illuminated R on first folio (M)
4/30 unspecified material; 6 masses, many authors; first mass Dominus deus, chriquilon;
royal arms at the beginning
4/31 unspecified material; another book of Josquin de près; first mass, gaudamus (M)
4/33 unspecified material; another book of mouton; first mass, de allemania; second,
tua es potençia
4/34 [MontsM 776] unspecified material [paper]; masses of lupus Helluk; first mass,
5v Su Regit bonus [Scribes K, II] (M)
4/35 unspecified material; many authors; first mass 4v Philomena of Verdelot
4/40 unspecified material, libro grande; masses, the first, adjuturium; royal arms on
first folio
4/45 unspecified material; Magnificats; the first by Venedictus [Appenzeller]

4/46 unspecified material; hymns; the first condictor by Benedictus [Appenzeller]
4/53 unspecified material, two books; fabordon of manchicourt; royal arms on first
folio
ABSTRACT
The scriptorium of Petrus Alamire at the Habsburg-Burgundian court was responsible

for one of the largest and richest collections of manuscripts from the first decades of
the sixteenth century. Yet archival records document even more manuscripts connected
to Alamire that no longer survive today. Scholars have previously pointed out several
individual now-lost manuscripts that closely parallel Alamire's productions, but far more
missing manuscripts than previously recognized are virtually certain to have come from
his workshop. The essay draws on the inventories of Raimund Fugger the Younger,
Palatine Count Ottheinrich of Neuberg, Philip II, and Mary of Hungary, as well as the
bequests of Pierre de la Rue and the records of Bergen op Zoom. A combination of
factors such as heraldry, writing support, repertoire, and the amount and placement of
decoration lead to the conclusion of courtly origin for many of the no-longer-extant
manuscripts found in these records.

The Lost Manuscripts of Alamair

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Lost Manuscripts of Alamair

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Societe Belge de Musicologie

The Unknown Alamire: Lost Manuscripts Reclaimed

boys and de facto court composer, Benedictas Appenzeller,11 is well represented.

Alamire in the Archives

TABLE 1. Archival References to Alamire

Al-3 1496 August 15 :- Alamire

C 1503 Alamire paidAlamire

[D ms.] March 7 : Margaret sends Alamire and music book to Maximilian23

August 22: Alamire paid 1£ by Antwerp Confraternity of Our

Q October 28: Alamire paid 5£ 5sc by Antwerp Confraternity of

S (= R?) December 8: Alamire paid 15sc by Antwerp Confraternity of Our

The earliest documentation is for the famous confraternity of 's-Hertogenbosch -

55 On this composition see D. Fallows, "Alamire as a Composer", in BHCC, p. 247-258.

TABLE 2. Alamire Manuscripts with Presumed Ownership by Philip the Fair,

The World of Parchment

One other realmmanuscripts:

something else, such as CambriP 1760. Finally, Table 3 presents "undecorated"

as extending beyond the calligraphic initials or rubrication found in numerous

TABLE 3. Parchment Manuscripts of Sacred Polyphony from the Continent, ca.

GERMANY: Mainz 368 (frag),70 Mainz

ITALY: FlorL 666, ModE M.1.2,

w r O - V o—> />r L—J i-"j L^vj

The survey of lost

Salve by Hofhaimer survives; no vocal setting is known. Paulus de Roda is not

TABLE 4. Contents of the Heidelberg La Rue Manuscript Compared with Alamire

TABLE 5. Origins of Surviving Polyphonic Manuscripts in Philip IPs Inventory

Court of Mary of Hungary ✓

2/69 MontsM 765 (including Alamire

Manuscripts Containing La Rue

TABLE 6. La Rue in Philip IPs Inventory

EL Manuscript is extremely likely to have an Alamire origin.

At least six of the manuscripts are devoted exclusively to La Rue's music,

105 p 33V ^ picture appears in Treasury, p. 85.

108 Knighton, "La müsica en la casa" [fh. 1], p. 83.

TABLE 7. Alamire Manuscripts featuring La Rue (not including fragments)

BrusBR 6428: parchment, 735 x 500mm

seven La Rue masses + one

SubA 248: paper, 396 x 282mm

Manuscripts Containing Josquin

TABLE 8. Josquin in Philip II's Inventory

L Manuscript is likely to have an Alamire origin.

P 2/7 parchment, folio; folio;

At least one of the nine collections is unlikely to be Alamire's: Item 4/10 (a

shown how frequently Josquin appears in Spanish intabulations, in striking contrast

Paper Manuscripts: Undecorated

TABLE 9. Paper Manuscripts in Philip II's Inventory

EL Manuscript is extremely likely to have an Alamire origin.

123 See Knighton, "La mûsica en la casa" [fta. 1], p. 76-77.

in five manuscripts. He is absent from other Spanish inventories. Perhaps 2/70 is a

Paper Manuscripts: Decorated

Manuscripts of Unspecified Material: Undecorated

TABLE 10. Manuscripts of Unspecified Material in Philip II's Inventory

EL Manuscript is extremely likelyikely

P- 2/78 unspecified material; another book of many authors; first mass ut re mi fa

Manuscripts of Unspecified Material: Decorated

141 See Meconi, "Plus oultre, Pierre de la Rue" [fn. 56].

inventory of an illuminated volume containing a composer and music known at court

Parchment Manuscripts: Undecorated

TABLE 11. Parchment Manuscripts in Philip II's Inventory

144 Knighton, "La müsiea en la casa" [fh. 1], p. 83.

Parchment Manuscripts: Decorated

TABLE 12. Selected Manuscripts from the Inventory of Mary of Hungary

Three of the "Luxembourg" manuscripts have further illumination, with