THE RECEPTION OF OPITZ'S - lUDITH DURING THE BAROQUE
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Mora Wade
THE RECEPTION OF OPITZ'S
lUDITH DURING THE BAROQUE
By virtue of its status as the second German opera libretto,
Martin Opitz's ludith (1635), has received little critical attention in
its own right. l ludith stands in the shadow of its predecessor, Da/ne
(1627),2 also by Opitz, as weH as in that of a successor, Harsdörffer
and Staden's See/ewig (1644), the first German-Ianguage opera to
which the music is extant today.3 Both libretti by Opitz, Dafne and
ludith, are the earliest examples of the reception of Italian opera
into German-speaking lands. 4 Da/ne was based on the opera ofthe
1. Martin Opitz: ludith. Breslau 1635. See also Kar! Goedeke: Grund-
risz zur Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung. Vol. III. Dresden 1886. p.
48. Aversion of this paper was given at the International Conference on
the German Renaissance, Reformation, and Baroque held from 4-6 April
1986 at the University of Kansas, Lawrence. Support from the Newberry
Library in Chicago and from the National Endowment for the Humani-
ties to use the Faber du Faur Collection at the Beinecke Library of Yale
University enabled me to undertake and complete this project. A special
thanks to Christa Sammons, curator of the German collection at the
Beinecke, for providing me with a copy of ludith.
2. Martin Opitz: Dafne. Breslau 1627.
3. Georg Philipp Harsdörffer: Frauenzimmer Gesprächspiele. Vol. IV.
Nürnberg 1644. Opitz's 'ludith' has only three acts and has no extant
music. Löwenstern's music to Tscherning's expanded version of Opitz's
'ludith' was not published until 1646, a full two years after 'Seelewig'.
Vgl. Gerhard Dünnhaupt: Bibliographisches Handbuch der Barock-
Literatur. Vol. 11. Stuttgart 1981. p. 1370, item 157.
4. Otto Taubert: Daphne, das erste deutsche Operntextbuch. Pro-
grammheft des Gymnasiums zu Torgau. Torgau 1879. Hans Heinrich
Borcherdt: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Oper und des Schauspiels in
Schlesien bis zum Jahre 1740. In: Zeitschrift des Vereins für Geschichte
Schlesiens 34 (1909) p. 217-43. Anton Mayer: Zu Opitz's Dafne. In:
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access148
same name by Jacopo Peri and Ottavio Rinuccini (1600);5 Judith
on Giuditta by Andrea Salvadori and Marco Gagliano (1626).6
Heinrich Schütz composed the music to Da/ne which was
performed on 13 (23) April 1627 at Schloss Hartenfels in Torgau
for the wedding of the Markgrave Georg of Hessen to the Saxon
Duchess, Sophie Eleanore. 7 Although Opitz's second libretto
stemmed from the collaboration with the composer Schütz on
Euphorion 18 (1911) p. 754-60 and Quelle und Entstehung von Opitzens
Judith. In: Euphorion 20 (1930) p. 39-53. These articles discuss the
relationship of Opitz's work to the Italian original. Bernhard Ulmer:
Martin Opitz. New York 1971. (= Twayne. TWAS 140.) p. 114-23, does
not mention the Italian predecessor of either drama. Arthur Scherle: Das
deutsche Opernlibretto von Opitz bis HofmannsthaI. Diss. Munich 1954.
p. 4-9 discusses both German works. Klaus Garber: Martin Opitz. In:
Deutsche Dichter des 17 . Jahrhunderts. Berlin 1985. p. 163-167 does not
mention 'Judith' together with Opitz's other translations.
5. 'Dafne' was first performed at the Palazzo Corsi in Florence during
the carnival season of 1597. Rinuccini wrote the text to which Jacopo Peri
composed the music. The libretto was first published in 1600, again in
1604. In January of 1608 Marco Gagliano set Rinuccini's text to music
again for a performance at the Teatro della Corte in Mantua. This score
was published in 1608. See Alfred Lowenberg: Annals of Opera 1597-
1940. Cambridge 1943. p. 1-4. See also Nino Pirotta: Peri. In: Enciclo-
pedia dello Spettacolo. Vol. VIII. Rome 1961. cols. 1-3.
6. Mayer: Judith. p. 39 states that the play was performed 22
September 1626 for the return ofthe papal envoy to Spain and nephew to
Pope Urban VIII, Cardinal Barberini, to Florence. A copy ofthe text for
this performance is unknown; the work appeared in a posthumous
edition in Rome in 1668. Mayer quoted a performance noted by Angelo
Solerti: Musica, ballo e drammatica alla corte Medicea dal 1600 al 1637.
Florence 1905, p. 186. Neither Nino Pirotta: Gagliano. In: Enciclopedia
dello Spettacolo. Vol. V. Rome 1958. cols. 817-18. nor Biancha Becherini:
Salvadori. In: Enciclopedia dello Spetacolo. Vol. VIII. Rome 1958. cols.
1438-9. mentions a 'Giuditta' among the plays on which Salvadori and
Gagliano collaborated. Carolyn Raney: Salvadori, Andrea. In: The New
Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Vol. 16. London 1980. p. 434.
states: "Martin Opitz published a German translation of the Istoria di
ludit that Salvadori wrote in 1626 for Gagliano (Judith, Breslau, 1635)."
7. Wilhelm Karl Prinz von Isenberg: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der
Europäischen Staaten. Vol. I. Marburg 1953. Tafel 107 gives the date of
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access149
Dafne, his Judith was never set to music in its entirety.8 Beyond its
importance to German and Italian cultural relations du ring the
seventeenth century, however, Judith provides various insights into
the literary world of German-speaking lands during the Thirty
Years' War. On the basis of Judith and its further reception in
German literature one can examine the reception both of Opitzian
dramatic theory (Czepko, Pierie) and of the biblical theme of
ludith and Holofernes. (Tscherning, Judith and Rose, Holojern).
Additionally, the varying demands for plays at court and for
school performance can be studied on the basis of these plays. The
complications which authors like Opitz, Czepko, and Tscherning
experienced in getting their works printed and/or performed shed
further light on the uncertain life of a poet during the Thirty Years'
War. Finally, one can trace the general development of German
musical drama on the basis of Judith and its successors.
the wedding as 1 April 1627. Taubert, p. 30-31 postulates that the
performance on 13 (23) April was the second performance, intended for
a wider public. Moritz Fürstenau: Zur Geschichte der Musik und des
Theaters am Hofe des Kurfürsten von Sachsen. Dresden 1861. p. 97-98
gives the wedding date as 1 April and the performance date as 13 April
1627. Hermann Kretzschmar: Das erste lahrhundert der deutschen
Oper. In: Sammelbände der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft 3 (1901-
02) p. 272 mistakenly gives the wedding date as 27 October 1627; he
reports a later performance of 'Dafne' with music by Bontempi and
Peranda in 1679. See also Hans Michael Schletterer: Das deutsche
Singspiel. Reprint: Hildesheim and New York 1975. p. 186. Schletterer
gives further performances in Weissenfeis (1698) and Hamburg (1708),
the latter with music by Händel.
8. Otto Baltzer: ludith in der deutschen Literatur. Berlin and Leipzig
1930. (= Stoff- und Motivgeschichte der deutschen Literatur. 7.) p. 14,
suggests that Heinrich Schütz set it to music, although he acknowledges
that he can provide no proof for this assertion. Although 'ludith' seems
to have been inspired by Opitz's collaboration with Schütz on 'Dafne',
this piece was not set to music. Werner Bittinger and Kurt Gudewill:
Heinrich Schütz. In: Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Vol. 12.
Kassel 1966. cols. 202-226 do not list it among Schütz's works - extant
or non-extant. Hans Heinrich Borcherdt: Andreas Tscherning. Munich
and Leipzig 1912. p. 108-9 discusses the musicality of both libretti by
Opitz. Vgl. Dünnhaupt: Vol. 3, item 157.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access150
Whereas Opitz's Da/ne was an occasional work, ludith was not
undertaken as a 'Gelegenheitsdichtung'. 9 The date non ante quem
for Salvadori's Giuditta is 22 September 1626. 10 Circumstances in
Opitz's career indicate that ludith postdates Da/ne and predates
the Schä//erey der Nimfen Hercinie. l1 Poetically more sophisticated
than Da/ne, ludith exhibits stylistic and metric features which
support the former contention. 12 Opitz's contemporary literary
endeavors, which include many translations and complement the
biblical dramatic themes of ludith, support the latter. Between
1625 and 1628 Opitz translated the Senecan tragedy Die
Trojanerinnen (1625), Die Klagelieder leremia (1626), Solomons ...
Hohes Liedt (1627), Da/ne (1627) and lonas (1628).13 Both Opitz's
literary endeavors and demands of his career in the service of the
Burggraf Karl Hanibal von Dohna support the notion that his
work on ludith fell between 1627 (after work on Solomon and
Da/ne) and before 1629, that is, before his translation of the
Counter-Reformation tract by Martin Becanus in 1629 and his
subsequent trip to Paris and work on Hercinie (1630).14 Like
Da/ne, ludith was written during Opitz's service to Dohna
(roughly February 1626 until February 1634) and Opitz praised
9. Max Hippe: Martin Opitz als Geistlicher Dichter. In: Beiträge zur
neueren Literaturgeschichte 7 (1931) p. 46 states that both 'Dafne' and
'Judith' were Gelegenheitsdichtungen, although there is no evidence for
the latter.
10. Solerti. p. 186.
11. Martin Opitz: Schäfferey von der Nimfen Hercinie. Brieg 1630.
12. Borcherdt: Tscherning. p. 236-8 discusses the meters of 'Judith' in
comparison to 'Dafne'. Kar! Vossler: Das deutsche Madrigal. Weimar
1898. (= Litterarhistorische Forschungen. 6.) p. 28-30 discusses innova-
tions in versification in both plays. Edna Purdie: The Story of Judith in
German and English Literature. Paris 1927. (= Bibliotheque de la
Litterature Comparee. 39.) p. 78-79 discusses the poetic dramatic struc-
ture of the libretto. Schletterer. p. 186 also compares 'Judith' favorably
to 'Dafne'. Bernard Ulmer: Opitz' Judith Reviewed. In: Traditions and
Translations. Studies in Honor of Harold J antz. Munich 1972. p. 55-63
discusses only the visual and not the metrical aspects of the play.
13. See Dünnhaupt: Opitz. Vol. III, item 75, 76, 82, 89, 96.
14. Marian Szyrocki: Martin Opitz. 2.Aufl. Munich 1974. p. 74-94.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access151
Dohna highly for allowing hirn sufficient time to pursue his literary
goals. 15 After Dohna's death in 1634, political and pecuniary
circumstances forced the poet to return to Breslau, where he put
the finishing touch es on his opera Judith and dedicated it to a
noblewoman, Margarethe von Kolowrath. 16 The dedication is
dated "d. 13. des Hornungs (i.e., February) 1635." In the
introduction, however, Opitz dearly states that he wrote the piece
long before that time:
Meine ludith ... welche ich doch auch vor etzlichen lharen an
Erfindung und Worten einen grossen Theil auss dem Italiänischen
entlehnet, ... 17
In alllikelihood, Judith was completed by late 1628.
Opitz's Judith is a three-act play with eight characters. Unlike his
first libretto, Dafne, there is neither a prologue nor an epilogue in
Judith. The three acts are divided into three, six, and six scenes
respectively. Although Opitz does not list the characters appearing
in a given scene at the beginning of that section, he does adhere to
the dictum of changing scenes when a new character appears on
stage. He lists five separate choruses, which appear for a total of
eight choral interludes, plus a combined chorus at the end of the
play. There is but a single chorus in Act I, which doses the final
scene (I, iii); Acts 11 and 111 have choral scenes interspersed
throughout (11, iii, IV, vi; III, i, iii, IV, vi 2x). Choruses are used not
only to dose individual acts of the play, but also within the scenes.
The last scene of the play is both opened and dosed by different
choruses in a grand finale fashion. Additionally, there are
numerous occaSlOns in the play during which an individual
15. This praise may indeed have been not completely accurate,
because Dohna's numerous assignments for Opitz often kept the writer
from his poetic pursuits. In addition to supporting Opitz himself,
Dohna also intervened on behalf of Sebastian Opitz, the poet's father,
and his family. See Szyrocki: Opitz. p. 74-94. For so me of the works
Opitz dedicated to Dohna, see Dünnhaupt: Opitz. Vol. III, items 88, 98,
118, and 139.
16. Neue Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 12. Berlin 1980. p. 473. mentions
two branches of the Kolowrat family in Silesia: no Margarethe is
mentioned.
17. Opitz: ludith. Vorrede.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access152
member of the chorus steps out as a soloist, as an interlocutor
within the play proper.
Opitz used the Alexandrine more frequently in ludith than in
Da/ne. There are madrigal verses for recitative and the strophic
choruses used as arias have the marked character of the 'arioso-
lied'. This unprecedented frequent use of choral interludes as weIl
as the lyrical meters in general underscores the musical qualities of
the text and reinforces the notion that Opitz clearly intended the
text for composition. Indeed, the number and types of chorus es
surely led to a printing error: the omission of the marker for the
beginning of Act III, i. 18 The printer was accustomed to closing
acts with a chorus and when one appeared immediately in the next
scene, it led to confusion. Why Opitz's opera text was never set to
music is unclear. Although the religious theme was topical for the
Thirty Years' War, the story of a virtuous woman who, through
deceit and treachery, beheads her intended lover to free her mother
country, it is hardly congenial to a wedding celebration - the
occasion on which many early German operas enjoyed their first
performance. Opitz infused the biblical story with patriotic
connotations reflecting the strife of German-speaking lands at that
time. Its moral didactic theme is typical of that of a school drama,
yet the dramatic structure indicates that it was intended for
performance at court: a smaIl cast, both male and female figures as
weIl as choruses, numerous opportunities for solos and duets by
individual members of the chorus, and an easily accomplished
stage set.
There is no record that Opitz's ludith was performed in Breslau
- or anywhere else - at the time of its publication in 1635. Elias
Major recorded a performance on 20 February 1651 by the
students of the Magdalena Gymnasium in Breslau at the residence
18. This error was not corrected in the later printings of the work.
For example, see Opitz: Geist- und Weltliche Gedichte. Part III. Breslau
1690. Martin Sommerfeld (ed.): Judith-Dramen des 16. und 17. Jahr-
hunderts. Berlin 1933. (= Literarhistorische Bibliothek. 8.) p. 114-33,
corrects this in his edition, correct1y placing the marker for Act 111, i
after the Chor der Gefangenen Könige wich closes Act II, vi. Act III, i
then comprises 'Ein Ebreeischer Soldat von der Mauren', answered by
the 'Chor der Ebreer in der Stadt'. Arsace opens Act III, ii.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access153
of the Herzog of OelS. 19 1t is unclear from the diary entry, however,
whether this was Opitz's Judith alone or Tscherning's reworking of
Opitz's original. Despite the fact that Judith was widely imitated
during the Baroque Age, it may indeed be the case that it never
enjoyed a single performance.
Andreas Tscherning gives fuH credit to Opitz on the tide page of
his work: "Martin Opitzen Judith auffs neue aussgefertiget ... "20
Like Opitz, Tscherning also wrote his play weH before it was
published. Some time between 1635 and 1642 Tscherning
reworked Opitz's libretto as a school play, which appeared in print
only in 1646:
Nachdem / vor etlichen Jahren / zu dem Schauspiel von der Judith /
wie es mein seeliger Opitz offentlieh an das licht gegeben ... ich das
vördertheil selbiger geschichte / in gleichfalls gebundener Rede /
angehefftet... 21
Tscherning's treatment of Opitz's Judith has been decried on
account of its total disregard for the operatic character of the
work, although this is due largely to the exigencies of the situation
for which Tscherning was writing, rather than gross ignorance of
Opitz's intentionsY During these years Tscherning was a tutor to
19. Max Hippe: Aus dem Tagebuch eines Breslauer Schulmannes im
siebzehnten Jahrhundert. In: Zeitschrift des Vereins für Geschichte und
Altertum Schlesiens 36 (1901) p. 188. Renate Brockpähler: Handbuch
zur Geschichte der Barockoper in Deutschland. Emsdetten 1964. (= Die
Schaubühne. 62.) makes no mention of a Judith performance in
Breslau.
20. Andreas Tscherning: Martin Opitzen Judith / Auffs new aussge-
fertiget; worzu der vördere Theil der Historie sampt den Melodeyen auf
iedwedes chor beygefüget von Andreas Tscherning. Rostock 1646. See
Goedeke: III. p. 51. Dünnhaupt: 11. Opitz. item 157.
21. Tscherning: Judith. >Ci recto. Tscherning dedicated the play to
three citizens of Danzig: Peter Hendrich, Daniel Ernest Czierenberg,
and Christoph Hendrich. According to Borcherdt: Tscherning. p. 121
and p. 292. Martin Opitz also knew these men. Moreover, Tscherning
dedicated a poem ("Sollte nun mein Opitz leben ... ") to D.E.
Czierenberg and his wife, Judith, on the occasion of their wedding. See
Gedichte auf das ... Freudenfest des Daniel Ernest Czierenberg mit
Juditha ... des Peter Hendrichs Tochter ... Danzig 1645.
22. Hugo Max: Martin Opitz als Geistlicher Dichter. Heidelberg
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access154
patrician youth in Breslau and Ton} and he expanded the play for
performance by pupils thereY Even though he did not have an
operatic performance in mind, Tscherning states that he tried to
follow Opitz's themes and dramatic characterization as much as
possible:
Ich habe so viel es möglich gewesen / und beydes zu den Sachen als
Personen sich schicken wollte / Opitzianischer Redensarten / ja
bisweilen ganzer Verse ... 24
Tscherning did not change the original three acts of Opitz's
libretto at all, but rather prefaced them with two additional acts of
five and seven scenes respectively. Tscherning added fourteen
scenes to Opitz's play - I, i-v, H, i-vii and IH, i - thereby
doubling the length of the work. The seam between the two works
is quite obvious and Tscherning himself marked it with a marginal
note: "Was von hieran folget / ist alles Herrn Opitzen Arbeit."
Tscherning, who listed the characters appearing in any given scene
at the beginning thereof, marks his IH, i for ludith, Abra, Arsace,
and Thraso (the last two characters are not in Opitz's work), but
Holofernes and Bagos, not mentioned in Tscherning's scene
directions, take over as called for in wh at was originally I, i in
1931. (= Beiträge zur neueren Literaturgeschichte. 17.) p. 65 discounts
Tscherning's ludith. Borcherdt: Beiträge. p. 241 dismisses Tscherning's
reworking of ludith summarily, and he later elaborated on this negative
opinion. Borcherdt: Tscherning. p. 113. Günther Müller repeats Bor-
cherdt's assessment of the play. Tscherning himse1f realized the
weakness of his version: "Mir ist bewusst, dass zur Vollkommenheit
eines Schauspiels ein mehres gehöre als die Ohnmacht meines
Verstandes kann fassen." Günther Müller: Geschichte des deutschen
Liedes. Bad Homburg 1959. p. 62-63 praises Tscherning's Lieder-texts,
stating: "Das Opitzische Lied ist von Tscherning inhaltlich ausgebaut
und formal vollendet worden."
23. Tscherning first studied in Rostock from 7 May 1635 until 1637.
Opitz hirnself recommended the young poet to Peter Lauremberg,
professor of rhetoric there. Financial problems forced hirn to return to
Breslau in 1637. In 1642 he assumed the position of Hofmeister to two
patrician youths from Danzig, who were to travel to Leiden, Holland as
part of their studies. See Borcherdt: Tscherning, p. 119.
24. Tscherning: ludith. Vorrede.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access155
Opitz's libretto. Tscherning does not accomplish this transition
smoothly. While omitting Holofernes' first exchange in Opitz's
work, Tscherning begins with his own first lines for Arsace, then
follows with the second exchange of Arsace by Opitz, allowing this
character to speak twice in succession. From this point on, the
work is Opitz's; Tscherning made no attempt to list the characters
in each scene as he did previously; everything follows as in the 1635
printing.
The two acts which Tscherning put before Opitz's work do not
contribute to the plot of the play, the information given there is
often redundant, and some of the action is improbable. 25 What
Tscherning did do was to expand the cast from Opitz's original
eight to twenty dramatic figures (all new figures are male) as well
as add another chorus, thereby providing an ample number of
roles for a school dass. Hans Heinrich Borcherdt in his study of
Andreas Tscherning attributes the author's additions to the Opitz
play to a Judith drama by Sixt Birk (1539), but the differences
between Birk's and Tscherning's works are too significant to
attribute any direct relationship between the twO. 26 The
widespread popularity ofthe Judith theme and its treatment in the
Old Testament demonstrates that Tscherning could have known
any number of Judith stories. Tscherning's main consideration
was to produce a work that would function as a school play. The
themes of the story - as already mentioned - were surely
appropriate to the didacticism of a school performance.
It is ironic to note that Tscherning's version, al ready extant in
1642, enjoyed a greater stage popularity than Opitz's librettoY
This is due largely to the audience at which it was directed, a
25. Tscherning's additions are the history of the enmity between the
two peoples and the story of Achior. See also Borcherdt: Tscherning. p.
109-122.
26. Borcherdt: Tscherning. p. 112-13. Purdie. p. 80-82 compares
Tscherning's additions to a ludith drama by Hans Sachs.
27. Based on what is known of Tscherning's life and his relationship
to Opitz, I suspect that Tscherning expanded the playas early as 1637-
38, after his return to Breslau, to serve his needs as a tutor there. The
Jesuit stage in Breslau, as Borcherdt suggests, very likely provided thc
impetus for Tscherning's work. See Borcherdt: Tscherning. p. 107.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access156
feature which virtually insured performance, rather than due to
any inherent literary quality of the supplemental acts. It can be
assumed that Tscherning reworked the piece for a specific
performance, perhaps as early as his second stay in Breslau
(1637f.). Despite the fact that the play had been in existence for
some time, in the preface Tscherning states that he is printing the
play anyway, because so many copies of it were being made.
Although no performances can be ascertained before 1643, one
could assume that the said copies were being made for the purpose
of performance. Before he resumed his studies at the University of
Rostock in 1642, Tscherning left a copy ofthe five-act play with his
friend Peter Czimmermann, whom he described as "meines
grossen Beförderers zu Thorn in eurem Preussen. "28 In 1643
Czimmermann, a pastor and also rector at the gymnasium in TOrI},
staged Tscherning's work, which "mit sonderbaren Ruhm
offentlich ist vorgestellet worden. "29 One can assume Tscherning's
work enjoyed more than this one performance, although no
concrete evidence for this exists.
Along with the text to Tscherning's expanded version of Opitz's
ludith was printed the music to the chorus es composed by the
poet's mentor Matthaeus Leonastro de Longueville Neapolitanus,
that is, Matthias Apelles von Löwenstern, at that time
Kapellmeister and counsellor to the Herzog of Oels. 30 The printing
28. Tscherning: ludith, A jj recto.
29. Tscherning: ludith, A jj verso. Borcherdt: Tscherning, p. 119
suggests that Czimmermann perhaps knew Opitz. For further discussion
of Opitz's contacts in Torn, see Richard Alewyn: Martin Opitz in
Thorn. In: Zeitschrift des Westpreussischen Geschichtsvereins 16 (1926)
p. 171-179.
30. Löwenstern's pedigree as indicated by his Italianized name refers
to Langenhof ("Longueville"), the name of the lands Löwenstern
acquired by his marriage to a rich widow in 1636. Neapolitanus refers to
his hometown, Neustadt in Silesia. His family name was Apel (Appel);
his father a master saddle maker. Löwenstern received the title of
nobility in 1634. First he was Cantor in Leobschütz (1613-1625) and
then entered the services of Heinrich Wenzel where he remained until
the latter's death (1639). Tscherning dedicated many poems to his
mentor Löwenstern.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access157
of the music bears the title "Chore so bey dieser Tragedien sollen
inserirt werden ... "31 The music to the choruses is set for three
voices: Tenor I, Tenor 11, and Bassus accompanied by a thorough-
bass. The total of eleven choruses shows a mixture of polyphonic
(motet-like) and homophonic styles. The two drinking songs are
prime examples of German arias. The final chorus is based on a
melody taken from Löwenstern's collection "Frühlingsmaien"
printed in 1644 ("Wenn ich in Angst und Not ... ").32 Löwenstern
composed music for the new chorus by Tscherning as well as for
the original choruses by Opitz. Although Opitz clearly intended his
choruses to be composed, the discrepancy between Opitz's opera
libretto and Tscherning's school drama becomes visible - perhaps
we should say audible - in those instances where individual actors
or chorus members respond in dialogue fashion to the chorus as a
whole. In Acts II and 111 of Opitz's drama where choruses are
interspersed into the text itself, Tscherning's disregard for the
chorus, or members thereof, as interlocuter, becomes painfully
apparentY For example, the exchanges between Judith and the
"Chor der Jungfrauen" (111, iv) or between Judith and the "Chor
der Ebreer" and the full chorus (I 11 , vi) must have had an odd
effect in the juxtaposition between sung and spoken text as given in
Tscherning's reworking. Additionally, there are some small
differences between Tscherning's text and the text of the choruses
as it appears printed in the music. Although Tscherning's new
chorus (11, ii, Chor der Klagenden auff den Knien) is listed in the
dramatis personae, it is not clearly marked as a chorus in the
dramatic text itself. In Löwenstern's music, this first chorus (11, ii)
31. Chore so bey dieser Tragedien sollen inserirt werden / In drey
Stimmen sampt einem Basso Continuo übergesetzet von Matthaeo
Leonastro di Longueville Neapolitano. Rostock 1646. The music was
printed simultaneously to the play, but they are separate works.
Taubert. p. 32, confused by the two printings, believed that both
Tscherning and Löwenstern set ludith to music - which is not the case.
See also Dünnhaupt: 11. Opitz. item 157a.
32. Matthias Apelles von Löwenstern: Frühlingsmaien. Breslau 1644.
See also Goedeke: III. p.52-53.
33. Donald 1. Grout: The Chorus in Early Opera: In: Festschrift
Friedrich Blume. Kassel 1963. p. 151-6l. Grout discusses the various use
of the chorus in early Italian opera.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access158
is labelled "Chor der Ebreer", in the manner of Opitz's choruses.
Also in the "Chor der Wache" there are three more verses in the
text to the music than in the dramatic text, another addition by
Tscherning. In the fifth act, Tscherning elaborated on the "Chor
der Ebreer"; whereas it appears twice in the dramatic text, it
occurs but once in the music. It is also curious that although
Tscherning inserted another chorus into the play (11, ii) and was
writing a school drama, he did not use choruses to dose the two
acts which he prefaced to Opitz's ludi/ho Characteristic of the
performance practice of school dramas is the insertion of choruses
after each act, primarily to cover the change of scenery.
Of greater interest and certainly of higher literary quality than
Tscherning's expansion of Opitz's ludi/h is a relatively little known
drama by Daniel Czepko (1605-1660), Pierie (1636).34 The theme
of Pierie is comparable to that of ludith, drawing, however, not
from the Bible but from dassical mythology. More important,
however, is the dramatic structure of Pierie which relies exc1usively
on Opitz's ludi/h. 35 Czepko, who in many ways can be considered
a successor to Opitz, indubitably knew the latter's libretto and
extensively revised his own drama accordingly, although it too had
been conceived many years before its printing. Czepko wrote in the
preface:
... vor etlichen Jahren hero auff gelegenheit gesehen; Hatt doch diesem
vorsatze beydes der zustandt deß fast unerkänlichen Vaterlandes / und
dann die jrrthümher meines Reisens / alle mittel auß den Händen
genommen. 36
34. Daniel Czepko: Piede. n.p. 1636. See Goedeke: III. p. 53-54;
Dünnhaupt: 1. Czepko. item 18. The copy used for this study is from the
edtion by Werner Milch: Daniel Czepko: Weltliche Dichtungen.
Reprint: Darmstadt 1963. Siegfried Sudhof: Daniel Czepko. In:
Deutsche Dichter des 17. Jahrhunderts. Berlin 1985. p. 227-L41 offers a
refreshing reassessment of Czepko's poetry, yet fails to mention 'Pierie'.
Many thanks to Annegret Ogden of the Bancroft Library of the
University of California, Berkeley far providing me with a copy of the
original.
35. This relationship was first mentioned by Hermann Palm: Beiträge
zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Breslau 1877. p. 127. See also
Borcherdt: Beiträge. p. 242.
36. Czepko: Pierie (ed. Milch). p. 304.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access159
Czepko referred here to his banishment from Schweidnitz in 1629
as a result of the Counter-Reformation (Czepko was Protestant),
his long absence from the city, and finally his return and marriage
in 1634. 37 The few "years" are more precisely given in his words to
the reader:
Sie [Pierie] hat sich schon in das siebende Jahr bey mir auffgehalten /
und dem staub und würmern mehr ungelegenheit gemacht / als jhrem
Wirthe. 38
Czepko further remarked that he had intended the work for the
marriage of Heinrich Wenzel, Herzog of Münsterberg-Oels-
Bernstadt (tI639).39 The dedication to Heinrich Wenzel, at whose
residence Löwenstern was Kapellmeister (1625-1639), is dated
Schweidnitz, 5 September 1636. 40 Since there is no manuscript to
Pierie, the completeness and the format ofthe early version cannot
be determined. 41 By comparison to Judith, it is clear that Czepko
undertook revisions to bring his Pierie into line with Opitz's
model.
The plots of Opitz's and Czepko's works are similar; only Pierie
has a happyend. The prince of the enemy sees Pierie at the feast of
Diana, falls in love with her, with great fear and trepidation she
reveals her true identity, and they marry. Through her marriage
Pierie has freed her people and brought peace to both lands.
Czepko explained that he chose the theme for its topical relevance
37. Hermann Palm: Czepko, Daniel. Allgemeine Deutsche Biogra-
phie. Leipzig 1876. Vol. 4. p. 671-2. Palm: Beiträge. p. 265. Dünnhaupt:
I. Czepko. p. 558.
38. Czepko: Pierie. p. 305.
39. Czepko: Pierie. p. 304: "Diese Pierie / ob Sie gleich Ew: Fürstl:
Gn: und dero Hochgeliebten Gemahlin / etwas zu spät / auff dero
Hochfürstl: Beylager Ihre gehorsambste dienste in Demut entbietet..."
Heinrich Wenzel married Anna Ursula von Reibnitz (d. 1658) in 1636 at
Vielgut. Johann Sinapius. Olsnographia. Leipzig and Frankfurt 1707.
Vol. I. pp. 202-04.
40. Czepko: Pierie. p. 305.
41. That Czepko might have known Opitz's 'Judith' before it was
printed in 1635 is but speculation. Printing devices, dramatic structure,
themes and content all suggest Czepko knew the printed version of
Judith and revised his own drama accordingly.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access160
to the war in Silesia and that he hoped the fortunate turn of events
will excuse hirn for not strict1y following the rules of tragedy, a
remark which also echoes Opitz's foreword to ludith. 42
Czepko's drama calls for eleven actors and five choruses. The
play has three acts of three, five, and six scenes respectively, very
similar to Opitz's model. In direct imitation of ludith, choruses are
used not only to dose the acts but also within the text itself as an
interlocutor. There are a total of nine separate choruses, plus a
combined fuH chorus at the end of the third act. The types of
chorus es (of soldiers, of virgins, of citizens) as weH as their conte nt
(praise ofvalor, love, and virtue) overlap considerably with Opitz's
work. Czepko's free use of meter also reflects certain knowledge of
Opitz's ludith, although not a slavish dependence on it. Czepko,
however, limits hirnself to two types of strophic forms for the
choruses, one iambic, one trochaic, wh ich he repeats in
alternation. With one exception (I1 ,v) every chorus has six
strophes; each has a strong Lied-character. When one considers
the novelty of the rhythms and the youth of the poet, the dramatic
verses seem regular and flow weIl. They are good examples of the
young author's poetic competence, although they do not measure
up to Opitz's verses. In the use of choruses Czepko shows some
originality and independence from the master. For example, he
uses a chorus to both open and dose Acts I and II (I,i and iii; lI,i
and iv). Moreover, Act III,ii is entirely choral. The repeating
strophe of the combined chorus responds to the "Chor der
Hoffpursche", then to the "Chor der Jungfrauen aus Miletia",
finally to the "Chor der Soldaten". This same arrangement (three
choruses ["Chor der Myuntier" (2x), "Chor der Jungfrawen der
Myuntier"] and the responding fuH chorus) is repeated in the last
act of the play. Additionally, antithetical use of choruses, first
presenting the prince's, then Pierie's countrymen, is accomplished
successfuHy and gives the short work a strong sense of symmetry.
From the imitative quality of Czepko's work in general, it would
seem that Czepko, like Opitz, was writing for a performance to
42. The re marks by Czepko and Opitz are more than a token apology
for their works. As texts for musical dramas, 'ludith' and 'Pierie' burst
the confines of Aristotelian dramatic theory and therefore did not
conform to established rules for tragic drama.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access161
music, although there is no evidence other than circumstantial that
this piece was ever set to musicY In any case Czepko's verses
would have been less conducive to composition than those of
Opitz.
The theme of peace and prosperity brought to the warring
homeland by a virtuous woman is common to both Judith and
Pierie. Czepko imitated Opitz in his choice of topics, yet Czepko's
Pierie, because it culminates in a peace-bringing marriage, would
certainly have been more suitable to nuptial festivities than its
predecessor, as indeed the author intended it. The didactic nature
of both works and their thematic appropriateness to war-weary
Silesia in the 1630s is evident. A curious printing technique which
marks particularly didactic passages is used in both Judith and
Pierie. 44 Lines with special moral content - proverbial expressions
and moralistic sayings - are marked in both works by lowered
open quote marks (,,) to draw the readers' attention to morally
significant passages. Czepko's use of this device again suggests that
he knew the printed version of Judith of 1635.
Although Czepko's work is considered one of the first dramas
written according to Opitzian dramatic theory, it is of interest that
Czepko wrote his work according to the example set by Opitz in
Judith, not according to theory per se. 45 Czepko's choices of theme,
poetic style, dramatic structure, and potential for musical setting
are all imitations of Opitz's Judith.
Opitz's opera libretto encouraged yet another treatment of this
biblical theme by Christian Rose (1609-1667), whose comedy
Holo/ern is actually the third generation, in that he in turn
43. The fact that the composer of the choral interludes to
Tscherning's reworking of Opitz's 'ludith', Löwenstern, was in the
service of Heinrich Wenzel, Duke of Münsterberg-Oels-Bernstadt,
strongly suggests that Czepko may have had composition in mind.
44. This technique is used in the 1635 printing of '1 udith', was not
taken up into later printings. In Tscherning's 'ludith' the passages
marked (,,) in Opitz's play are printed bold face. 'Pierie' shows the same
technique as in the 1635 'ludith'.
45. Palm: Czepko. p. 672 and Palm: Beiträge. p. 127 and p. 272. See
Dünnhaupt: I. Czepko, item 18.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access162
expanded upon Tscherning's version of the play.46 His work,
however, requires eighty actors. Rose, who had written one other
play, Theophania (Berlin, 1646), a drama about the birth of Christ,
also wrote for a school performance. 47 In an odd acknowledgment
of the particularly musical qualities of Opitz's verse, Rose rewrote
the entire play in prose, "wegen der vielfältigen Beschwärlich-
keiten, welche den Schauspielern aus denen gezwungen Arten zu
Reden erwachsen. "48 The choruses he borrowed word for word,
presumably because he kept the music. Additionally, Rose inter-
twined the comic interludes of Johann Rist's Perseus (1634) into
his play, and borrowed from the latter's Himmlische Lieder (1642)
as weIl as from J ohann Hermann Schein 's Studentenschmaus
(1626) for further incidental music. 49 Owing to the patriotic themes
of Opitz and Rist and to the opportunity for musical interludes
pulled from Rist, Löwenstern, and Schein, Rose intended this piece
46. Christian Rose: Holofern ... allen des Teutsch-Landes Friedens-
Störern und Blut-gierigen Kriegern in einem lustigen Schauspiel zur
anderen Probe der Rhetorischen Mutter-Spraache vorgestellet. In
welchem (nebst vielen wol-merklichen Lehr-Puncten und Seufftzerlein /
die in bedrängten Zeiten zuge brauchen) auch etzlich anmutige concertenl
von 3 Stimmen I sampt einen Basso Continuo I sein mit-einverleibet I
so dem Werck gleichsam eine Seele geben! Hamburg 164~. I quote the
title after Purdie (note 12) p. 43. She used the only known extant copy
in the Preussische Staatsbibliothek, Berlin (Yq 4591) wh ich is no longer
there. See also Johann Bolte: Rose, Christian. In: Allgemeine Deutsche
Biographie. VoL 29. Leipzig 1889. 174-5.
47. Ingrid Merkei: Barock. Munich 1971. (=Handbuch der deutschen
Literaturgeschichte. Abteilung Bibliothek. 5.) p. 67 lists Christi an Rose
(1609-1667), a contemporary of both Tscherning and Czepko. Baltzer.
p. 15 discusses Rose's Holofern briefly. Purdie. p. 43, 47, 55-56, 81
discusses Rose's play in detail, describing it as a compilation. Purdie. p.
43 describes the school drama: "To this end he [Rosel caused his pupils
themselves to write the dialogues and the soliloquies which make up his
dramas. He calls the plays 'rhetorice disponieret'. and the speeches are
written in prose. In this connection Merkel cites also Heinrich
Begemann: M. Christian Roses Geistliche Schauspiele. Berlin 1913. and
C. T. Gädertz: Das niederdeutsche Drama. VoL I. Berlin, 1884.
48. Purdie. p. 55. Bolte: ADB 29. p. 174-5.
49. Bolte I.c.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access163
to celebrate the end of the Thirty Years' War, an intention
suggested by the year of its printing - 1648. This unusually long
play, a patchwork of hits and would-be hits of the Baroque
musical stage, was performed as a school drama at the Neu-
Ruppiner gymnasium where Rose taught. 50
The reception of Opitz's Judith and its successors can be viewed
from another purely practical vantage point: that of publication.
Clearly, the reception of a work is inextricably linked to its
dissemination. In the case of dramatic works dissemination can
take the form of either performance or publication - or both.
Since no performances of Opitz's Judith or Czepko's Pierie and
only one each for Tscherning's Judith and Rose's Holo/ern can be
documented, the printing of the play becomes a much more
important issue. Three of the aforementioned authors - Opitz,
Czepko, and Tscherning - were forced to delay publication of
their work until a more propitious moment. Opitz, whose Judith is
poetically the finest of all four works discussed here, never found a
composer for the libretto and finally dedicated his play to a local
noblewoman in hopes of remuneration. Tscherning, on the other hand,
had first tried to get his Judith published in Lübeck; when negotia-
tions with that publisher disintegrated, he made other arrangements.
The Lübeck firm, however, had lost Läwenstern's music to the
choruses, so publication was delayed yet againY Both the play and
the music finally appeared with Wildgen in Rostock in 1646.
Czepko suffered even greater problems. Banished from Schweid-
nitz in 1629, in 1634 he watched as Croats burned many of his
manuscripts on the market place of Hultschin. 52 Because of his
50. As note 48.
51. Boreherdt: Tseherning. p. 161-2. Tseherning eontaeted the
publisher in August 1644 and reported in Deeember 1644 that Judith
would soon be published. On 17 May 1645 Tseherning wrote that the
work would appear with Wildgen in Rostoek; one month later that it
was in print; then on 26 July 1645 he had to request another eopy of the
musie from Löwenstern, whieh arrived only on 11 Oetober 1645. On 20
Deeember 1645 he was able to send eopies to the Hendriehs and to
Czimmermann, to whom the play is dedieated, whieh brought hirn a
eonsiderable sumo The date on the title page is 1646.
52. Palm: Czepko. p. 671.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access164
mystic inc1inations, his spiritual writings were forbidden by the
censor, although the delay in publication of his secular drama
Pierie can be attributed to the general strife in Silesia at that time. 53
Apparently his drama found little echo in the literary world, for he
promised more dramas were his Pierie successful: none followed. 54
Only Rose, writing in the year of the Treaty of Westphalia - and
in relatively secure circumstances - seemed to have little trouble
in getting his work printed in Hamburg.
Precisely because of its novelty, its high poetic standards, and its
musical features, the successors to Martin Opitz's ludith were all of
lesser literary note. Tscherning, who probably was led by circum-
stances rather than a lack of poetic sensibilities to expand Opitz's
libretto to a five-act school drama, did manage to get a reputable
composer to set the choruses to music. Furthermore, he paid
homage to the patriotic and biblical themes of the play and even
saw, in a minor visionary fashion, the appropriateness ofthe work
to the school stage, as did Rose. Tscherning attempted to follow
the nuances of Opitz's work, yet due to incongruencies in dramatic
structure and poetic intention between the two works, his drama
did not compare favorably with that of Opitz. It was very likely his
desire to preserve Opitz's poetry in the original three acts - rather
than ruthlessly transforming them into prose as Rose later did
- that led to a latter-day denial of his poetic talent. Moreover, one
must acknowledge Tscherning's sound instincts to use the moral
didactic text as a school play. The fact that Czepko provided his
drama with a happy resolution indicates perhaps the thematic
incompatibility of Opitz's work with the context of a court
performance. Czepko produced in his Pierie the poetically most
viable imitation of Opitz's ludith. If, as the author claims, Pierie
was written seven years prior to publication, Czepko was but
53. Palm: Czepko. p. 672 and Palm: Beiträge. p. 262. Werner Milch:
Drei zeitgenössische Quellen zur Biographie Daniel von Czepkos. In:
Euphorion 30 (1929) p. 251-281. Some occasional poetry and a few
short pieces are - together with 'Pierie' - the only items that appeared
in print during the author's lifetime (p. 266). Czepko imitated Opitz in
other genres; his Corydon and Phyllis relies on Opitz's 'Hercinie'.
Additionally, Borcherdt: Beiträge. p. 242 reports that Czepko also wrote
texts for cantatas.
54. Czepko: Pierie. p. 304.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free access165
twenty-four when he wrote the first version of the play. Only much
later he had the work printed at his own expense; the publisher is
not named on the title page. For political and/or financial
reasons, Czepko, like Opitz, dedicated his play to nobility.
Opitz's Judith is a milestone in several respects. As a direct link
to Italian opera, Judith, together with Dafne and also Orpheus
(1638) by August Buchner, provides asolid foundation for the
subsequent development of German language opera. 55 All three
operas are reworkings of Italian texts and represent the efforts of
the most no ted German poets to introduce new verse forms,
meters, poetic themes, and dramatic genres into the German
language, thereby affirming its vi ability as a vehicle for literary
expression. As a work of the leading German poet of the Baroque
Age, Judith is important in its own right. The play is technically
weIl executed; its dramatic structure is concise; its poetry is flexible
and musical; and the infusion of patriotic overtones makes it a
specifically German product of the age. Due to the lack of public
recognition accorded it in the seventeenth century, however, Judith
is even more important as an intermediary step in relaying new
impulses to other poets. Like many of Opitz's other translations,
Judith served as an example of one type of poetic work and its
successful expression in the German language. Opitz's Judith was
not weH known in its own day, and, in fact, remains so today. Yet,
as a pivotal work in early German musical drama, its role is not in-
significant. Even though the drama may never have been performed,
Judith can be considered a success insofar as it inspired imitation.
The final twist to the libretto's history is that Opitz's Judith, the
se co nd link to Italian opera in German literature, is this genre's
first link to Scandinavia with Mogen Skeel's translation Danskta-
lende Judith in 1666. 56
55. August Buchner: Ballet ... von dem Orpheo und Eurydice 20 Nov.
1638. See also Fürstenau: Geschichte. p. 97-103 where he discusses both
Opitz's 'Dafne' and Buchner's 'Orpheus'. Buchner's work, also
composed by Heinrich Schütz, is based on Monteverdi and Striggio's
'Orfeo' (1607). Willi Flemming: Das schlesische Kunstdrama. Leipzig
1930. p. 33-36 discusses Opitz's role in elevating German to a literary
language through his translation of dramas.
56. Mogens Skeel: Martin Opitii Dansktalende ludith. Copenhagen
1666.
Downloaded from Brill.com12/02/2021 06:54:09AM
via free accessYou can also read
