The Manuscripts of Tallis's Forty-Part Motet

Author(s): Bertram Schofield

Source: The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1951), pp. 176-183
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/739894
Accessed: 13-04-2015 10:01 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/739894?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
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.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Musical Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE MANUSCRIPTS OF TALLIS'S

FORTY-PART MOTET

By BERTRAM SCHOFIELD

NE of the compensationsfor the tedium of administrative

duties that fall to the lot of the librarianis the occasional
rediscoveryof long-losttreasures.In an earlier issue' it was my
fortuneto describea recentlyfound valuable manuscriptof 15thcenturymusic acquired by the BritishMuseum, about whose existenceand historyno mentionin printis knownfromthe time it
was writtendown to the presentday. More recentlyan equally
fortunatechancehas broughtto lightthe so-called"original"manumotet Spem in alium, which,
scriptof Tallis's famousforty-part
known
well
to
historiansof music,had disapalthough
18th-century
peared fromsightforalmosttwo hundredyears.About it the most
recenteditorsof the work wrote,"It is now impossibleto recover
the originalwhich belonged to James Hawkins of Ely",2but, far
fromthatbeing so, it has now founditswayto the BritishMuseum,
bear the numberEgertonMS 3512.
whereit will henceforth
Our earliestknowledgeof the manuscriptcomesfroma seriesof
lettersfromDr. Thomas Tudway, Professorof Music in the Universityof Cambridge,to HumfreyWanley, the indefatigableand
and secondEarls ofOxford.Tudway
industriouslibrarianto thefirst
an
of
ardent
musicalresearcherwho sought
the
was
earlyexample
out eagerlythe relicsof the Englishheritagein Cathedrallibraries.
At the desire of Edward,Lord Harley,who succeededhis fatheras
secondEarl of Oxfordin 1724,he made copies of manyservicesand
anthemsof Tudor composersand theirsuccessorsfrommanuscripts
in thoserepositories.The six thickquarto volumes,now numbered
Harley MSS 7337-7342in the BritishMuseum,remaina permanent
recordof his labors,and are a furtherreminderthat,as Professor
J.A. Westruphas pointedout,3theaccusationof totalneglectof the
1 The Musical Quarterly,XXXII (1946),
509.
Tudor Church Music, Vol. VI (Thomas Tallis), published for the Carnegie United
Kingdom Trust, Oxford UniversityPress, 1928, p. xxxiii.
3 The Musical Quarterly,XXXV (1949), 490.
2

176

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Manuscripts of Tallis's Forty-Part Motet

177

glories of Elizabethan music prior to the 2oth-centuryrevival is

completely unjustified.
In a letter to Wanley dated 1 May 1718 Tudway wrote: 4
I'm veryglad thatmy friendMr. JamesHawkins5has ye good fortuneto get
into his hands yeoriginalscoreof Mr. Tallis's 40 partsAnthem,'tis a unic made &
scor'd in Queen Elizabeths time. I thinkit will incomparablybe proper to go
along wththatgreat body of compositionswch I have prepared formy Lord, & a
greaterraritytherecannot be in its kind, it haveingneverbeen attemptedby any
to be laid up, among so manyvaluable manuscriptswehyou
one, 8cis indeed fittest
have Wthso much judgmt,pains 8cIndustryprocur'dformyLord. The designeof
composeingit was not, we may be sure,to be perform'd;but to remaina Memoriall of ye greatskill 8cabillityof ye composer,who was able to findwayesforso
in theirown spheres.I had been oftentold of this
manypartsto move differently,
Composition,but I coud neverbeleive therwas any such thing.I have ventur'dto
promise to bring Mr Hawkins to my Lord, when we shall have ye happines to
see again my Lord at Wimple;6 but you shall be sure to see it, by one means or
other first,wheneveryou come again to Cambridge.

What happened as a resultof this letteris not known,but the

manuscriptdid not immediatelyleave its owner'spossession.On the
19thMay Tudway again writes:7
It is utterlyimpracticableto transcribehis [Hawkins's] manuscriptof 40
parts,into myLords volumes,& I Judgit ratherbetterto be laid up in myLords
Libraryin ye Original MSS. because of ye Antiquityof it than to have it copied;
my Ld shall be sure to have whateverMr. Hawkins has, or can procure,wch
may be worthyof my Lords haveing.

More thana monthlaterTudway again returnsto thecharge:8

Mr. Hawkins's peice of fortyparts is I beleive ye same weh you have seen, &
is, as he assuresme, a Unic; I got a sightof it, 8cshow'd it to Dr Covel,9who is
charm'd wthit, 8c woud, to be sure, put a greatervalue upon it, were it his,
than my friendJamespretendsto do; I verymuch hope yt my Lord will like to
ad it to his musick collection, that therbyhe may reap some benefitfor y*
servicehe has done in assistingme so effectually,
in makeingthiscollection.

Finally on August 24th:'

I can't readilyrecollectye severallparticularsof what I have to writeto you,

4British Museum, Harley MS

3782, f. 95-

5JamesHawkins(d. 1729), organistof Ely Cathedral.

homeof EdwardHarley,2ndEarl of Oxford.

Wimpole,theCambridgeshire
7 HarleyMS 3782,f. 96.
6

8 Ibidem, f. 98.
9 Dr. John Covel, Master of Christ's College, Cambridge.
o10
Ibidemn,f. 102.

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Musical Quarterly

178

it is so longsinceI had yefavrofa linefromyou;thatwChfirst

& whose
occurrs,
InterestI have muchat Heart,is HonestJamesHawkins'saffair.
I hope you
have appriz'dmyLord of his MusicManuscript
of forty
parts,wchhe aversto
be a Unic.,& if it proveyesamewchyouhaveseenI shallconcludeit to be so;
If you'lpleaseto influence
kindmyLord to buyit ofhim,it willbe yegreatest
nes to me in yeworld,forit willin somemeasurefreeme fromyemanyObligationsI have to himin ye wholecourseof mywork,in myLord Service...
I hope youwillin friendship
to me,promotethisaffair
wthmyLord,& thenif
I
don't
come
down
to
before
will
ventureto introduce
Mickms,
you
Wimple
himto myLordwithhis MSS. Tho it is notstrictly
Churchmusic,yetmethinks
a Curiosity
of thatKind shouldbe nowherebut in myLordsLibrary,
wchdoes
and will abound wthev'rything
thatsvaluable& curious;I show'dit to Dr.
as
Covel who protests(if yt signifies
anything)thatit is as greata Curiosity
everhe saw.

From thispoint thereis no furtherreferenceto thismanuscript

in the Tudway-Wanleycorrespondence.Accordingto John Hawkins," however,writingin 1776, JamesHawkinsactuallypresented
it to theEarl of Oxford,but it could not at thatdate be foundin the
Harleian collection,whichhad by thenbeen acquiredby the British
Museum. Dr. Charles Burney,however,statesl2thatafterbeing in
the possessionof the Earl, "it was attractedinto the vortexof Dr.
Pepusch",and was laterthepropertyof RobertBremner,theStrand
music publisher.Some supportto Burney'sstatementis given by
anotherand later copy of the work which was afterwardsin the
writtenin 1751
possessionof the MadrigalSociety.This manuscript,
on
the
founder
of
the title-page
the
bore
by JohnImmyns,
Society,
"This
Motett
of
was
first
the note
fortyparts
composedto the Latin
wordsfollowingby Thomas Tallis, gentleman& Masterofthe Chappell to K.Henry

ye

8th,K.Edward

ye

6th,Q.Mary & Q.Elizabeth sup-

posed to be fittedto the above Englishwordsin ye Reign of James

ye Ist by Orlando Gibbons,M.D., onlyat the writingover thisscore
year 1751 ye words [Prince Charles] were altered to [King
George]"13-an inscriptionwhich,as we shall see, is similarin some
in

ye

respectsto thaton the Hawkinsmanuscript.Now JohnImmyns,in

additionto beingcopyistto theAcademyofAncientMusic,was also
amanuensisto Dr. John ChristopherPepusch,himselfan enthusiastic collectorof earlyEnglishmusic.Moreoverit is knownthatin
11

I, 456.

J. Hawkins, A General History of the Science and Practice of Music, (ed. 1875),

C. Burney,A General History of Music, III (1789), 74.

13Motet for 40 Voices by Thomas Tallis edited by A. H. Mann, London, 1888.
Preface,p. ii.
12

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Manuscriptsof Tallis's Forty-PartMotet

179
1763 Robert Bremnerpurchasedthe famousFitzwilliamVirginal
Book at the sale of Pepusch'slibrary,and it is possible that other
manuscriptsfromthe same sourcecame into his possession.On the
otherhand, a still later manuscriptof the motet,now in the Royal
Music Library,'4 has on the last page the words "This belongs to
Robert Bremner,music publisher,London", and at the top of the
firstpage "As in the original".It also bears the note, "Tho8 Tallis,
Gentlemanof King Henry the Eights Chapel, King Edward and
Queen Mary,8c of her Majesty that now is Queen Elizabeth,the
Maker of thisSong of fortyParts".This inscriptionis wordforword
identicalwithone at theend of the HawkinsManuscript,and it will
be seen that it has significant
variationsfromthat of the Madrigal
of the words"of her Majesty
the
inclusion
volume,
Society
notably
that now is". It differsfromthe formerin that the Latin, not the
English words,are writtenunder the music. Since, however,the
placingofthewords,accordingto theeditorsoftheCarnegieedition,
is obviouslyfaulty,'5it is more than likelythat this copy was, like
the Madrigal Societycopy,made directlyfromthe manuscriptof
JamesHawkins,perhapswhenit was in Bremner'spossession.
Fromthistimenothingmoreis knownof thehistoryof theHawkinsvolume until it was submittedto the BritishMuseum,in 1947,
on behalfofa ladyresidentin KingsLynn,Norfolk,in whosefamily
it had remainedformanyyears.It consistsofsix folios,and to obtain
a page sufficiently
large to take the 40 partsin full score,each-folio
has been made to consistof two sheetsof paper attachedto one
anotherfoot to head, the whole measuring3o01/2
in. x 11 in. It is
bound in a greenembossedpaper cover,on the back of which are
the words"Mr. Tho. Tallis's, Song of 40 Parts"-the hand is none
other than thatof Dr. Thomas Tudway himself,and it is thisthat
identifiesthe manuscriptas the one previouslybelongingto James
Hawkins.Underlyingthemusicare theEnglishwords,as in Immyns's
copy,in honorof PrincesHenryand Charles:
heavenshighMaiesty
Singand glorifie
Authorof thisblessedharmony
Sounddevynepraises
Withmelodiousgraces
This is theday,holyday,happyday
For evergiveit greeting
14BritishMuseum,R.M. 4 g.1.

15 Tudor Church Music, VI, xxxiii.

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

180

The Musical Quarterly

Love and coyhart&cvoicemeeting
Lyve Chary
les
SHarryv

Princlyand mighty
long

Charleslyvlong

in thyCreation happy.

Y
The arrangement of the voices is by groups of eight equally

voices,and in the
pitchedvoices,not in eightchoirsof fivedifferent
ofa thorough
middle,afterthetwentieth
voice,is an accompaniment
bass.16Above the latter,on f.I, is writtenthe completetextof the

original Latin motet Spem in alium, and below it the complete

English text. The eight cantus or treble parts have been numbered
in the original hand 1,6,11,16,21,26,31,36; the altos 2,7,12,17,22,
27,32,37, and so on for the other voices. The bars were numbered in

quintuple,viz. below each set of eightvoices,and renumberedin

groups of two, thus: 11 2 32 4

5 6 7
3

8 9 . On the last page, at the top,

5

were thewords,now partlylost,"This dyttyof thissongof 40 parts

[was firstmade] in Lattyn", and lower down the sentence referring

to Tallis which has already been quoted fromthe copy in the Bremner MS. In spite of the words "that now is" as applied to Queen
Elizabeth, the referencesto the Princes make it clear that the manuscript cannot be Tallis's original manuscript, nor can it have been

writtenearlierthan the beginningof the reignof JamesI. On the

other hand, the inscriptionmakes it probable that the scribe was
copying from an Elizabethan manuscript,possibly from Tallis's
original.A numberof errorsin transcription,
mainlyarisingfroma

confusion of the many parts, have been corrected by the scribe on

strips of paper glued to the manuscript over the incorrect passages.
Similarly fromf.2 onwards parts 30 and 35 were wronglycopied and

of the
confused,and a note at the footof f.I b reads: "The figuring
35 must be for the 30, but its [sic] was mistaking the figures."

A fewwordsmustnow be said about a volumein the Libraryof

Gresham College that was used as the best available authority for

themusicaltextfortheeditionin theseriesofTudor ChurchMusic.

This volumewas not mentionedby Mann in his listofextantmanu-

scriptsof the work. By an oversightit was included in the sale of the

property of Sir Frederick Bridge,17 who had been Librarian to the

16 The
thorough bass is in one part only and is not figured.It is written in the
same hand as the rest of the MS and, like it, must date from not later than 1612.

17 Hodgson's sale-catalogue,3 July 1924, lot

532.

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Manuscriptsof Tallis's Forty-PartMotet

181
College,and it was thenboughtby AldermanJohnBrookof Southport.isWhen its historybecame known, the latter in 1933 generously

restoredthe erringvolume to its originalowners.By the courtesyof

the GreshamCommittee,it was temporarily
depositedin the British
Museum formyuse, and a fullerdescriptionthanhas hithertobeen
available can.nowbe given.
The volume consists of twenty-twoleaves, 12 in. by 7 in., in a
cardboardbinding.Each of the fortypartsis written
19th-century
on a separatepage in the order of firsttreble,thirdtreble,fourth
treble,secondtreble,fifthto eighthtrebles;firstto eighthaltos; contratenors;tenors;bassus,while on the last leaf is "A thoroughbasse

to ye song of fortyparts forye Organ". The title-pagebears the words,

in a contemporary
hand,"The songof40 partswitha Thorow Base,

made by Mr Tho: Tallis. All the parts are here sowen together,wch

may be oftenseene,but seldomesung". The same page also has the

signature"E. T. Warren"-presumablyEdmund Thomas Warren,
Secretaryof the Catch Club, who died in 1794-and a 19th-century
note: "N.B. All the partsare here stitch'dtogether."The underlyingtextconsistsofthesongin honorofPrincesHenryand Charles,
as in the new BritishMuseum Manuscript,but the Latin textSpem
in alium is copied on a numberof pagesthroughoutthe MS. A further resemblanceto the Museum MS is the occurrencein several
places of the words: "This song of 40 partswas firstmade in Latin
by Mr. Tho: Tallis", "The dittieof thissong of 40 partswas first
made in Latin" with othervariations,and also "Mr. Tho: Tallis,
Gentlemanof king Henryye EightsChapple, kingEdward,Queene
Mary and Queen Elizabeth, the maker of this Song of 40 parts"-

also with variations.It would thereforeseem probable thatone of

these manuscriptswas copied fromthe other. Which then is the
earlier? The answer is not difficult.In the Gresham manuscript
Queen Elizabethis not referredto as the Queen "thatnow is", and
thesewordswould not have been added in the EgertonMS unless
the scribe had been copyingdirectlyor at second hand froman
archetypecontainingthesewordswrittenin her reign.Even more
pertinentis the factthaton the page in the GreshamMS containing
the 35thpart,on whichboth the Latin and Englishtextsare given,
a note reads "These be all ye dittiesthateverwas made to thissong
of 40 parts",and at the end of the 33rd part "This song was first
made to a lattindittyby Mr. Tho: Tallis; butwhoput in theEnglish
is

Tudor Church Music, VI, xxxiii.

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Musical Quarterly

182

dittyI ame altogether ignorant of". The Gresham MS is therefore

not the original of the English adaptation,and it does not necessarily follow, as the editors of the Tudor Church Music have
asserted,'9that the referencesto Prince Henry postulatea date of
c. 1610oforit. All that can be deduced is that it was copied from
anothermanuscriptwrittenabout thattime;and fromthesimilarity
of its annotationsto thosein the recentlyrediscoveredmanuscript,
therecan be littledoubt thatthe latterwas the originalfromwhich
it was copied. From the handwritingit would appear to date from
about theend of thefirstquarterof the 17th century.
To sum up-we have thusfardescribedfourmanuscriptsof the
17th-century
adaptationof thisfamouscomposition:
(a) EgertonMS 3512, probablythe originalmanuscriptof the
English version,which may have been copied fromTallis's own
Latin original.It formerly
belongedto JamesHawkins of Ely, and
is now in the BritishMuseum.It is thesource,directlyor indirectly,
ofall otherknowncopies.
(b) The GreshamCollege Manuscript,probablycopied from
the above in the firsthalfof the 17thcentury,and used by the editorsof Tudor ChurchMusic as thebasisof theirmusicaltext.
(c) A manuscriptformerlyin the possessionof the Madrigal
Society,transcribedin 1751 by JohnImmynsfrom (a).
(d) Royal Music MS 4 g.I, a late 18th-century
copy,also premade
from
sumably
directly
(a).
To these can be added a numberof late copies which are describedby A. H. Mann in his edition of the motet.Some of these
are now lost, othershave changed hands. Since theyall descend
indirectlyfromEgerton3512 and throwno lighton the historyof
the Hawkinsmanuscript,thereis no need to enumeratethemhere.
Two questions,however,remain to which no answer can yet be
given. First,who is the authorof the original 17th-century
adaptation?Variousnameshave been suggested,althoughwithoutany evidence to substantiatethem,includingthose of Orlando Gibbons,
Thomas Warwick,organistofWestminster
Abbey,and JohnAmner,
of
organist Ely Cathedral.Attemptsto identifythe hand of Egerton
3512 have so farfailed,and perhapsare bound to fail until more is
known of the handwritingof English composersof the 16th and
early

1th

centuries. Secondly and finally,what has happened to the

19p. xxxiii.

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Manuscriptsof Tallis's Forty-PartMotet

183
original autographmanuscriptof Tallis? Now that it is probable
that Hawkins's so-calledoriginal was the 17th-century
adaptation,
no mentionof Tallis's autographis knownto exist.It can only be
hoped thatan even more fortunatechance than thatwhichhas led
to the discoveryof Hawkins'sfamousmanuscriptwill one day bring
it to light.

This content downloaded from 193.136.113.58 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:01:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions