medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Re: [M-R] Third Impressions: Pfaff - The Liturgy in
Mediev
Please note that I am not presuming to
"defend" a book I haven't read. I am urging that we
maintain a tone of civility in discussing our colleagues'
work.
Sue
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions
of medieval religion and culture
Well, my "impressions" are very much interim reports - I am
still formulating my "final conclusions". But two
points:
(1) I have read the book and you haven't. I made exactly the same
mistake as you in assuming beforehand that it was "obviously"
a substantial work. I would be delighted to discuss any aspect of the
book - or my account of it - with anyone who has read the book, but it
is pointless arguing with someone who hasn't.
(2) I have given chapter and verse (or rather page) for the errors
listed below. Yes, some are trivial - careless, even - but others are
more serious. For example, on p.549 Pfaff argues that because there
were no processionals printed for use in England before 1508, then the
many processionals listed for Lady Margaret Beaufort's household
chapel must have been manuscripts. I am by no means an expert in the
field of liturgy (I know rather more about medieval architecture,
which is why I am quite so dismissive of Pfaff's attempts to relate
liturgy to architecture), so I just should not have been able to spot
quite so many errors. How many more have I missed? This suggests to me
(a) that Professor Pfaff's friends and colleagues should have been
more attentive in their reading of his drafts, and (b) that Cambridge
University Press have been slack in their reviewing, editing and
copy-editing of his manuscript.
John Briggs
---- Susan Ridyard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and
culture
>
> >John
>
> I don't have a horse or any other animal in this race, but I'm
sure
> I'm not alone in finding the tone of these remarks somewhat
> offensive. Pfaff is a distinguished scholar who has obviously
written
> a substantial work; it may have some errors, as most works
inevitably
> do; but it surely deserves to be treated with more
professional
> objectivity and less relentless sarcasm.
>
> Sue
>
> >medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion
and culture
> >
> >Another change of gear: the last 250 pages consist of five
chapters
> >on the secular Uses and a final concluding chapter. Picking
up the
> >story of the secular Uses at about 1100 after 200 pages on
the
> >monastic Uses (!), we have three chapters on the Sarum Use,
with one
> >on Exeter (don't ask!) and another on the other Uses.
> >
> >The three chapters on the Sarum Use seem much more like a
coherent
> >history. Not that it actually is, of course. It's the
familiar
> >story of manuscripts, saints and modern editions. There are
curious
> >errors: a reference (p.373) to Frere using the same
alphabetical
> >sigla for his editions of the Sarum consuetudinary and
customary,
> >despite them referring to different manuscripts (yes, but the
sigla
> >for the customary are in bold, and a different typeface!);
the
> >reference (p.426n) to an incomplete edition of the Sarum
antiphonal
> >in 1519 (a reference on p.549 to the "sole edition"
of the
> >antiphonal in 1519-20 gives the correct answer); a curious
belief
> >that the Sarum Processional of 1508 (edited by Henderson) was
the
> >first printed one - calamitous on p.549 when an argument
is
> >constructed upon it (even from my bed I can clearly see that
the
> >facsimile edition has "1502" on the spine! The
mistake must arise
> >from a touching reliance on Dickinson's "List of Printed
Service
> >Books" of 1850: Pfaff does make use of Wordsworth's
"Ceremonies and
> >Processions of the Cathedral Church of Salisbury"
["Edited from the
> >fifteenth century MS no. 148, with additions from the
cathedral
> >records, and woodcuts from the Sarum processionale of
1502", 1901]
> >which should have given him a
clue, but not of Bailey's "The
> >Processions of Sarum and the Western Church" [1971] -
the name
> >"Terence Bailey" occurs neither in the index nor
the
> >acknowledgments).
> >
> >Pfaff continues to trip himself up over bibliographical
and
> >biographical issues. On p.425 he writes: "As early as
1842-43
> >Charles Seager published two fascicules of a proposed edition
of the
> >Sarum Book" [the Sarum Breviary] "but apparently
lost interest after
> >his conversion to Roman Catholicism in the latter year."
Well, no.
> >The fascicle published in 1843 was the second edition
(actually a
> >re-issue with considerable added matter and a new title page)
of the
> >the first fascicle of 1842. The second fascicle was published
in
> >1855.
> >On the next page, discussing the Procter and Wordsworth
edition, he
> >writes (p.426n): "the patience of the Cambridge
University Press may
> >have been wearing thin." Is it fanciful to suggest that
he is
> >projecting his own experience onto the 19th century?
> >
> >The Exeter chapter concludes with a reference: "Frere,
p.70, citing
> >pp.10-11 of H.E. Reynolds's edition of the Exeter Chapter
Acts, a
> >book unavailable to me." Well, it's not unavailable to
me: I have
> >Christopher Wordsworth's copy!
> >
> >Chapter 14, "Regional Uses and local variety" is
much more
> >satisfactory. The brief account (pp.445-462) of the York Use
is a
> >model of clarity. Unfortunately, here we have a comparison:
in 2008,
> >Matthew Cheung Salisbury published as Borthwick Paper 113
"The Use
> >of York: Characteristics of the Medieval Liturgical Office in
York."
> >An attempt to compare them shows that they can't be compared:
they
> >are largely examining different manuscripts! Pfaff takes five
saints
> >to be diagnostic of the York Use. Salisbury (who is only
looking at
> >the Office) takes a different approach: he uses the
Responsory
> >series to distinguish a group of York Breviaries from
Sarum
> >Breviaries adapted to the York Use. He identifies seventeen
feasts
> >as peculiar to the York Use, but argues that they cannot be
used as
> >a diagnostic tool.
> >
> >The discussion of the Hereford Use (pp.463-480) is
satisfactory, if
> >somewhat limited. A trick is missed in discussing the St
Paul's Use:
> >Pfaff wonders why that term is used instead of "London
Use", but
> >doesn't consider why the cathedral is called "St Paul's
Cathedral"
> >rather than "London Cathedral". A howler seems to
be perpetrated on
> >p.481: he claims that the 10th century "Rule of St
Paul's" was "an
> >adaptation of the Institutio Canonicorum of Amalarius of
Metz" - I'm
> >pretty certain he doesn't mean either "Institutio
Canonicorum" or
> >"Amalarius of Metz" - what actually means is
somewhat opaque. Total
> >obscurity occurs on p.491: "Both in Sparrow Simpson's
1875 printing
> >of that register (itself still unpublished), and in the
missal" -
> >what is it that is unpublished? Several of Simpson's
publications
> >are cited, but his "Registrum" dates from 1873.
> >
> >Pfaff is (probably correctly) sceptical of the existence
(ever) of
> >the Lincoln Use which he considers to be a reification of
Cranmer's
> >preface to the Book of Common Prayer. Here he misses a couple
of
> >tricks. First, he could have mention that the list of Uses in
that
> >preface: "And whereas heretofore there hath been great
diversity in
> >saying and singing in Churches within this Realm; some
following
> >Salisbury Use, some Hereford Use, and some the Use of Bangor,
some
> >of York, some of Lincoln;" differs from the list in the
preamble to
> >the 1549 Act of Uniformity itself: "Where of long time
there has
> >been had in this realm of England and in Wales divers forms
of
> >common prayer, commonly called the service of the Church;
that is to
> >say the Use of Sarum, of York, of Bangor, and of Lincoln;"
Second,
> >he could have pointed out that the preface is itself
highly
> >rhetorical (Pfaff himself points out on p.478 that the Sarum
Use had
> >already been made uniform for the southern province) and is a
free
> >translation of Cardinal Quignon's preface to his own
reformed
> >Breviary!
> >
> >The section on "Liturgy in parish churches" is
unsatisfactory:
> >unbelievably, Pfaff has difficulty defining a "parish
church"
> >(p.509)!
> >
> >The last chapter "Towards the end of the story" is
rather a rag-bag,
> >with subjects as diverse as the Bridgettines and printed
service
> >books. This is done, of course, to avoid any suggestion of
teleology
> >or whiggishness: as if it wasn't blindingly obvious (whatever
Eamon
> >Duffy might say) that the Reformation was inevitable. A
howler is
> >made in trying to strain a point that didn't need to be made
at all
> >(in the context of printed breviaries for Abingdon and St
Albans):
> >"The monks can scarcely have supposed that their choirs
would soon
> >be bare, as at Abingdon, or ruined, as at St Albans."
It's the other
> >way around, of course! (Pfaff's attempts to relate liturgy
to
> >architecture are consistently painful.)
> >
> >Final conclusions to follow.
> >
> >John Briggs
> >
>
>**********************************************************************
> >To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion
YOUR NAME
> >to: [log in to unmask]
> >To send a message to the list, address it to:
> >[log in to unmask]
> >To leave the list, send the message: leave
medieval-religion
> >to: [log in to unmask]
> >In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners,
write to:
> >[log in to unmask]
> >For further information, visit our web site:
> >http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
>
>
> --
> Susan Ridyard
> Professor of History
> Director, Sewanee Medieval Colloquium
> The University of the South
> 735 University Ave
> Sewanee, TN 37383
>
> tel. (931) 598 1531
>
>
**********************************************************************
> To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR
NAME
> to: [log in to unmask]
> To send a message to the list, address it to:
> [log in to unmask]
> To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
> to: [log in to unmask]
> In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners,
write to:
> [log in to unmask]
> For further information, visit our web site:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR
NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write
to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
--
Susan Ridyard
Professor of History
Director, Sewanee Medieval Colloquium
The University of the South
735 University Ave
Sewanee, TN 37383
tel. (931) 598 1531
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html