D-Dl MS Löbau 4 [8]

Sächsische Landesbibliothek, Dresden, Germany

Partbook: c. 1604-10

Archive Sächsische Landesbibliothek, Dresden, Germany (D-Dl)
Shelfmark MS Löbau 4 [8]
Image Availability DIAMM does not have images of this source.
Surface Paper
Measurements c. 315 x 195 mm
Copyists
Relationships
External Authorities
Provenance
  • Löbau, Bavaria, Germany
Contents Contains 72 compositions from 20 composers.
General Description

An Octava Vox partbook from an incomplete set of seven books (the Tenor is lost), manuscript additions bound in after Weissensee's Opus melicum (1602). While most works are for 8-7-6vv, a substantial section in the middle of the D-A-B books is of 4vv settings by Gallus-Handl. The book labelled Septima Vox is in fact probably the Sextus, and vice versa.

Copied by Johann Schmid, Christoph Misler, Gregorius Nostwitz and several other scribes. Formerly in the Löbau Ratsbibliothek, the manuscript was deposited at the library in Dresden in 1890.

DIAMM, 2024
Extent

81pp

DIAMM, 2024
Physical Description

All the books are in poor condition. The Bassus has lost the top-left quarter of most pages. Titles have been cropped off many pages in binding. The pages containing the last three pieces from the Quintus, and the last 20 from the Septima (Sexta) Vox, are lost.

DIAMM, 2024
Date

Dates between 1604 and 1607 appended to nos. 31-33, 41 and others.

DIAMM, 2024
Foliation

No foliation. Original numbering of pieces 1-132 (though some numbers were added later than the copying). Modern pagination.

DIAMM, 2024
Loading inventory…

The inventory could not be loaded.

Sets

Select a set to see its sources.

‡ denotes primary source study

Steude, Wolfram. 1974. Die Musiksammeihandschriften des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts in der Sächsischen Landesbibliothek zu Dresden. Quellenkataloge zur Musikgeschichte, vol. 6.  Wilhelmshaven. Pages: 107-11. Notes: physical description (partial); contents list; concordances (partial).

This form is used to make comments on a source. If you wish to notify us of a correction to the record, you should use the "Contribute a change" form instead.

No comments have been made.