Baptism of Apostles

The Baptism of the Apostles
Author(s): Ernst H. Kantorowicz

Source: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 9/10 (1956), pp. 203-251
Published by: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1291097 .
Accessed: 08/03/2011 23:38
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=doaks. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
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.
Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers.
http://www.jstor.org
THE BAPTISM OF THE APOSTLES
ERNST H. KANTOROWICZ
This studyis in substanceidenticalwitha paper
read at the "Symposiumon ByzantineLiturgy
and Music" at DumbartonOaks in April 1954.
the galleysto thePressdid I
Onlyafterreturning
receivethenewsthatonDecember7, 1955,Manfred
The present
Bukofzerdied at theage offorty-five.
volumeof Papersis dedicatedto thememory
of a
colleagueofwhose
venerablescholarand venerated
presencetheDumbarton Oakscommunity has been
deprived,but I do not wantthisPaper to appear
thenameofthefriend
also commemorating
without
who inspiredit: MANFREDBUKOFZER.
E. H. K.
in a fieldofknowledge
UERIES originating outsidethatofone's
own studiesoftenhave theeffect ofa stimulant.ProfessorManfred
Bukofzer,my friend and formerlymy colleague at Berkeley,
chanced, in a Huntington Librarymanuscript, a
upon musicologically inter-
estingpassage. His findingspromptedhim to raise the questionwhether
the so-called Mandatum--the ritualFeet-washingon Maundy Thursday
- had any significancebeyondthe obviousone of establishingthesupreme
exampleofhumility and charity.Since theperformance ofthatceremonious
lavingprojected intothe in
politicalsphere, so faras it was practicedin the
laterMiddle Ages by Byzantineemperorsand Westernkings,'the present
authorhappenedto be vaguelyacquaintedwiththeproblemitselfand ven-
turedto say thatthe ritemighthave somethingto do withthe "Baptismof
the Apostles."Only afterdelvingmuchmoredeeplyintothe matter,how-
ever, did it become apparent how involved the problem actually was.
Many strandsof a diffusedtraditionhad to be drawnto a commoncenter
in orderto answerwithsome precisionthe musicologicalquestionof Pro-
fessorBukofzer,who could anticipateand brieflysummarizein a recent
studysomeresultsofthepresentinvestigation.2
I
An Epiphanyantiphonof theEasternChurch,whichdriftedalongwith
similarchantsintotheWesternLiber responsalis,
refersto theinstitution
of
the Sacramentof Baptism:
Today the stingof sin has been broken,the Lord has been baptized, and regeneration
has been given to us.3
ISee below, n. 160.

2
ManfredBukofzer, Studiesin Mediaevaland RenaissanceMusic (New York,1950), 238,
n. 47. While it standsto reasonthatmy own remarkson the musicological aspectsof the
Mandatum- briefly discussed,as theyare, at the end of thispaper- relyentirely uponPro-
fessorBukofzer's I wishto emphasizethatin otherrespectsalso I am indebted
investigations,
to himforseveralvaluablehints.My thanksgo further to ProfessorSirarpieDer Nersessian,
ProfessorAlbertM. Friend,Jr.,Dr. RalphE. Giesey,Dr. RosalieB. Green,Mrs.Dora Panof-
sky,Professor KurtWeitzmann, and Dr. SchaferWilliams,fromwhosehelp,advice,sugges-
tions,and assistanceI greatlyprofited.
Severalphotographs werekindlyplaced at mydisposal
by theDepartment of Artand Archeology of PrincetonUniversity (figs.40, 51, 52, 55), by
ProfessorWeitzmann(figs.17a-b, 24, 31, 32, 35, 37, 41, 42, 43, 45, 53), by Professor
Friend(fig.44) and by theMorganLibrary,in New York(figs.16, 25).
sLiber responsalis,In octavas Theophaniae,PL., LXXVIII, 744 B: "Peccati aculeus
contereturhodie,baptizatoDomino;et nobisdata est regeneratio." For Easternpatterns, see
RitualeArmenorum, ed. F. C. Conybeare(Oxford,1905), forexample,p. 418, n. 13; 426,
n. 23; also 186, nos. 40, 43, 32. For the general scheme, see the (hodie) antiphons
describedby A. Baumstark,"Die Hodie-Antiphonen orjcEpov
des rdmischen Breviersund der Kreis
Die Kirchenmusik,
Parallelen,"
ihrergriechischen X (1909-1910), 153-160;alsoEgonWellesz,
206 ERNST H. KANTOROWICZ
Thereis nothingreallyremarkablein thistext;fornothingwould seemmore
naturalthan to linkthe institution of the Sacramentof Regenerationwith
the Baptismof Christin Jordan,thatis, withthe feastof Epiphany.What
appears most natural,however,is not always what happens in history.
Festal calendars,establishingthe liturgicalyear of a politicalor religious
community, in all religions- pre-Christian,
have theirpeculiar difficulties
non-Christian, and Christianalike. Those calendarsare conditioned,prac-
ticallyeverywhere, by the cyclesof natureas well as by the annualrecur-
renceofmythically memorableevents- proprium
orhistorically de tempore
and propriumsanctorum.But the efforts to forcethosetwo speciesoffesti-
vals intocoincidencehave frequently obscuredthe originalreferencepoint
of an anniversary. The laterRoman calendars such as theFeriale Duranum
or the Calendar of 354 demonstrate thosedifficulties timeand timeagain,
and thecalendaroftheChristianliturgicalyeardoes notforman exception.'
We need thinkonlyof the complicatedhistoryof the feastof Christmas,
thatis, the introduction of December25thas the Nativityof Christin the
Westernand EasternChurches,to understandthe interference of natural
cycleswithhistoricalcommemorations. Moreover, as a resultof the general
spiritualizationof Christianreligiousthought, the commemorative dates of
anniversarieswere oftensubordinatedto otherconsiderations - spiritual,
speculative,mystical,or local - and thusit happened thatthe date of the
institutionoftheSacramentofBaptismalso couldbeginto fluctuate.
To be sure,the Epiphanydate remainedvalid as thatof the institution
ofbaptism,and as suchitwas observedat all timesin theEasternChurches.
However,evenin theEast thisanniversary date was in competition withthe
EasternElementsin WesternChant (MonumentaMusicaeByzantinae,SubsidiaII; Oxford,

1947), 141 ff.See also Hieronymus FrankOSB, "Hodie caelestisponsoiunctaest ecclesia,"
Vom Christlichen Mysterium: Gesammelte Arbeitenzum Gediichtnis von Odo Casel OSB
(Diisseldorf,1951), 192-226, who admits the Eastern (Syrian) backgroundof the famous
Epiphanyantiphonthoughclaiming that the compositionof the chantwas Roman.No less
interesting than the questionwhen and how those EasternchantsgotintotheWesternLiber
responsalis is the questionwhen and how they were eliminatedfromtheWesternresponsoria.
' For theFerialeDuranum,see R. O. Fink,O. S. Hoey,and W. F. Snyder,in: Yale Classi-
cal Studies,VII (1940); A. D. Nock,"The RomanArmyand the RomanReligiousYear,"
HarvardTheologicalReview,XLV (1952), 187-252; and,fortheCalendarof354, therecent
monograph by HenriStern,Le Calendrier de 354 (Institutfrangais de Beyrouth,
d'arch6ologie
LV; Paris,1953), whichin manyrespectsmaybe calledfinal.
5For the problemof Christmas, see the bibliographieraisonneeby Hieronymus Frank,
"Friihgeschichte undUrsprung des rdmischen Weihnachtsfestesim LichteneuererForschung,"
ArchivfiirLiturgiewissenschaft,II (1952), 1-24,to whomunfortunately thevaluablestudyby
Dom AnselmStrittmatter, "Christmasand Epiphany:Originsand Antecedents," Thought,
XVII (1942), 600-626, remainedinaccessible.For a few additionaltextson Epiphany,see
TheodorE. Mommsen, "Aponiusand Orosiuson theSignificance ofEpiphany,"Late Classical
and MediaevalStudiesin HonorofAlbertMatthiasFriend,Jr.(Princeton, 1955), 96-111.
THE BAPTISM OF THE APOSTLES 207
othergreatreligiousideas whichmade differentdatesno lessimportant. The
Pauline baptism"into the Death and Resurrectionof Christ,"as well as
thepentecostalDescent of the Spiritconferringthe spiritualbaptism,were
the "greatreligiousideas" 6 whichdetractedfromthe calendaranniversary
of the Jordanevents;and, whereasthe ideas of Easter and Pentecostwere
merelyrivalsof the idea of Epiphanyin the OrientalChurches,theydefi-
natelyprevailedin theWest- all themoreso sinceherethefeastofEpiph-
any was dominatedby otherevents. Aftersome vacillation,the Western
ChurchesabandonedEpiphanyas the chiefbaptismalday of the catechu-
mens and gave preferenceto the vigils of Easter and Pentecost.7Other
baptismaldays were observedregionally- Christmas,forexample,or the
day of St. Johnthe Baptist.8Rarely,however- even in liturgicalliterature
- is therementionofan old traditionaccordingtowhichMaundyThursday
was lookedupon as the day when the Sacramentof Baptismwas officially
instituted.
The traditionof Maundy Thursdayas the date of the institution of
baptismis inextricablybound up withthevexedquestionof theBaptismof
theApostleswhichpuzzled ecclesiasticalwritersin theearlycenturiesofthe
Christianera.' Were the apostlesbaptizedor not?And if theywere,was it
Christhimselfor anotherpersonwho baptizedthem?The bearingsof that
questionare evident.The dominicalprescription,transmitted in theFourth
Gospel (John3:5), says that"Except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit,he cannot enterinto the kingdomof God." Was one supposed to
assume thatthe apostleswere not saved because theylacked theirevan-
gelicallycertified
rebirthby water?AlreadyTertullianhad spokenagainst
this assumption."'On the otherhand, if the apostleswere saved without
'
The distinctionbetween commdmoraisonshistoriques and frtes d'idde has been skil-
fully carried throughby A. Baumstark,Liturgie comparde,3rd ed. by Dom Bernard Botte
(Chevetogne and Paris, 1953), 173 f, 179 ff.
'For Epiphany as baptismal day, see the classical study of Karl Holl, "Der
Ursprungdes
Epiphanienfestes,"in his GesammelteAufsditzezur Kirchengeschichte,II (Tiibingen, 1928),
123-154; in general, see, e.g., Ludwig Eisenhofer,Handbuch der katholischenLiturgik,II
(Freiburg, 1933), 232 f, ? b. For the problem,see also F. M. Braun, "Le bapt&me d'apres
le quatriemeEvangile," Revue thomiste,XLVIII (1948), 347-369.
8 The
shiftingof the baptismal day fromJanuary6th to December 25th is easily explained,
because originallythe Nativityof Christwas celebrated on the
day of Epiphany; hence, the
referencepoint may have been mistaken,but not really changed (cf.
Eisenhofer,loc. cit.).
That the day of St. Johnthe Baptist served as baptismal day is almost self-evident.The
Copts
baptized on the day of the Consecrationof the Chrismand of the "Baptism of the Apostles"
(see below, n. 45).
SSee Harry A. Echle, "The Baptism of the Apostles," Traditio,III (1945), 365 f.
"
Tertullian, De baptismo, c. 12, ed. A. Reifferscheidand G. Wissowa (CSEL.,
XX;
Vienna, 1890), 210 ff,also ed. R. F. Refoul6 and M. Drouzy (Paris, 1952), 82 ff,with valu-
able notes. Tertullian,like Augustine in his letterto Seleuciana (below, n.
12), neatly sums
participation in baptism,thento all appearancesthedominicalprescription

lacked generalvalidity.The Gospelsgave no answerto thosequestions,and
theallusionofJohn4:1-2 seemedto denyat anyratea baptismat thehands
of Christ:"Jesushimselfdid not baptize,but his disciplesdid." This verse
made theproblemeven moreperplexing:could the apostlesbaptize others
withoutthemselvesbeing baptized?
It is not surprising,then,thattherearose the questionconcerningthe
Baptismof the Apostles,and that since the correctanswercould not be
known,it was answeredin manydifferent ways.Some authorsheld thatthe
disciples were baptized by Christ,otherssaid: "By John the Baptist."
Clementof Alexandriaseems to have thoughtthatChristbaptized Simon
Peter only,who in turnbaptized some,or all, of the otherdisciples." St.
Augustinewas inclinedto believe thatall apostleswere baptizedby Christ
himself,but declined to accept the versionaccordingto which all were
baptizedon MaundyThursdayin connectionwiththe Last Supper.'2
This versionsprangfromtheGospel ofJohn,foronlytheFourthGospel
describesthe Feet-washingceremonyin the Upper Room,whereasit omits
thenarration one would expectin thatplace, thatof theLast Supperand of
the Institution of the Eucharist.This centraleventis barelyalluded to in
John13, whereit is said quite briefly:"And supperbeing ended . . . he
risethfromsupper."Instead,all stressis laid upon the scene about which
theSynopticsare silent:theLaving oftheFeet.'3
from
up the various opinions currentin his times; he refersalso to John13:9-10, but deduces
that passage that the apostles were baptized previously,probably by John the Baptist. Cf.
Echle, loc. cit.
" For
Clement, whose theoryis transmittedindirectlyonly throughscattered remarksin
JohnMoschos, Sophronios,NikephorosKallistos,and otherwriters,see Echle, 367 f.
'
Augustine,In JoannisEvangelium, LVI, c. 3 ff,FL., XXXV, 1788 f, says nothingabout
the Baptism of the Apostles,thoughin LVII, c. 1, he says: Ubi visum est intelligendumquod
Baptismoquidemhomototusabluitur;sed dumistoposteavivitin saeculo,humanisaffectibus
velut pedibus calcans . . . contrahit.In his letter to Seleuciana, however, while al-
terramin
sive
luding to John 13, he says: . . quos [apostolos] intelligimusiam fuisse baptizatos
sive,quod magiscredibileest,baptismoChristi.
sicutnonnulliarbitrantur,
baptismoJohannis,
Cf. Ep., CCLXV, cc. 4 ff,ed. A. Goldbacher (CSEL., LVII; Vienna, 1911), 641 ff,esp. 643.
This passage became, so to speak, the officialversion; it was repeated verbatim, e.g., by
Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae,IIIa, q. 72, a.6, 2, who likewisereflectsupon the Baptism
of the Apostles in connectionwithJohn13:10, just as Tertulliandoes, De baptismo,c. 12.
"1The theologicalliteratureon this topic is, of course, immense.See, in general,A. Malvy,
"Lavement des pieds," Dictionnairede theologie catholique, IX (1926), 16-36; H. Leclercq,
"Lavement," DACL., VIII:2 (1929), 2002 ff.There are some more recent studies, e.g., Paul
"Zur
Fiebig, "Die Fusswaschung," Angelos, III (1928), 121 ff; H. von Campenhausen,
"Die
Auslegung von Joh. 13,6-10," ZNW., XXXIII (1934), 259-271; Ernst Lohmeyer,
zur
Fusswaschung,"ZNW., XXXVIII (1939), 74-94, and Anton Friedrichsen,"Bemerkungen
94-96. The commentaries on 13
John yield historicallynot
Fusswaschung," ibid., theological
very much; see, however, Alfred Loisy, Le quatrieme veangile, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1921), 382 ff;
Oscar Cullmann,Les sacrementsdans l'dvangileJohannique (Paris, 1951), 73 ff;R. P. Braun,
The Johannine narrationof thecourseof eventsis simpleenough,and it
willbe well to recallsome of thedetails,sincetheywill have to be referred
to quite frequently. Christrisesfromsupper,lays his garmentsaside, and
girdshimselfwitha towel.Afterthat,he puts waterinto a basin-V-iqp
in Greek,pelvisin Latin - and beginsto wash thefeetof thedisciplesand
wipe themwiththe towelwithwhichhe is girded.Venitad Petrum- he
comes to SimonPeter,apparentlynot the firstof the discipleswhose feet
werebathed,"4 and at thatpointtheredevelopsthememorablestichomythia
"Le lavementdes pieds et la reponse de Jesus'a Pierre,"Revue Biblique, XLIV (1935), 22 ff;
also, for a few remarks,WilfredL. Knox, Some Hellenistic Elements in PrimitiveChristianity
(Schweich Lectures, 1942; London, 1944), 75, n. 3. For the synagogical background,see
below, n. 15. Two importantstudies on the Mandatum proper may be added here: for the
East, see S. Petrides,"Le lavementdes pieds dans l'eglise grecque," echos d'Orient,III (1899-
1900), 321-326, and, for the West, Dionys Stiefenhofer,"Die liturgischeFusswaschung am
Griindonnerstagin der abendlhindischen Kirche,"Festgabe Aloys Kniipflerzur Vollendung des
70. Lebensjahres (Freiburg, 1917), 325-339.
" East and West differon that
point. Origen,In Ioannem Commentarius,XXXII, 4 ff,ed.
Preuschen (GCS., X = Origen, IV; Berlin, 1903), 435,18 ff,says one would assume that
Peter was firstand Judas last; Christ,however, acting like a good physician, started with
Judas who needed medical treatmentmost urgently,and treatedPeter last W9cXarrov -7rvrwv
ri-0 v1~V W Wro8w&v.
od'fpvov v Ephrem (below, n. 30), ed. Lamy, I, 394, likewise gives Peter
~, fileof apostles: Auctor
the last place in the gratiae lavavit pedes omniumdiscipulorumusque
ad Simonem; quum autem ad eum accessisset . . . , ille timuitetc. Ephrem's reason for this
sequence, however, was not medical, but ethical: Incipiendo autem a minimodocuit omnes
humilitatem(p. 392). See also Cyrillonas (below, n. 32), p. 28. This remained the traditional
sequence within the OrthodoxChurch; cf. J. Goar, Euchologion (Paris, 1647), 753, nos. 12-
13, also p. 748 forthe customof beginningthe Feet-washingwith Judas (traditionallystaged
by the ostiarius) and ending it with Peter (traditionallystaged by the oeconomicus); cf.
Petrides,322 f.
The opposite opinion we findrepresentedin the West by
Augustine,In loannem, LVI,
c. 1, PL., XXXV, 1788: . . . deinde subiunctumest, 'Venit ergo ad Simonem Petrum,'
quasi
aliquibusiam lavisset,posteos venissetad primum.Quis enimnesciatprimumApostolorum
esse beatissimum Petrum?Sed non ita intelligendum
est quod postaliquosad illumvenerit;
sed quod ab illocoeperit.Quandoergopedes discipulorumlavarecoepit,venitad eum,a quo
coepit, id est, ad Petrum.This, then,seems to have been a widely spread opinionin the West;
it is quoted, e.g., in Bernardof Porto's Ordo Lateranensis,c. 133, ed.
Ludwig Fischer (Munich
and Freising,1916), 53; also Ernaud of Bonneval, Liber de cardinalibus
operibus Christi,c. 7
("De ablutionepedum"), PL., CLXXXIX, 1650 A: . . . de mensa surgens,linteose praecinxit,
et ad genua Petri . . obtulitfamulatum.Ernaud even excluded
Judas fromthe pedilavium,
which Augustinedid not do (below, n. 83). It is
interestingto notice that even in this rela-
tively insignificantmatterthere prevails in the West a hierarchicrationalism,the tendency
to proceed in rank fromtop to bottom,whereas the East - here as -
always recognizes the
mysteryin the unexpectedlyreversed order.
The question of Peter's precedence, or that of Judas, cannot, be specified
unfortunately,
by the iconographicmaterial. There are, it is true, scores of picturesshowing the apostles as
they handle theirsandals while Peter is washed; rarely,however,can it be told whetherthey
are lacing theirsandals afterthe washing, or
unlacing them in order to be washed. Only one
type suggests that Judas has preceded Peter: a small crouching figure,separated fromthe
otherdisciples, is rubbinghis feet or puttingon his sandals, while Peter is
being washed. This
is quite obvious in a Byzantine fresco in Curtea de
Arges (Rumania); see Oreste Tafrali,
Monuments byzantinsde Curt&a de Arges (Paris, 1931),
pl. LXXI bis, and text p. 137 ff;
betweenMasterand disciplewhichwas to becomebasic forall representa-
tionsof thatscene:
(6) And Peter saithunto him: "Lord, dost thou wash myfeet?"
(7) Jesusansweredand saiduntohim:"WhatI do thouknowest
notnow;but
thoushaltknowthereafter."
(8) Peter saith unto him: "Thou shalt never wash my feet."Jesusanswered him:
"If I wash thee not,thou hast no partwithme."
(9) SimonPetersaithuntohim: "Lord, notmyfeetonly,but also myhands and my
head"(nonsolumpedes,sedetiammanusetcaput).
(10) Jesussaith to him: "He that is washed needethnot save to wash his feet,but
is clean everywhit.And ye are clean, but not all are."
The lastwords,ofcourse,hintedat Judas'imminent betrayal.In the Synop-
tic Gospels,thispredictionformsan indispensablepartof the Last Supper;
in the Fourth,it is shiftedto the Feet-washingceremony,althoughit will
be repeatedonce morewhen Christ,lateron, dips the sop forJudas.For,
so we are told,afterhavingwashed the feetof the disciplesand takenhis
garments,Christreturnedto the table,reclinedagain, and set out to ex-
plainwhathis doingmeant. "If I then,yourLord and Master,have washed
yourfeet,ye also oughtto wash one another'sfeet."It was an exampleof
humility and charitysetto thedisciples,a Mandatumnovum(ovroX'i Katv4)
ornew commandment ofmutuallove - and thisis whattheMandatumwas
in thefirst
place.
The intentions of the writerof the FourthGospel,in omittingfromhis
narration the communionof the apostles and insertinginstead the cere-
moniouspedilavium,will have to remainhis own secret.It is easilyunder-
stood,however,thatlaterinterpreters were inclinedto raise the lavingin
the Upper Chamberto a sacramentallevel, an act hardlyless meaningful
and portentousthanthe breakingof thebread itself,withwhichthe Feet-
washingwas so closelyconnected.At any rate,the exegeteswere inclined
to see thatancientritualof the Synagogue15 in a new light,to attributeto
it more than an act merelyof humilityand charity,and to visualize
fora Byzantine
see further, S. Eitrem,"La SainteAblutionsurune broderie
silverembroidery,
en argent byzantine,"Elr Mv'jvyv .rvplSwvo'Acd4rpov (Athens, 1935), 160 (fig.); see also
Bibl.Nat., MS. copte 13 (below, n. 128, and fig.45). See, forthe West, e.g., Hanns Swarzen-
ski,Die illuminierten
Handschriften in den Liindernan Rhein,Main
des XIII. Jahrhunderts
und Donau (Berlin, 1936), pl. 144, fig.805, and textpage 64 ("der sich die Fiisse trocknende
Apostel").
'1 The synagogical background of the ritual washing, importantthough it is, may be left
aside for the present discussion; see, however, H. Strack and P. Billerbeck,Kommentarzum
Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, II (Munich, 1924), 557; Robert Eisler, "Zur
Fusswaschung am Tage vor Passah," ZNTW., XIV (1913), 268 ff,as well as the papyrus
Gospel fragment,published, e.g., by H. B. Swete, Zwei neue Evangelienfragmente(Lietz-
manns Kleine Texte, 31; Bonn, 1908; reprintedin 1924, pp. 4-9); JoachimJeremias,"Der
someinnercausal connectionbetweentheFeet-washingand theInstitution
of the Eucharist.In short,one began to attributeto the ritualwashinga
sacramentaland, morespecifically, a baptismalmeaning.Peter'sreluctance
to accepthis Master'sservicescomparedideallywiththereluctanceofJohn
the Baptistto performthe servicedemandedof him,a parallelismbetween
theBaptismin Jordanand theLavingin theUpperChamberwhichdid not
escape St. Ambrose,"6 and whichoccasionallywas reflectedin the art of a
laterperiod (figs.57, 58). 17 If, further,Clementof Alexandriaheld that
onlySt. Peterwas baptized by Christhimself,he too mayhave thoughtof
theFeet-washingat which,ofall theapostles,Peteralone was distinguished
by beingtoldthathe was clean,and therefore apparentlyhad been cleansed
before."8
Moreover,anyeventor actionconnectedwithwaterwouldhave evoked
in early-Christiantypologicalthinkingsome associationwith baptism.'9
Hippolytusof Rome,forexample,interpreted thebathof Susannaas a bap-
tismwhichhe linkedtopassover.20The SyrianAphraates,called the"Persian
Sage," who wrotearoundA.D. 340, drewan even moresuccinctparallel:
Israel[hewrote]wasbaptizedinthemiddle oftheRedSea onthispaschalnight. . . ;
Zusammenstoss Jesumitdem pharisiiischen Oberpriesterauf dem Tempelplatz:Zu Pap. Ox.

V, 840," ConiectaneaNeotestamentica, XI (1947), 97-108.
1 Ambrosius, De sacramentis, III, 1, 4, ed. JohannesQuasten,Monumenta eucharistica et
liturgica vetustissima (FlorilegiumPatristicum, VII; Bonn, 1936), 152, 10 ff: . . . et ait
illi Petrus:'Tu mihilavas pedes?' . . . Habes hoc et alibi: 'Venitad Iohannem,et ait illi
lohannes:Ego a te debeo baptizari,et tu venisad me [Matth.3:14]?' See also the sermon
attributed to Fulgentius,Sermo,XXVI, PL., LXV, 893D: Sic et conversustuusJoannesex-
cusabatad Jordanem, sic et tu excusasad pelvem;and,fora laterperiod,BernaudofBonneval,
Liberde cardinalibus operibus,VII, PL., CLXXXIX,1652B: Similimodoet Johannes venienti
Dominoad baptismum tentavit resistere. . . The resistanceofJohnwas a famoussubjectfor
dramatization in sermons,dialogues,and mystery plays; see GeorgeLaPiana, Le rappre-
sentazionisacre (Grottaferrata, 1912), 72 ff.
1 Notablyin thecasketof Farfa (fig.57; cf.n. 154); see also theportablealtarfrom the
Rhine(fig.58, n. 155).
" Echle,in Traditio,III (1945), 367 f.
1 The monograph of Per Ivar Lundberg,La typologiebaptismaledans l'anciennedglise
(Upsala, 1942), mayreplaceherean enumeration of thevast literature
on thatsubject;see,
however,also F. J.Dblger,"Der Durchzugdurchdas Rote Meerals Sinnbildder christlichen
Taufe,"Antikeund Christentum, II (1930), 63-69, also 70 ff.
yAavtLX, I, 16, ed. Bonwetsch (GCS., I: 1, 1897), 26 f: royav"ed Erov
2 Hippolytus,Eti Trv
(c4p1av)" aAXo'IVT
r-v 7ov-ra'oa; Ev 711T XovpOV El 7rapa&LunpW
T0t' KaVCOALEVOLKEToLLCt~ETaLKat
w
(q 1KKAX'T/Oa
) S(OoaVVa a7rokovoZIVf] KaOapah OE 7rapararat. The bath of Susanna is
paralleledheremainlywiththe nuptialbathvv'xPrq
of the Church;cf. Odo Casel, "Die Taufe als
Brautbadder Kirche,"JahrbuchfiirLiturgiewissenschaft, V (1925), 144 ff,and, forthe
Hippolytuspassage in particular,his "Artund Sinn der iiltestenchristlichen
Osterfeier,"
JLW.,XIV (1938), 23. Casel,in thatconnection,
refersalso to theMaundyThursdaybathof
the catechumensmentionedin Hippolytus'ApostolicTradition,c. 20, reprinted L.
by
Duchesne,Christian
Worship,5thed. (London,1931), 533.
and our Saviour washed, also on the paschal night,the feet of his disciples,which is
the Sacramentof Baptism.21
In a similarvein Origen,a centurybeforeAphraates,had alreadyinter-

preted the famousscene under the oak treesof Mambre in a baptismal
sense.Abrahamwashed thefeetof his threeangelicvisitorsbeforeserving
themtheirmeal:
For Abraham [wrote Origen] knew that the dominical sacramentcannot be consum-
mated exceptby washingthe feet.22
If by "dominicalsacrament"the Eucharistwas meant,then indeed the

Laving oftheFeet musthave meantbaptismto Origen.At anyrate,Origen
placed in parallel the laving of the angels before their meal and the
pedilaviumof the apostles- yetanothertypologicalconcordanceof which
late mediaevalmanuscript paintersavailed themselves(fig.15).23
Origen'ssimilecalls to ourattentiona ratherimportant point.Abraham,
as was thecustomin theMediterranean washedhis visitors'feet
world,first
and thereafter served the meal. Was that the sequence of eventsin the
Upper Chambertoo? Did thelavingtakeplace beforeor afterthebreaking
of the bread? Did the Feet-washingprecede or followthe Communionof
" des persischen
Aphraates,HomilyXII ("On thePasch"),c. 6, trsl.GeorgBert,Aphrahat's
WeisenHomilien(Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichteder altchristlichenLiteratur,
III: 3-4; Leipzig, 1888), 191. In the Latin translation of J. Parisot,AphraatisSapientis
Persae Demonstrationes, in Graffin,PatrologiaSyriaca,I (1894), 527, the passage reads:
Baptizatus est autem Israel in mediomarihac paschatisnocte,in die salvationis;et Salvator
nosteretiampedeslavitdiscipulorum suorumnoctepaschatis,quod estsacramentum baptismi.
See, for the whole problem, the extremelyuseful study by Edward J. Duncan, Baptism in
of America:
of Aphraatesthe PersianSage (The CatholicUniversity
the Demonstrations
Studies in ChristianAntiquity,No. 8; Washington,D. C., 1945), esp. 53 f and 67 ff.
22 Origenes, In Genesim Homiliae, IV, c. 2, ed. Baehrens (Origenes,
VI: 1, GCS., XXIX;
nonnisiin lavandispedi-
Berlin,1920), 53, 5: Sciebatenim[Abraham]dominicasacramenta
bus consummanda.For no obvious reason Origen firstrelates that Abraham ordered the meal
forhis guests beforehe discusses the Feet-washing.See next note.
"
Munich, Cgm. 20, fol. 10r; Henrick Cornell, Biblia pauperum (Stockholm, 1925), pl.
63 and p. 334, ? 25. The text of the Biblia pauperum is highlysignificantfor the confused
chronologyof events characteristicof the Western Church. The authorfirststates: "Da begat
unser herrdas mandat." Then he tells the storyof Abraham at Mambre: "kaum das sy zu im
chomen,da er in nun zu essen und zu trinkengeben het und ir fuez gewaschen het." Genesis
18:3-8, of course, says that Abraham firstwashed the feet and then ran to prepare the meal.
The author has a reason for correctingGenesis: "Abraham petzaichnet unseren herren,der
sich diemutikleichenneiget fur sein lunger und ir fues zwug nach dem essen." Rome, on the
whole, favoredthis sequence of events (see below, nos. 82, 83), and thereforethe author of
the Biblia pauperum changed also the sequence of Genesis 18. See also Hans von der
Gabelentz,Die Biblia pauperumund Apokalypseder Grossherzogl.Bibliothekzu Weimar
1912), 44, fortheRomansequenceof events.The Feet-washing
(Strasbourg, of Genesisand
that of John 13 are paralleled also in the Modena, Bibl. Estense, MS. a. U. 6, 7, fol. 34',
of which a reproductionis found in Enciclopedia Cattolica (Vatican, 1951), VII, 969. See
below,n. 26, forAugustine's
chronology.
theApostles?The FourthGospel,our onlysource,is notat all clearon that
point.The narrationbeginswiththewords:"Andsupperbeingended . . .
he risethfromsupper." This would suggest that the Feet-washingwas
performedafterthe meal, and, apparently,afterthe Institutionof the
Eucharist- an additional act of charityand humility,accentuatingthe
charitablecontentsof the precedingbrotherly repast.On the otherhand,
so we are told,the lavingbeing accomplishedJesusreclinedagain at the
table, not only to explainthe meaningof the "New Commandment," but
also to dip thesop forJudas.If thisJudas-Communion be takenas an inte-
gralpart of the Last Supper,as it is in the otherGospels,thenindeed the
Feet-washing would have taken place before the Communionof the
Apostles.
All thatcan be said on the basis of the FourthGospel is thatthe laving
interrupted the meal, or, at least, thatit was performedduringthe meal.
The scene is, in fact,occasionallyso represented by mediaevalminiaturists.
The twelfth-century Bible of Floreffe(near Liege), forexample,showsthe
disciples stillat the table,togetherwithChristwho givesthe sop to Judas;
at the same time,however,Christwashes the footof Peterfromunderthe
table (fig.14).24 In magnificent simplicity and directnessthissceneis shown
in a Psalter,likewiseof the twelfthcentury,in the Morgan
Library:the
bread, as yet unbroken,is on the table at which the disciplesare seated,
whilethelordlybalneator(to use an expressionofZeno ofVerona) reaches
again fromunder the table forPeter'sfoot to bathe it (fig. 16).25 Those
paintingsmay followthe perfectlysound interpretation of Augustinewho
pointed out that Coena ergofacta means Coena iam parata,"thetablebeing
prepared" instead of "supperbeing ended." However,this interpretation,
thoughfoundin some otherpaintings(see, e.g., fig.25), was not the one
to conquerdespitetheauthority of its champion.26
' Brit. Mus., Add. MS. 17737-8, fol. 4'.

' New
York, Morgan Library MS 645, fol. 4', a particularlybeautiful Psalter fragment
containingthe Entry into Jerusalemwith the Reception (fols. 3'-4r), the Feet-washing,and
the Crucifixion(5r). I am indebted to the Morgan
Library for placing a photograph at my
disposal. Cf. Zeno of Verona, Tractatus,II, c. 35, PL., XI, 480f: lam balneator praecinctus
exspectat . . . (with referenceto baptism, although the epithet praecinctus is reminiscent
of the Feet-washing); see also Jamesof Edessa, The
Hymns of Severus of Antiochand Others,
ed. and trsl. by E. W. Brooks, POr., VI (1911), 106 f
(Hymn 63): "[we] have gained
cleansing throughthe divine laver of regeneration."
" Augustine,
In JoannisEvangelium,LV, c. 3, PL., XXXV,1786: Non ita debemusintel-
ligerecoenamfactamvelutiiamconsummatam atque transactam:
adhucenimcoenabatur, cum
Dominussurrexit et pedeslavitdiscipulissuis.Nam postearecubuit,
et buccellamsuo traditori
dedit,utiquecoenanondumfinita, hoc est,dumadhucpanisessetin mensa.'Coena ergofacta,'
dictumest,iam parata,et ad convivantium mensamusumqueperducta.It is surprising that
in this case
the West, with few exceptions,disregarded
Augustine'sinterpretation.
However,uponthequestionwhetherthelavingwas meanttoprecedeor
tofollowtheLast Supper,otherconclusionsdepended.If thatceremony was
performed afterthe Last Supper,it could be understoodexclusivelyas the
act of humilityand charitywhichthe Mandatumnovumwas at any rate.
If,however,thathumbleservicewas assumedto have been renderedbefore
the meal, as was the custom (so to speak) since Abraham'stimes,then
indeed thewashingand themeal would appear to be in causal relationship
withone anotherand a totallydifferent chainof symbolscould,thoughnot
of necessity,be activated.For in thiseventthe washingcould have taken
place in preparationfortheSupperand fortheInstitution of theEucharist;
thatis, in preparationforthe FirstCommunionof the Apostles- and the
firstcommunionnormallyfollowedimmediatelyafterbaptism.In other
words,the washingin the vItrr-qp, mightappear as the Bap-
the foot-basin,
tismof Apostles.Moreover,the Feet-washing,if it preceded directlythe
Institutionof theEucharist,mightbe takento be synonymous withthe In-
stitutionof the Sacramentof Baptismin general,and the two holyritesof
on thesame day.
salvationcouldbe said to have been instituted
Hence, thechronology of eventswas ofmajorimportancefortheevalu-
ationoftheceremoniouslaving.It could be takeneitheras an act of charity
and onlycharity,or it could be takento have, in additionto its charitable
values,a sacramentalmeaning.In short,a double interpretation sprungup,
one charitableand the othersacramental, whichnow shall be tracedin its
radiationsintovariousspheresof influence.
II
A fewtextsmayfirstillustratethebaptismalexegesisof the Feet-wash-
ing. When Origensaid that"the dominicalsacramentscannotbe consum-
matedwithoutwashingthefeet,"he musthave assumedthatthepedilavium
preceded the ritualmeal - as in the case of Abraham'sangelic visitors."27
Quite unequivocalas usual, however,is the Syriantradition,whichmost
connectsthe baptismalinterpretation
significantly of the Feet-washingdi-
rectlywiththe chronology of eventsin the Upper Chamber.Aphraates,we
recall,styledthe Mandatumstraightforwardly the"Sacramentof Baptism."
When contrasting the baptismof the discipleswithIsrael's baptismin the
Red Sea, he made the sequence of events one of the essentialsof his
argument:
Above, nos. 22-23. See also Origen,In loannem, XXXII, 4, 47, ed. Preuschen (Origenes,
IV _7
= GCS., X), 431 f, where once more the pedilavium is compared with the services of
Abraham.
Afterthe Lord had washed theirfeet and reclinedagain [at the table], he gave them
his Body and Blood; whereas Israel firstate the paschal meal and was baptized there-
afterin the Red Sea.28
Aphraatesfurtherpointed out what the baptismallaving of the apostles

meant: whereasthe baptismperformed by the Precursorreferredto peni-
tenceonly,thelavingofthedisciplesrepresented theevangelicalinstitution
of true baptism,because in that paschal nightthe Lord revealed to the
apostlesthemystery ofa baptismintohisPassionand Death.29OtherSyrian
authorsshowsomefamiliarity withthebaptismalexegesisoftheFeet-wash-
ing.30Theymaynotalwaysbe quite clearaboutthepoint;but theevidence
ofCyrillonas,a Syrianpoet oftheend ofthefourthcentury,is unmistakable,
forhe conceivedof the Feet-washingas thepreludeto thereceptionof the
Eucharist.He seemsto have had in mindthepassingof thenewlybaptized
fromthebaptistery intothechurch,31 whenhe makesChristspeak afterthe
laving:
Behold, I have washed and cleansed you; now hastenjoyfullyintothe churchand enter
into her portalsas heirs.32
"
Aphraates,HomilyXII, c. 6; Bert,Aphrahat,192 f; Parisot,in Patr. Syr.,I, 531: Et
postquamlavitpedes eorum,dedit eis Corpuset Sanguinemsuum.Secus autem [populus]
Israel, qui postquampascha manducaverunt, baptizatisunt in nube et in mari. Duncan,
Aphraates, 68 f.
0
Bert,Aphrahat,193; Parisot,op. cit.527 f: Noverisetenim,carissime, Salvatoremnocte
illa dedisse baptismumveritatis.Nam quamdiu cum discipulisconversatusest, baptismus
legis,quo sacerdotesbaptizabant, eratbaptismusille de quo dicebatIohannes:'Paenitentiam
agitea peccatisvestris.'At in ea noctemanifestavit eis sacramentum baptismipassionismortis
suae,sicutidixitApotolus:'Consepultiestisei perbaptismum in mortem, et cumeo surrexistis
per virtutem Dei.' Cf. Duncan,Aphraates,67 ff,who has collectedthe Aphraatespassages
referring to the Feet-washing.
" See, e.g., Theodoreof Mopsuestia,Commentarium in EvangeliumJohannisApostoli,
ed. and trsl.by J.-M.Vost6,in: Corpusscriptorum Christianorum orientalium,Script.Syri,
ser.IV, vol. III, versiolatina(Louvain,1940), 183, on 'Non habebispartem':Cum autemex
hocverboexistimaret baptismiloco esse hanclotionem, et ab ea se sumpturum participationem
cum Domino,atque idcircodiceretut se totumlavaret,si ita res se haberet,Dominus
corrigiteiusignorantiam, dicens:Qui lotusestetc. DominusnosterveroloquensSimonidicere
vult: Hic non est baptismusin remissionempeccatorum . . . Theodore then goes on saying:
Receperunt nempediscipulibaptismum remissionis
a Johanne.. . , eos veroperfecit
descensus
Spiritusqui posteavenitsupereos. This argumentation,of course,is quite conventional
and
maybe found,timeand timeagain,in bothEast and West. See also Ephrem,SermoIII in
hebdomadamsanctam,c. 4, ed. T. J. Lamy (Malines,1882), I, 398, who indicatesat least
the connectionof John13:10 with baptismalideas by adding the word baptismus(Qui
baptismoablotusest . . . nullo prorsuslavacroindiget); Ephremholds that the disciples
werepreviously baptized"withfireand withthe spirit,"thoughnotwithwater,and he, too,
assumesthatthe Feet-washing precededthe Institutionof the Eucharist;see ibid.,414 ff.
See also a sermonfalselyattributed
to JohnChrysostom,PGr.,LIX, 718.
31 Duncan, Aphraates,71.
Hymnusiiberdie Fusswaschung,
* Cyrillonas, trsl.by P. S. Landersdorfer,
Ausgewdhlte
Schriftender syrischenDichter (Bibliothekder Kirchenviiter,VI; Kemptenand Munich,
1912), 29.
And duringthe Last Supperitself,accordingto Cyrillonas,Christreferred
to his precedingservices:
Behold,how highlyI have honoredyou. I have laved yourfeetand have invitedyou to
share my meal.33
No doubtcould ariseforCyrillonasthattheFeet-washingwas theprepara-

tionforthe Eucharist.
This traditionbelongednotto theSyriansalone. Theymayhave started
it,butit was popularand persistent
throughout theEast. AnastasiusSinaita,
form
writingbeforeA.D.700,was a Syrianby birth,itis true;buthiswritings
partof Byzantineliterature.On one occasion,whendiscussingin his Hexa-
emeronthe achievementsof the fifthday of the Creation,he happened to
comparethe Temple of Solomonwiththe Churchof Christ,and thereby
remarked:
Afterthe fifthday, Solomon the son of David washed the temple in the type of the
baptismalwashing of the Church by Christthe son of David; therefore,the basin of
the Last Supper on the fifthday [thatis, the pteyakX7
rqciTrrq,feriaquinta]
takes theplace
of the baptismal font: the feet of the apostles were laved in a baptismal fashionby
Christ,whereafterhe gave them to participatein his Body and Blood.34
AnastasiusSinaita,who laterexercisedconsiderableinfluenceon theRussian

Churchand on RussianChurchsymbolism, culled his flowersfrommanya
theologicalbypath.In thiscase, however,he seemssimplyto have enlarged
upon an EXO o-Worov,an anonymousand undatedchantwhichin
S86/'kov
the tenthcenturyappears in a Grottaferrata manuscriptas an Epistham-
bonos- a prayerad populumsaid at the end of the mass frombehindthe
ambo - and normallybelongsto Vesperson Holy Thursdayin the Greek
Churchas well as in herdaughterChurches.It beginswiththewords:
The gloriousdisciples were illuminatedin the basin of the Last Supper.35
To "illuminate"(cortELtw)means to baptize,and the "basin of the meal"

(vITwrp refershere- as in the exegesisof AnastasiusSinaita-
8Ervov)
70o 34.
ErsteHomilieiiberdas Pascha Christi,trsl.by Landersdorfer,
" Cyrillonas,
3 Anastasius
Sinaita,In Hexaemeron,V, PGr., LXXXIX, 922C (onlyin a Latin version):
Haec nos quintusdies docet de Christoet Ecclesia,symbolaet aenigmata,ante nobissig-
nificansprincipiumbaptismatisin quo creati sunt quinque sensus humanae naturae . . . In
hoc quinto,inquam,die saeculi,in quinquiesmillesimoanno,factumest etiamlavacruma
SalomonefilioDavid in temploDei Hierosolymis, in typumbaptismatisEcclesiae Christi
Dei, filiiDavid. Quomodoetiamrursusilla pelvisin magnocoenaculo,quintodie, exemplum
habenspiscinae;pedes discipulorum primumbaptizavitChristus, et deinde dedit corpuset
sanguinem .
in participationem. .
dei Codici criptense,"Bollettinodella
3 Teodore Minisci,"Le preghiereopisthambonoi
Badia Greca di Grottaferrata,III (1949), 62, no. 29, lines 8 ff: rTE yap o0
1vSo$0 aov
OtaOr7a-
. . . ; of. W. Christand M. Paranikas,Anthologia Graeca
iv VL7Lp 70318E'0Vvov
70
carminum Christianorum (Leipzig,1871), 94.
(4wrTLovTO
to the foot-bathwhichthustakesthe place of the "Jordan,"the baptismal
font.Since it seemsquite unlikelythatthe ididmelonwas formedafterthe
textof AnastasiusSinaita,who, on the contrary, probablyused or para-
phrased the chant,we may assume that the chantantedatedat least the
seventhcentury.It belongsuntilthepresentday to the MaundyThursday
serviceof the Greekand RussianChurches,36 and thebasic idea embedded
in the idi6melonwill therefore be foundeverywhere withinthe Orthodox
orbit,from Grottaferrata
to Moscow.
This is truealso withregardto theGospel lessonsin theliturgyon Holy
Thursday.The pericopesare Matthew26:2-19, John13:3-17, and again
Matthew26:21-39. The readingsare arrangedin such a fashionthat,by
theintercalation ofJohnintothereportof Matthew,theimpression is given
thattheFeet-washingprecededtheCommunionoftheApostles.37
The same chronologyof eventsis reflectedalso by the Armenianrite,
in whichthe baptismalinterpretation of the pedilaviumwas notunknown
either.A prayeraftertheFeet-washingand precedingtheliturgysays:
Whereforeeven this day thou completedstin the economicalhumanitythe two works
of our salvationbegun in ineffablehumility,
by washingin the holyupper-chamberthe
feetofthydisciples
andbydistributing
amongthemthybodyandblood.38
Since the precedingprayerremembersthe renewal of God's command
"throughthe visiblewaterof thiswashing"and entreatsGod to "endue us
withtheholinessof thyholySpirit,"therecan be but littledoubt thatthe
"twoworksofoursalvation"instituted on Holy ThursdaywereBaptismand
theEucharist.
These conceptscan be traced also in the EgyptianChurch.It would
be difficult
to tell whetherOrigen'sexegesisof Genesis 18:4, the
washing
of the feet of Abraham'sangelic visitors,has influencedthe lectionaries.
Howeverthatmay be, the laterCoptic lessonsforMaundy
Thursdaycon-
tainedthe pericopeGenesis
18:1-23,39immediatelyfollowedby the Man-
datum ceremonywhich, in turn,opened with two
specially composed
lessons: one referringto Israel's crossingof the Red Sea,40 and the other
" Triodion(Rome, 1879), 665; ServiceBook of the Holy Orthodox-Catholic
Apostolic
(Greco-Russian)Church,trsl.by Isabel FlorenceHapgood (Bostonand New York,1906),
208, cf. 210.
Euaggelion(Rome,1880), 131 f.
1
' Rituale ed. F. C. Conybeare(Oxford,1905), 219.

Armenorum,
' Le lectionnairede la Semaine Sainte: Texte copte . . .
d'aprds le manuscritAdd. 5997
du BritishMuseum,ed. and trsl.by O. H. E. Burmester, POr., XXV (1943), 253 f. The
Genesispericopeis followedby therubric:"Voiciles legonsqu'on litsurle Bassin."It seems
thatin theCopticChurchthelavinghad itsplace withintheframeofthemass.
0
Op. cit.,257: "Quand Israeltraversale merRouge,leurspieds foulerent la mer . . .
ils allerentviolemment dans 1'eau; les pieds d'Israelet de toutela maisonde
Jacob,leurs
referring to the crossingof theJordanunderJoshua.41 While normallyboth

crossingswere takento be typologicalprefigurations of Baptism,theywere
here prefigurations of the Feet-washing,too, as the repetitionof the word
"feet"clearlydemonstrates. The Feet-washing,therefore, belonged to the
generalcompoundofbaptismalideas. Moreover,in the Coptic Church,the
pedilaviumand thereadingofJohn13:1-17 werefollowedby thepericopes
of the Institutionof the EucharistfromI Corinthians11':23-26 and Mat-
thew26:20-29 so thatclearlytheFeet-washingprecededtheLast Supper.42
This chronology is foundalso in theApophthegmata patrum,"The Say-
ingsoftheMonasticFathers,"and in theSyriacderivatives ofthatcollection
of edifyingtales,whichwas composedin Egyptin the fourthor fifthcen-
tury.48In one ofthesestorieswe findthediscussionoftheOrdinesChristi-
a speculativeinterpretation ofthelifeofChristin whichan effort was made
to attribute to Christtheperformance ofeverydutyand functionpertaining
to the variousordersand ranksof the ecclesiasticalhierarchy.That cursus
honorumstartedwiththe functionof ostiariuswhichChristallegedlyexer-
cised when drivingthe money-changers fromthe Temple,and it ended in
the Last Supperwhen Christas a priestor bishopimpartedthe bread and
the cup to the apostles.This priestlyor episcopal function, however,was
precededby thediaconateof Christ,who tookupon himselftheobligations
of a deacon when he washed the feetof the apostles.In otherwords,the
Feet-washingpreceded the Communionof the Apostles.It may be men-
tionedobiterthatthe towelwithwhichChristgirdedhimself,was accord-
la ruine;ils chanterent
pieds dans'rent;ils 6vitBrent le cantique:'Louonsle Seigneur,car il
a 6t6glorifi6'."
le traverserent le Jourdain;leurspieds foulkrent
les
1"Op. cit.,258: "Josueavec peuple
sont au-dessousde l'eau; leurspieds furent fermes;ils leurs
battirent ennemis."
pierresqui
" Op. cit.,267-273,followsa longand interesting litanywhichwas repeatedalso on the
day of Peter and Paul, when once more the lavatiopedum was performed; see Burmester,
"Two Servicesof the CopticChurchattributed to Peter,Bishopof Bahnesd,"Musion,XLV
(1932), 241 f. Then (p. 277) a shortgraceis said afterthelavingand (277-282) thelessons
referring to the Last Supperbegin.See also p. 239, the "Prayerof the Basin (Lakane),"
where the baptismal meaning of the Feet-washing is expressed quite clearly: ". . . who
didstprepareforus theway of Life by thefeetof ThineelectholyApostles."The Br. Mus.
MS. Add. 5997 is dated 1273; but the lectionary itself,whichof coursecontainsveryold
material,is said to have been composedby the PatriarchGabriel II (1131-1146); see
Burmester, in POr. XXIV (1933), 173.
'*For the Greektextof the Apophthegmata passage, see A. Wilmart,"Les ordresdu
Revue des sciences III
religieuses, (1923), 324 ff,esp. 326, whohas admirably traced
Christ,"
thehistory of thattopic.See, forthe Syriactradition, ErnestA. WallisBudge,The Paradise
or GardenoftheHoly Fathers(London,1907), II, 135 (c. 594), and 243 (c. 429); and,for
theLatinversion, VerbaSeniorum, IV, c. 8, PL., LXXIII, 1016A.Withinthetradition ofthat
are with
variations to theranks (see Wilmart,op. cit.), but theFeet-
storythere many regard
is alwaysinterpreted as a function of Christthe Deacon.
washing practically
inglyinterpreted as the Orarion,the stoleof the deacon.44Later on, in the
mediaevalCoptic Church,we have also the testimony of Bishop Macarius
of Manuif, secretaryto thePatriarchbetween920 and 933. Not onlydoes he
assertthat"on the day of thepreparationof the chrismthe baptismof the
apostlestookplace,"buthe mentionsalso thaton thesame day thePatriarch
performed baptism"because it is said thaton thisday Christbaptizedhis
disciples."45
We noticethatin all EasternChurchestherewas a certainreadinessto
interpretthepedilaviumin a baptismalfashionor at leastto have it chrono-
logicallyprecedethe Institution of theEucharist.
III
Withregardto imagery,our interestwill be concentrated, forobvious
reasons,on representations whichshowboththeFeet-washingand theLast
Supper.The earliestevidenceforthe treatment of thesetwo themesin one
pictureis foundin thepurpleCodex ofRossano,a GreekGospel-bookofthe
sixthcentury(fig.17a)." At firstglancewe mightbe inclinedto thinkthat
theRossanensishas thewrongchronology: theJudassceneseemstoprecede
thelavatiopedum.This,however,is notquitecorrect.Judasdoes notreceive
thesop, but dips his hand intothedish.Hence, theartistdid notfollowthe
Fourth Gospel, but presentedthe scene accordingto Matthew26:23, or
Mark 14:20. It cannotbe said, therefore,
thathe disregardedthe sequence
of eventsin Johnwhen he added marginally - following
probablyan old
iconographic formula - the Mandatumscene in the upper rightcorner.
4
In fact,he mayhave been quite consciousof thecorrect
sequence,forafter
" Cf. H.
Leclercq, s.v. "Lavement,"DACL., VIII: 2 (1929), col. 2004. See also the
Coptic"PrayeroftheBasin"fortheextremeimportance attributedto the"towel";Burmester,
in Musion,XLV, 239 (above n. 42).
' L. Villecourt,"Un manuscritarabe sur le Saint ChrOmedans l'6glisecopte,"Revue
d'histoire XVIII (1922), 16 ff.The chronology
eccldsiastique, is confusedand it is notclear
exactly what day was meant; however,baptismwas performed on the day on whichthe
chrismwas consecratedand the apostleswere baptized.This
day,it is true,was fora long
timeGood Friday;but since 933 - witha brief - it seems to have been
interruption Holy
Thursday;cf. PhilippHofmeister, Die heiligenOle in der morgen-und
Kirche(Das dstlicheChristentum, abendliindischen
N. F., Heft6-7; Wiirzburg, 1948), 46; see also Riedel,in
GdittingerNachrichten (1902), 697 ff.
" Rossano,Bibl. Arcivescovile, fol.3'; see A. Mufioz,II codice purpureodi
Gospel-book,
Rossanoe ii frammento sinopense(Rome,1907), pl. 5.
" This formula(the placingof theFeet-washing in therightcornerof the Last
Supper),
whichis foundin all centuries, may be of considerableage, as Professor KurtWeitzmann
kindlypointedoutto me. The virvrp, of course,is marginalin thePsalterswhereit illustrates
Ps. 50:9 ("Thou shaltsprinkle me withhyssop,and I shallbe cleansed");cf.
"Die Psalter-Illustration J.J.Tikkanen,
im Mittelalter," Acta SocietatisScientiarumFennicae, XXXI: 5
(1903), 55.
thelavinghe depictstheCommunionoftheApostleswherebythedisciples,
as in wall paintingsand mosaics,approachChristfromoppositedirections
to receivethebread and the chalicerespectively(figs.17b-c).48 We might
arguethattheartistfollowedtheGreeklessonsofMaundyThursday,which
wereMatthew,John,and again Matthew,and thathe merelytookthefree-
dom to intercalateJohn,not afterMatthew26:19, as the pericopewould
suggest,but afterMatthew26:23, therebythrowingthe Judasscene to the
firstpericopeand severing,by the Feet-washing,the Last Supperfromthe
Communionof theApostles.
The peculiar tripartition
There arise, however,certaindifficulties. of
in the
scenes,rareon thewhole,is foundmainly Syrianmanuscripts, British
MuseumAdditional7170 9 and theVaticanSyriac559 (figs.18a-c),50 both
of the early thirteenthcentury,in which the Feet-washingis not inter-
calated,butprecedesboththeLast Supperand theCommunion.Thismight
strengthen thehypothesisaccordingto whichthe Codex Rossanensisorigi-
nated in Antioch,"and not in Byzantium,where that tripartition is not
found;forthe Paris Gospels,Bibl.Nat.MS.gr.74, repeatapparentlyby mis-
" See, e.g., CharlesDiehl, Manueld'artbyzantin, I (2nd ed., Paris,1925), 258 ("rappel-
lent,par leurdisposition, la d6coration d'un h6micycle d'abside"). As ProfessorA. M. Friend
kindlyinformed me,thispatternwas foundalreadyin ZionChurch,in Jerusalem; see Hugues
Vincent and F. M. Abel, Jerusalem: Recherches de topographie, d'archeologie d'histoire
et
(Paris,1912-1926), II: 3, p. 456, n. 5.
' For the manuscript, see Hugo Buchthal,"The Paintingof the SyrianJacobitesin its
Relationto Byzantine and IslamicArt,"Syria,XX (1939), 136 ff(cf.nextnote). The sequence
is: Feet-washing (fol.139r),Last Supper(fol. 139v),Communion oftheApostles(fol. 141r).
This, by the way, is also the sequence of eventsdepictedby Ephrem;see SermoIII in
HebdomadamSanctam (above, n. 30), cc. 1-3: Feet-washing;cc. 4-8: Judas (= Last
Supper); and SermoIV, cc. 1-4: Institution oftheEucharist(= Communion oftheApostles).
See below,n. 51, forothersequences.
' See
G. de Jerphanion, Les miniatures du manuscrit syriaqueNo. 559 de la Bibliothtque
Vaticane(VaticanCity,1940), pls. xvi-xvin, figs.32-34. This MS., by and large,duplicates
Brit.Mus.Add.7170 (cf.Jerphanion, 62 f).
51Anton Baumstark, "Bild und Liturgiein antiochenischem Evangelienbuchschmuck des
6. Jahrhunderts," Ehrengabe deutscher Wissenschaft, ed. by Franz Fessler(Freiburg, 1920),
233-252,doesnotdiscussFeet-washing and Last Supperwhenhe triesto linktheRossanensis
to the SyrianLectionaryreconstructed mainlyon the basis of the hymnsand sermonsof
SeverusofAntioch(Severus,unfortunately, yieldslittlefortheLavingon MaundyThursday);
see also Baumstark,"Das Kirchenjahrin Antiocheiazwischen512 und 518," Romische
Quartalschrift, XI (1897), 31-66. For thepericopesat a laterdate,see Jerphanion, op. cit.,
19; they do not seem to justifythe sequence of events depicted in the Rossano Codex. At-
tentionmaybe calledto thefactthatin thelaterCappadociancyclestheLast Supperalways
precedesthelavatiopedum;see thetablespublishedby Jerphanion, La voixdes monuments
(Paris,1930), 248-249. However, the Last is
Supperapparently alwaysrepresented, as in the
Rossanensis, according to Matthew 26 (Judas dipping his hand), and not accordingto John
13 (Judasreceivingthe sop). One maywonderwhetherthe confusing narrationof Tatian's
Diatessaronhas had any influence; but to answerthisquestionis beyondthe capabilitiesof
thepresent author.
taketheLast Supper,whichbothprecedesand followsaftertheFeet-wash-
ing, but omit the Communion.52 The Syrianreadings,however,do not
follow the Byzantinescheme,53and the only featurewhich the Eastern
representations seemto have in commonis thatthepedilaviumprecedesthe
Last Supper and theCommunionoftheApostles.Thisis trueofan eleventh-
centuryAthosmanuscript 5
as well as of severalArmenianmanuscripts,55
althoughon the whole the laving ceremony,in Easternart,is rarelycon-
joined with the Last Supper or the Communionof the Apostlesin one
image."
The scheme of the Rossanensisand the Syrianmanuscriptsremained
practicallywithoutinfluencein theEast, and it was completelyunknownin
the West. Even in the one extraordinary case in whichthe Communionof
theApostlesappearstogetherwiththewashingceremonyin a westernwork
of art- thethirteenth-century Enamel CasketfromHuy - theCommunion
precedes the laving (figs. 19a-b).57 It would be hazardous to call this
sequenceofeventswithoutqualification "Roman,"althoughit is remarkable
that in the Roman orbitthereis a certainpredilectionforthischronology.
The Sacramentary of Ivrea of thetimeof OttoIII (fig.20) mayserveas an
illustration:58
in the upper registeris the Last Supper accordingto John,
" Cf. H. des MSS: Evangilesavec peintures
Omont,BibliothequeNationale,Ddpartement
byzantines du XI sidcle (Paris,n. d.), fortheMS.; pl. 167 (fol. 195): Last Supper;pl. 168
(195'): Feet-washing; pl. 168b (fol. 196): Last Supper (almostidenticalwithfol. 195),
whereone wouldexpecttheCommunion of theApostles.
" Jerphanion, SyriaqueNo. 559, 19, givesthe laterreadings.Severusof Antioch,in his
hymn"On theWashingon MaundyService,"does notconveyanysuggestions withregardto
thepericopes;see Jamesof Edessa, Hymnsof Severus,ed. Brooks,POr., VI, 106 f. Nor are
we certainabouttheByzantinepericopesin theearliertimes.
"Athos, Dionysiou740, fol. 52r (Feet-washing)and fol. 53' (Last Supper). I am in-
debtedto Professor A. M. Friendforacquaintingme withthismanuscript. This sequenceis
also thatof the texts;see, e.g., Minisci,"Le preghiereopisthambonoi" (above, n. 35), 61,
no. 28, lines16 ff,wheretheFeet-washing precedestheInstitutionof theEucharist.
' As Professor
SirarpieDer Nersessiankindlyinforms me the Feet-washing precedesthe
Last Supperand the Communion of the Apostlesin the following Armenianmanuscripts:
Jerusalem, ArmenianPatriarchate, MS. 2583, fol. 13 (Feet-washing)and fol. 14' (Com-
munionof theApostles),Gospelsdated 1444; Manchester, JohnRylandsLibr.,MS. armen.
20, fols.24 and 25' (Last Supper), Gospelsdated 1587; Paris,Pozzi Collection(no folio
numbers:Washingand Communion),Gospelsdated 1586. In abouttwelveotherArmenian
MSS., however,theWashingof theFeet comesaftertheLast Supperor Communion, and in
the Gospel-bookof 1653 (Jerusalem, ArmenianPatriarchate, MS. 2350) the Last Supperis
above and theFeet-washing below,thoughwithouta lineseparating thetwoscenes.
" The reasonis thatmostof the Easternrepresentationsof the lavingare foundin the
Psaltersas an illustration of Ps. 50:9 (see above, n. 47), whereasGospel and Lectionary
illustrationsof thatsceneare relatively rare.See, however,above,no. 55.
" Fernand
Crooy,Les dmauxcarolingiens de la Chdssede SaintMarc & Huy-sur-Meuse
(Paris,1948).
' Bibl. MS. fol.
Ivrea, Capitolare 86, 50' (ca. A.D. 1001-1002); cf. A. Ebner, Quellen und
zur Geschichteund Kungstgeschichte
Forschungen des MissaleRomanum(Freiburg,1896),
in theloweris thelavatiopedum.F"We findthisschemeveryfrequently, for
example,in a Gospel-bookofGnesenofthelate eleventhcentury(fig.21),)o
or in the clearoutlineof an EnglishPsalterof the thirteenth(fig.22),"0 not
to mentiona scoreof othersimilarrepresentations.62 It was a veryconven-
tional artisticmanner of depicting the narration of John,even though,
rathersurprisingly, the chronology of eventshas been reversed.To be sure,
therelationbetweenupperand lowersectionsneed notalwaysbe thatof a
chronologicalorderproceedingfromabove to below. A MunichPsalterof
the thirteenth century,forexample,would suggestthatthe contentshave
to be read frombelow to above, since otherwisethe EntryintoJerusalem
would followafterthe Laving and the Last Supper (fig.23)."3 Scruplesof
chronology,however,have to be excluded when examiningthe twelfth-
centuryGospelsfromPembrokeCollege wherea thirdscene is introduced:
theKiss of Judasand the Arrestof Christ(fig.24)."4 Here the sequence is
clearly:Last Supper,Laving,Arrest.
Contrariwise,themagnificent Gospel-bookofMatildaofTuscany(Mor-
gan Library),whichfallsin the secondhalfof the eleventhcentury, shows
that the West had not totallysurrenderedto the wrongchronology(fig.
25)."" In theuppermostthirdwheretheFeet-washingtakesplace, thetable
is laid withdishesas yetuntouched- coena iam parata,as Augustineinter-
pretedversicle13:2 of St. John.6" Therefollows,in the centralsection,the
Last Supperwiththe Judasscene accordingto John;finally, in the lowest
57; G. B. Ladner,"Die italienische Malereiim11. Jahrhundert," Jahrbuch derkunsthistorischen

Sammlungenin Wien, V (1931), 137, fig.115; Luigi Magnani,Le miniaturedel Sacra-
mentario d'Ivreae di altricodiciWarmondiani (Vatican,1934), pl. xiv.
" It seemsthattheWesthad a strong preference forrepresenting theLast Supperaccord-
ing to John,whereas the East apparently preferredthe versions of Matthew and Mark.The
problem,however,should be studiedin greaterdetailthan is intended here.
"Gnesen, ChapterLibraryMS. la, fol. 45"; cf. Socite' frangaisede reproductions de
manuscrits XIX (Paris,1938), pl. xxxix.
d peintures:Bulletin,
1 BritishMuseum,Royal MS. 1. D. X., fol. 4'; cf. A. Herbert,"A Psalterin the B.M.
(Royal MS. 1. D. X) Illuminatedin Englandin the Thirteenth Century," Walpole Society
Annual,III (1913-14), 47-56.
See below,figs.27, 28 (nos. 69, 70); also,fora Lectionary at Karlsruhe,O. Homburger
and" K. Preisendanz,Das Evangelistardes SpeyererDomes (Leipzig, 1930), 20 f, pl. 21
(fol. 28).
"Cf. Hanns Swarzenski,Die lateinischenilluminierten Handschriften des XIII. Jahr-
hunderts in den Liindernan Rhein,Mainund Donau (Berlin,1936), pl. 84, fig.498.
"6Cambridge,
PembrokeCollegeMS. 120,fol.3r; cf.M. R. James,A Descriptive Catalogue
of the MSS. in the Library of Pembroke College,Cambridge (Cambridge, 1905), facingp.
121.
" New York,
MorganLibraryMS. 492, fol. 100'; cf. Sir GeorgeWarner,Gospels of
Matilda,Countessof Tuscany(RoxburgheClub, 1917), pl. xxiv.
"' Above,n. 26.
third,the Arrest.This sequence of eventswill be foundno less frequently
than the otherversion,and it mightbe foundin Europe anywhere- most
tellingly,for example,in the Wilten chalice of the twelfthcentury(fig.
26),"6 or in a wall paintingof St. Caecilia in Cologne,of the late thirteenth
(fig. 30)."8 The correctchronology, as representedby these images,does
notbelongto anyone schoolor any one countryalone. Nevertheless, on the
basis of a cursoryexaminationof the Index of ChristianArtit has been ob-
servedthatespeciallyin late mediaevalFrance the pedilaviumpreceding
the Last Supper is almostinvariablythe orderdisplayedby all kinds of
worksof art.For example,thePsalter(so-called) of St. Louis and Blanche
of Castile of the thirteenth centuryshows the well-knownschemeof the
Ivrea Sacramentary (fig.20) or the GnesenGospels (fig.21) in a reversed
order:theMandatumis in theupperregister,theLast Supperin thelower
(fig.27)."6 The same sequence is persistent in the ivories- and if the dip-
tychof theCollectionReubell (fig.28) shouldnotbe deemedunambiguous
enough,thenthediptychof the Musee de Cluny (fig.29) maydispelevery
possible doubt concerningthe chronology:the Feet-washingfollowsim-
mediatelyaftertheEntryand therefore clearlyprecedestheLast Supper.70
Admittedly, there are exceptionswhichgive the oppositechronology.7?
the
However, question ariseswhetherthepredilectionof Frenchartistscan
be accountedforby some otherevidence,and whetherthe observationof
the correctchronologymay have some significance.Perhaps the
literary
traditionin theWest can provideus withsome clue.
IV
In theRomanChurch,thebaptismalinterpretation ofthelavatiopedum
was neveraccepted.Rome,in thatrespect,was peculiarlyguardedand un-
receptive.St. Augustine,farfromrecognizingtheequationof Feet-washing
and Baptismof theApostles,warnsof confounding theceremonyof charity
withthe Sacramentof Regeneration;he mentionsin his letterto
Januarius
thatin ordertoseverthepedilaviumcompletely frombaptismmanyteachers
7 HeinrichKlapsia, "Der Bertoldus-Kelch aus dem KlosterWilten,"Jahrb.d.kunsthist.
Sammlungen in Wien,N. F. XII (1938), 7-34.
8 P. Clemen,Die gotischeMonumentalmalerei der Rheinlande(Diisseldorf,1930),
pl.
XX.
6 Paris,Bibl.de l'Arsenal,
MS. lat. 1186,fol.22r; cf.HenriMartin,Les joyauxde l'Arsenal
(Paris, 1909), I, pl. xxvmii.
70RaymondKoechlin,Les ivoiresgothiquesfranCais (Paris, 1924), pl. cxxxvii,figs.799
and 805.
1 I am greatly
indebtedto Dr. RosalieB. Green,of thePrinceton Indexof Christian Art,
whocalledmyattention to variousitemstoucheduponhere.
(or churches) have refusedto make it a customor to introduceit at all,
thatothershad no scruplestowardeliminating thelavingfromthe custom-
aryrite,and thata thirdgroupfoundit expedientto deferthewhole laving
ceremonyto a different date.72He pointedout thatthe discipleshad been
baptized previouslyeitherby Johnor, preferably, by the Masterhimself
so that a repetitionof baptismwould have been whollyimproper,73and
declaredthatwhereasby baptismthewholemanwas cleansed,thewashing
of the feet referredonly to the daily pardonablesins.74Very consciously
Augustineseveredtheact of charityfromthe Sacramentof Baptism,there-
by admitting, of course,by implicationthathe was quite familiarwiththe
conceptof a baptismalexegesisofthepedilavium.He could noteasilyhave
avoided such admission;foramongthosewho believedthatthe lavingdid
pertainto theSacramentof Baptismwas theimposingfigureofAmbroseof
Milan who, in 387 at San Lorenzo in Milan,presumablystoopedto wash,
in a thoroughly non-Romanfashion,the feetof his unusuallygiftedcate-
chumenfromTagaste,Augustine.75
St. Augustine'sattitudemay have been determinedby conditionsin
Africa.More than a generationbeforehim,Optatus,Bishop of Mileve in
Numidia,had writtenagainsttheschismaticDonatistswho logicallyhad to
defendthepossibility ofa secondbaptismifthefirst had been performed by
a traditor;and in thatconnectionOptatusdeclaredthat,
when Christlaved the feetof his disciples, . . . he fulfilledmerelya formof humility,
but pronouncednothingconcerningthe sacramentof baptism.7"
"7Augustine, Ep. LV, c. 33, ed. Goldbacher(CSEL., XXXIV, 2), 208: Ne ad ipsum
baptismisacramentum pertinerevideretur, multihoc in consuetudinem reciperenoluerunt,
nonnulli etiam de consuetudine auferre non dubitaverunt, aliqui autem,ut hoc secretiore
temporecommendarunt et a baptismisacramento distinguerent, vel diemtertium octavarum
. vel etiamipsumoctavum,ut hoc facerent, elegerunt. thatamong
It is notat all unlikely
themultiwho declinedto introduce theLaving,was Rome;see below,nos. 107, 108.
"
Augustine,Ep. CCLXV, ed. Goldbacher(CSEL., LVII), 643; see above, n. 12. Cf.
Echle,in Traditio,III, 366, n. 8.
" Augustine, In Joannem, LVII, c. 1, PL., XXXV,1790: Ubi visumestintelligendum quod
Baptismoquidem homo totus abluitur;sed dumistoposteavivitin saeculo,humanisaffectibus
terramvelutpedibuscalcans. . . , contrahit unde dicat 'Dimittenobis debita nostra.'See
also ibid.,LVI, c. 4-5, col. 1789: . . homoin sanctoquidemBaptismototusabluitur,non
praeterpedes, sed totusomnino:verumtamen cum in rebus humanispostea vivitur,quasi
pedessunt, ubi ex humanis rebus afficimur. thosewho are cleanbecausetheylive right-
Even
eously,opus tamen habent pedes lavare,quoniamsine peccatoutiquenon sunt.Augustine's
are
arguments closely related to thoseof Tertullian,De baptismo,c. 12; see also Theodore
of Mopsuestia,above,n. 30. Bernardof Clairvaux(below,n. 79) followedAugustine closely.
" See below,n. 103. Stiefenhofer, "Die liturgische Fusswaschung"(see above, n. 13),
327 f: "ErstAugustin schneidet bewusstdie Verbindung vonTaufeundFusswaschung durch."
of Mileve, De schismate Donatistarum, V, c. 3, PL., XI, 1049B: Cum lavaret
7' Optatus
suis .. , solam fecerat formam humilitatis, nihilpronuntiaveratde sacra-
pedes discipulis
mentobaptismatis.
Optatus triedto preclude everypossible interpretation of the pedilavium
as a "better"baptismthanthe one whichtheapostlesmayhave previously
received,and he therefore stressedthe pointthatthe washinghad merely
charitable,but not sacramental,values. This distinctionmusthave been
deeply engrainedin the AfricanChurch.In one of the foursermonsDe
lavandispedibus ascribedto Fulgentiusof Ruspe, an ardentdefenderof
Augustine'santi-Donatistdoctrinesin Africa,the preachersaid straight-
forwardly: "The Feet-washingis nottheMystery ofBaptism,but theobser-
vationof charity."77 This antithesisof charitableand sacramentalaspects
shouldbe keptin mind,forit willbe heardfromtheotherside of thefence
as well.
The reluctanceof the Africanbishopsto acknowledgein the Maundy
Thursdayceremonyany traitsotherthan thoseof charity,as well as their
resistanceto makingany concessionsin thatmatter,resultedclearlyfrom
the horrorwhichtheyfelttowardanythingresemblingre-baptism, which
the Donatistsdemanded- or were chargedwith- and whichmightimply
a seriousencroachment on the sacramentalpower of the hierarchy.What
the
exactly repercussions oftheanti-Donatist werein thelongrun,
struggles
and to whatextenttheyinfluenced theRomanChurchin thesensein which
"See (Pseudo-) Fulgentius, Sermo XXIII, PL., LXV, 890D: Non est istud mysterium
sed obsequiumcaritatis.
baptismi, Cf. SermoXXIV,col. 891C: Officium
vos doceohumilitatis,
non repetitionembaptismi. While a great number of these sermonshave been identified
by
G. Morin, "Notes sur un manuscritdes hom6lies du
Pseudo-Fulgentius,"Revue be'ndictine,
XXVI (1909), 223-228, the four sermonsDe lavandis pedibus (XXIII-XXVI) have not
yet
found theirauthor and may actually be by Fulgentius; see also
Eligius Dekkers and Aemilius
Gaar, Clavis PatrumLatinorum (Sacris erudiri,III; Bruges and Hague, 1951), 147 f, no. 844.
According to Morin, p. 228, the collection representsan Africantype of the fifthor sixth
century.In fact, it can hardly be later than that because many sermonscontain an intimate
knowledge of imperial ceremonial not easily obtainable at a later period. Whether the
sermons are "African" is a differentmatter. For example, Sermo XXV (cols. 891-893)
containsa long passage fromAugustine,In Joannem,LV, c. 7, PL., XXXV, 1787
(Quid autem
mirum . . .), which in its turn served to compose the Inlatio (the Preface) of the Moz-
arabic Maundy Thursday mass; cf. Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum,ed. Marius Ferotin
(Paris, 1912), 241, no. 586; also the Mozarabic Missale Mixtum, in PL., LXXXV, 416A.
This passage, borrowed presumablyfromthe Mozarabic mass,
appears also in the Maundy
Thursday Illatio (or Preface) of the Gallican Missale Gothicum,xxviii,PL., LXXII, 266; ed.
H. M. Bannister (Henry Bradshaw Society,LII; London 1917), 63 f. It does not seem
likely
thatthe Mozarabic mass was derivedfromthe Gallican, whichfollowsthe textof
Augustineless
closely than the Hispanic mass; see, for all that, Marcel Havard, "Centonisationspatristiques
dans les formulesliturgiques,"in F. Cabrol, Les
origines liturgiques (Paris, 1906), 287 ff
(cf. 246 ff), who reproduces the three texts (Augustine, Mozarabic, Gallican) in parallel.
However, it has not been noticed that Fulgentius' sermonshave a few additional clauses in
commonwith the Gallican mass which the Mozarabic has not.
Fulgentius XXVI Missale Gothicum

(col. 893C) (col. 266)
.tremore concussi (discipuli) contra- Turbatur Petrus cernens exemplum tantae
anti-Arianism finallymoulded Rome,78would be difficult to assess. How-
ever,evenin so peripherala matteras thelavatiopedumtheRomanattitude
was extremely unyieldingthroughout the Middle Ages.
It is true,of course,thatBernardof Clairvauxcalled theablutiopedum,
whenhe discussedit togetherwithBaptismand Communionin a Maundy
Thursdaysermon,a "sacrament."But he used thistermin the sense of a
"sacramental,"that is, a holy action not reckonedamong the sacraments
properas, e.g., a king'sconsecration.The Mandatumwas to him a sacra-
mentalinstitutedto wash offthe daily venial sins,a "sign,"a symbolof
humilityand charity,but definitely nota ritualactionpreparatoryto Com-
munion.7" Similararguments werebroughtforthby Bernard'scontemporary
Ernaud,Abbotof Bonneval.8oErnaud clearlydefinesthe lavingas a sacra-
mental,and not as a sacrament,and in additionto thathe betrayscertain
confusions whichmusthave been verycommonin his times,and forwhich
he cannotbe held responsible.It was a minormatterthathe deviatedfrom
Augustinein thathe held thatthe Institution oftheEucharistprecededthe
dicere non audebant.Cecideratsuper cos humilitatisin rege tantaemaiestatis;trem-
cuiusdamformidolosa sarcina:quia mundi escitpavenshumanitas, quia ad eiusvestigia
dynasta ad serviliadignatusse inclinare sese inclinare
dignaturDivinitas.
vestigia.
In additionto the italicizedwords,the passageshave in commonthe tremor(tremescit)of
the disciples,fromwhichFulgentiusproceedsto mentionmundidynastawherethe Missale
Gothicumhas rextantaemaiestatis.See further Fulgentius, XXIV, 891B, and XXVI, 894A:
grandemysterium; o carum mysterium (also XXV, 892A: O stupendum miraculum! 0 grande
and
spectaculum!), compare MissaleGothicum: 0 admirabile sacramentum, grandemysterium!
Here theGothicum seemsto have used Augustine, In Joannem, LVII, c. 2, PL., XXXV,1790,
who (withreference to the Songof Songs) likewiseexclaims:O admirabilesacramentum! o
grandemysterium! That Augustine was thesourceof boththesermonand theGallicanmass,
goes withoutsaying.However,thereare certaininterrelations (and theremay be more)
betweenthesermonand the Missalewhichit mightbe worthwhileto investigate. Also,the
perpetualcomparisons of thepedilaviumwiththelavingof infants and withbaptism,despite
a definitelyanti-baptismal interpretationof the Feet-washing, mightsuggestforthe sermon
surroundings in whichthebaptismalFeet-washing was stillpracticed.
78See theexcellent sketchby J.A. Jungmann, "Die Abwehrdes germanischen Arianismus
und der Umbruchder religi6senKulturdes friihenMittelalters," ZeitschriftfiUrkatholische
Theologie, LXIX (1947), 36-99; but nothingcomparable has been written on the influence
whichanti-Donatism or its Abwehrexercisedon the WesternChurch- a centralthemein
RudolphSohm'sDas altkatholische Kirchenrecht und das DekretGratians(Leipzig, 1918).
Actually,the fearof any kindof re-baptism was not unreasonable.The Anabaptists of the
sixteenth as
century, opposed to the Lutherans, clung to the Feet-washing as "a sacrament
instituted and ordainedby Christ,"whereasto the Lutheransit appeared as griiulicher
papistischerUnfug;cf. H. A. Daniel, Codex liturgicusecclesiae Lutheranae,II (Leipzig,
1848), 38 and 424; below,n. 160.
SBernard of Clairvaux,In Coena Domini: Sermode baptismo,sacramentoaltariset
ablutionepedum(esp. cc. 3-4), PL., CLXXXIII, 271 ff.
" Ernaud of Bonneval,De cardinalibusoperibusChristi,c. 7 ("De ablutionepedum"),
PL., CLXXXIX,1650-1653.
Feet-washing,whereasAugustinetaughtthatthe lavingtookplace before
themeal properstarted.81Ernaudmaysimplyhave followedthechronology
establishedby the Romanprayerat Communionon Holy Thursday:"The
Lord Jesus,afterhe had supped with his disciples,washed theirfeet."82
Ernaud goes muchfurther, of course,whenhe assertsthatJudasno longer
was presentat the Feet-washingbecause he had leftthe Upper Chamber
afterreceivingthesop - a scenewhichhe, likescoresofminiaturists, places
chronologicallybeforethe pedilavium,so thatfinallythe Biblia pauperum
likewisereversedthe orderof Genesis 18:4-10 and claimedthatAbraham
washed the feetof his angelicvisitorsafterthe meal.83Here again Ernaud
disregardsAugustine,who strongly emphasizedthatevenJudaswas washed
althoughthe Masterknewthatthisdisciplewould betrayhim;84 and in the
EasternChurchthe liturgicalchantsvoice the lamentthatJudasbetrayed
ChristalthoughhisLord had humbledhimselfto washthedisloyal
disciple's
feet."8Ernaud,however,musthave representedan opinionwidelydiffused
'8 Ernaud (loc. cit.) beginshis sermonwiththe words: lam sacramentacorporissui apostolis
Dominusdistribuerat,iam exieratJudas,cum repentede mensasurgenslinteose praecinxit,
et ad genua Petri,lavaturuspedes eius, ipse genibusflexisDominusservo consummatae
humilitatisobtulitfamulatum.See above, n. 14, forPetrus and
Judas.
8"DominusJesus,postquamcoenavitcum discipulissuis,lavit pedes eorum,et ait illis:
'Scitis quid fecerimvobis. . .'. This Communion
prayer is based on John 13:12 where the
text,however,reads: 'Postquam ergo lavit pedes eorum . . . dixiteis: Scitis . . .'. The textof
the prayeris of considerable age, since it is found in the Liber
antiphonariusthe oldest manu-
script of which is the Compiegne Codex writtenunder Charles the Bald (PL., LXXXVIII,
675CD); see also, for the transmissionof the prayer in later times, Michel Andrieu, Le
PontificalRomain au moyen-dge(Studi e Testi, 86; Vatican, 1938), I, 226, also 228 and 233.
' See the
place quoted above, n. 81, as well as Ernaud's specificremark (col. 1653C):
An mensaetuae participationem Judasproditorest admissus;sed ab hoc lavacrosalutari
exclusus,lavariin finenonpotuit,quia Apostolatus
sui honorem
detestabili foedavit.
cupiditate
See, forthe Biblia pauperum,above, n. 23.
8 Augustine,In Joannem,LV, c. 6, PL., XXXV, 1786 f: . . . ut hoc quoque ad maximum
cumulumhumilitatis
accederet,quod etiamilli nondedignatusest pedes lavare,cuiusmanus
iam praevidebat in scelere. But Augustine (ibid., LXII, c. 3, col.
1802) denies the communion
to Judas, whereas Ernaud holds the
opposite view (see preceding note). It is remarkable
thoughthat the early sacramentariesdo not deny the Judas communion.In the Preface of the
Maundy Thursday Mass in the Gelasian Sacramentary,ed. H. A. Wilson (Oxford, 1894), 73,
the participationof Judas is an essential
point: Pascit igiturmitis Deus barbarumJudas, et
sustinet in mensam crudelem convivam, donec se suo
laqueo perderet. . . See also Alban
Dold and Leo Eizenh6fer,Das Prager Sakramentar(Texte und Arbeitender Erzabtei
1. Abt., Heft 38-42; Beuron, 1949), 49*, as well as other Gelasiana. The Beuron,
Gregorianumalso
has this Preface, though slightlyattenuated: Patitur mitis Deus immitem
Judam, et sustinet
pius crudelemconvivam,qui meritolaqueo suo periturus
erat. . . Cf. The GregorianSacra-
mentaryunder Charles the Great, ed. Wilson (Bradshaw Society, XLIX; London, 1915);
also PL., LXXVIII, 82. See nextnote.
SSee, e.g., Triodion (Rome, 1879), 669, the Kathisma:
HIoo~ TE Tpdorog, 'Iov8a, 7rpo80dr'Tq
TOV .a . /j
YWOT^PO9 Ep-YuuTaO; Uvl''8Et7rv'uag EKELVOLK r0 "T77 a'TW)raTO; tl7
TparEfrv/ 7T(OV cXWhv
O
TI/ 7rosa , ToV UO atvqwv
7rotdavayaO^ov"p ylvovlTheserhetorical questions
8
are implied already in Ephrem,

o"PeipeCoEv;
Sermo III in hebdomadam sanctam,ed.
Lamy, I, 400 and 408:
in the West,forin factwe oftenfindin westernimagerythatonlyeleven
apostleswerepresentat the Mandatum.86
The attitudeof Rome was certainlyimportant; but Rome,especiallyin
the earlyMiddle Ages, was not yet identicalwith the West, and Roman
liturgicalcustomswere notyetthoseof all the WesternChurchesin many
ofwhich,theFrankishincluded,a definitely non-Romanstratumremained
vigorousformanycenturies.In a Carolingiancatechismof the ninthcen-
tury,thecatechumenasks: "Whyare thoserebornin thefontofbaptismled
to the table of the Lord?" And he receivestheanswer:
To confirmin them all the sacraments of Christianity. . . . For also the Lord, after
laving the feetof the apostles,handed to themthe mysteriesof his Body and Blood." 87
In thesamecentury, thePseudo-Isidorian
Decretalswerecomposedin Gaul.
One ofthefalsedecretals,theso-calledSecond LetterofPope Fabian (240-
253), containsa longparagraphabout the consecrationof chrismon Holy
Thursday:thePope is made to remarkthatnotonlywas thepreparationof
the holy oils institutedon Maundy Thursday,but also communionand
baptism- "forthe washingof our feetsignifiesbaptism."88 FromPseudo-
Isidorusthatpassage wanderedto othercollectionsof canonlaw. Bonizo of
Etenimquamvisagnosceretpravameius mentem,inclinavit se ut lavaretei pedes, sed cor
illiusnonfuitablutus.See Lamy,I, 423, n. 1, on the questionof theJudascommunion. It is
noteworthy that theseideas are foundalso in a MaundyThursdayantiphon of the Beneventan
rite:Lavi pedestuos,discipule;fecite testemsacramenti mei.Manducastipanemmeum;et tu
quare sine causa sitistisanguinemmeum?See the BeneventanGradual,in Paleographie
musicale,XV (1931), 288, wherethe learnededitoradds: "Expressionbien hardie,et qui
sembleassez peu romained'inspiration. Spontandment on pense a un originalgrec."He is
reminded ofthetoneoftheImproperia; buttheprototype is foundin Ephrem.It is significant
forthe non-Romanclimatethat this antiphonhas the rubric:Deinde responsorium Am-
brosianum, although it is notfoundin theMilaneseservicebooksthatwe know.
'
See, e.g., the Salzburg,Stiftsbibliothek Antiphonal(MS. a. XII. 7, fol. 298), of the
middleof thetwelfth century, reproduced by KarlLind,Ein Antiphonarium mitBildschmuck
. . imStifteSt.Peterzu Salzburg(Vienna,1870), pl. x,and p. 15; ortheNew York,Morgan
Library,PierpontMS. 521; cf.M. R. James,"FourLeaves of an EnglishPsalter,"WalpoleSo-
cietyAnnual,XXV (1936-37), pl. vi. Rathersignificant forthelaterstyleis Duccio'sRetableat
Siena,in the CathedralMuseum(Opera del Duomo), of 1308-1311 (see fig.40). See also
below,n. 121, forthe Berninireliefin the CathedraPetri(fig.39). If the MozarabicLiber
ordinum, ed. M. Ferotin(Monumentaecclesiaeliturgica, V; Paris,1904), 190, line 24 (cf.
n. 2), says: ". .. exiendum ad vigintiduos pedes; et accedendum est ad cenam post pedes
lavatos . .. ," there can be no doubt that only eleven apostles were laved (Judas not being
present).
8 See A. Wilmart,"Une catichosebaptismaledu IX' siecle,"Revue benedictine, LVII
(1947), 196-200,? 17: Quarerenati mox et
fontebaptismatis corporis sanguinis domini sacra-
mentapercipiunt? in eis sacramenta
Resp. Ob hoc videlicetut omniachristianitatis firmentur.
Nam et salvator,postquamlavitpedesapostolorum [see above,n. 82], tradiditeis sui corporis
et sanguinismisteria.
" P. Hinschius,DecretalesPseudo-Isidorianae et capitulaAngilramni(Leipzig, 1863),
160 f,theletter"AdomnesHorientales episcopos": illodie dominuslesus,postquamcoenavit
In
(see above,n. 82) cumdiscipulissuiset pedeseorumlavit,sicuta sanctisapostolispraedeces-
Sutri,forexample,who wroteat the end of the eleventhcentury,stillre-
peated thatpassage and assertedthat"afterthe lavingof the feet of St.
Peter and the otherapostles,the sacramentof Body and Blood was dis-
pensed."8" It is true,thewholepassage,includingtheinterpretation of the
as
pedilavium baptism,may still
be found in for
liturgicalwritings, example,
in the somewhatold-fashioned Ordo Lateranensisof Bernardof Porto (ca.
1150).90 On thewhole,however,it maybe said thatby the timeof Bonizo
the canonistshad begun to omit the baptismalpassage fromthe second
Fabian letter,even thoughtheletteritselfwas quoted regularlyon account
of theconfection of chrismon Holy Thursday;and in thisconnectionit was
incorporated also intotheRomanBreviary."9 However,theunderlying idea
of theclause equatingtheMandatumwithbaptismwas probablyno longer
understood,since it deviatedtoo strongly fromthe Roman customswhich
became thebindingnormin theage oftheChurchReform.At anyrate,the
baptismalphrasein the Fabian letterno longeris foundeitherin Ivo of
Chartresor in Gratian'sDecretum,92 althoughboth authorsstillquote the
letteritself.Therewiththe idea of the baptismalvalues of the pedilavium
was lostto thejuristswho glossedtheDecretum,and likewiseit strayedout
ofthesightofthetheologians.
This does notimplythatthechronology of eventspropagatedunderthe
influenceof Roman customswas uniformly accepted. The Egyptianmedi-
tationabout the ordinesChristi,accordingto which Christas a deacon
soresnostriacceperuntnobisquereliquerunt,
crismaconficere
docuit;ipsa enimlavatiopedum
nostrorumsignificat
baptismum, quandosancticrismatis
unctioneperficituratque confirmatur.
Dr. Schafer Williams, in Washington,was kind
enough to call my attentionto this passage.
For the letterof Fabian with regard to the confectionof the
holy oils, see also Goar, Eucho-
logion, 643; L. Petit,"Du pouvoir de consacrerle Saint Chreme,"rchos d'Orient,III (1899-
1900), 4; Philipp Hofmeister,Die heiligenOle (above, n. 45), 45.
"
Bonizo, Liber de vita Christiana,II, c. 52, ed. E. Perels (Berlin, 1930), 60: In cena
Domini antiqua traditionea sanctis patribusaccepimus reconciliari
specialiterdebere
ideo quia eo die sacramentorum,
penitentes, baptismiscilicetet sanguinisDomini,apostolisa
domino Christo donata fuit traditio.Ibid., II, c. 55,
p. 62: [On this day the consecrationof
the chrismand the reconciliationof the penitents]
quia ultimopascha cum discipuliscelebrato
postPetriceterorumque discipulorum pedumlavationem, ut nobisevangelicanarrathystoria,
iterumChristum scimusrecubuisseet sacramentasui corporiset sanguiniset ordinemcele-
brandiapostolistradidisse
.
" Cf.Bernhardi Cardinaliset Lateranensis OrdoOfficiorum
ecclesiaeprioris ecclesiaeLater-
anensis, c. 126, ed. Ludwig Fischer (Historische Forschungenund Quellen, 2-3; Munich and
Freising,1916), 49 f.
1 Breviarium Romanum, January 20th, "SS. Fabiani et Sebastiana": Idem statuit, ut
quotannisferiaquintain Coena Domini,veterecombusto,
chrismarenovatur.
Cf. Hofmeister,
Die heiligenOle, 45.
9"Ivo of Chartres,Decretum, II, 73, PL., CLXI, 176; for Gratian,see c. 18, D.3, de con-
secratione,ed. E. Friedberg,Corpus Iuris Canonici, I (Leipzig, 1879), 1357 (with n. 173 for
the older canonical collections).
washed thefeetof theapostlesbeforehe instituted as a priestor bishopthe
Sacramentof the Altar,was translatedat an earlytimeintoLatin - prob-
ably in the sixthcentury.The translationapparentlywas made in Rome,
but it was the Irish- withtheirstrangepreferenceforthingsEgyptian-
who spread the storyin the West, especiallyon the fringesof the Roman
Patriarchate."It appears in the so-calledHibernensis(the Irishcollection
of canons of the seventhcentury)and in the Bobbio Missal as well as in
the MalalianusChronicleof the eighthcenturyand in St. Gall manuscripts
oftheninth.In thetwelfth centuryitspopularityrose.The storyis reported
by Ivo of Chartresand Honoriusof Autun,by the NormanAnonymous,
Stephenof Baug6, Hugh of St. Victor,and finallyby Peter the Lombard;
and it is foundin manuscriptsfromMonte Cassino and Cluny,fromSt.
Martialand Paris, Chartresand Troyes,and fromvariousotherplaces."4
In short,throughthatstoryof the Egyptianmonkssome recollectionre-
mained alive of the old traditionaccordingto which the laving was per-
formedin preparationof the Last Supper.
All that,however,is of minorimportance.What mattershere is thatin
the earlyMiddle Ages the non-RomanChurchesof theWest practicedthe
pedilaviumas partofthebaptismalriteitself:thefeetoftheneophytewere
washed. In Spain and in Africathisritewas eliminatedby the fourthand
fifth In the IrishChurchthebaptismalFeet-washingwas prac-
centuries.95
ticed as late as the ninthcentury,when it is mentionedby the Stowe
Missal."9A Ravennainscription suggeststhatthisritewas not unknownin
" Wilmart, "Les ordresdu Christ"(above,n. 43), has carefully inspectedthetextsreferred

to in thisparagraph, notall ofwhich,however, containthepassageon thepedilavium.
" Kircheund Staat in
The NormanAnonymous escaped Wilmart;see HeinrichBAhmer,
England und in der Normandie im XI. und XII. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1899), 457: De
canonibuset decretis,c. 7, wheretheAnonymous combinesthe functions of Christwiththe
"Ordination oftheApostles";similarly TractateXIX, ed. Bahmer,473 f; see also 441, and,for
a numberof relevantobservations, GeorgeH. Williams,The NormanAnonymous of 1100
A.D. (HarvardTheologicalStudies,XVIII; Cambridge, Mass., 1951), 85 f.
" For Spain,see canon48 oftheSynodofElvira (303 or 305), ed. H. T. Bruns,Canones
apostolorum et conciliorum, II (Berlin,1839), 8: Neque pedes eorum [qui baptizantur]
lavandisunta sacerdotibus vel [otherreading:sed] clericis.See, on thatcanon,F. J.Dolger,
"Die Miinzeim Taufbecken," Antikeund Christentum, III (1932), 1 ff,who unfortunately
does not seem to havewritten the studyon thebaptismalFeet-washing whichhe had planned.
The polemicsof the Africanbishops(above, nos. 76, 77) would suggestthata baptismal
LavingoftheFeet was practicedin Africa;see also Duncan,Aphraates, 74.
" The Stowe Missal,ed. G. F. Warner(BradshawSociety,XXXII; London,1915), 32;
see also F. E. Warren,The Liturgyand Ritualof the CelticChurch(Oxford,1881), 217.
Aboutthesequenceof eventsthereis no doubt;therubricTunc lavanturpedes eius accepto
linteois followedby a set of antiphons:Corpuset Sanguisdomininostriiesu christisittibiin
vitamaeternam.Amen.
theChurchof theformer Exarchateeither."And it was generallyobserved
overa longperiodin theChurchesofGaul and Milan.Althoughthereis no
directevidenceextantthatthe East ever practiceda baptismalLaving of
the Feet, it is difficultto imaginethatall the non-RomanChurchesof the
West shouldhave adopted thatritualwithoutthe stimulusof ideas which
were commonin Syriaand not unknownto the otherEasternChurches."
The practiceoftheGallicanChurchis well known,and theplaces refer-
ringto the baptismalriteAd pedes lavandosin the Missale Gothicum,the
Gallicanumvetus,and theBobbiensehave oftenbeen collected.99 Additional
evidence can be gleaned easily fromthe answersof Frankishbishops to
Charlemagne'sinquiry concerningbaptism.'00The ceremonyitself,the
washingofthefeetoftheneo-baptizedafterhe had leftthefontand donned
hiswhitegarment, is ofminorinterest here- withone exception:According
to all the Gallican servicebooks the celebrant,afterhaving
accomplished
the washing,speaks the formulaEgo tibi lavo pedes.'0' This formulacor-
respondswith that spoken at the accomplishments of otherholy actions
(Ego te baptizo,Ego te absolvo etc.), and it may suggestwhat kind of
liturgicalrank was attributed to the baptismalLaving ofthe Feet.'02
By farthe mostinteresting evidence,however,comesfromMilan. The
ritualitselfwas similarto thatof Gaul, thoughit was somewhatmoreelab-
orate.The celebrant,or thebishopifhe himself therites,notonly
performed
kissedthefootof the neo-baptizedafterthe
laving,but also (accordingto
a later Milanese Order) placed on his head threetimesthe heel of the
neophyte'sfoot- a strangevarietyof sacred calcatiocolli,or rathera ges-
" The
Feet-washing is referredto in the baptistryof S. Giovanni in Fonte, where an
inscriptionbeneath a mosaic showingthe Baptism of Christreads:
Ubi deposuitIhs vestimentasua et misitaquam
In pelvim,coepit lavare pedes discipulorumsuorum.
Duncan, Aphraates,74 f.
"
Duncan, Aphraates,71, is certainlycorrectwhen he refutesthe
generallyaccepted view
(cf. L. Duchesne, ChristianWorship [5th ed., London,
1931], 326) accordingto which "there
was in the Orientno trace of a
washing of feetin connectionwith baptism."There is, however,
no evidence that a washing of the feet
" See actuallybelonged to baptismalrites.
Leclercq, DACL., VIII: 2, col. 2007-9; Malvy, Dict. theol. cath., IX, 17; Quasten,
Monumenta 128,n. 1; Duncan,Aphraates,
eucharistica, 75.
1'See F. Wiegand, ErzbischofOdilbertvon Mailand iiber die Taufe (Studien zur
Geschichte der Theologie und der Kirche, IV: 1;
Leipzig, 1899), 63 ff;Odilbert's work was
submittedto Charlemagnein answerto the
emperor'sinquiryof 812 to which onlynine answers
were knownuntilJ. M. Hanssens, "Deux documents
carolingienssur le bapt&me,"Ephemerides
liturgicae,XLI (1927), 69 ff,added a tenthfroman Orl6ans manuscript.See also A.
Analecta Reginensia (Studi e Testi, 59; Vatican, 1933), Wilmart,
154, n. 3, who mentionsseventeen
such answers,thoughadmittingthat
"plusieurssont irreelles."
1o See PL., LXXII, 275C, 370A, 502D.
Other actions,to be sure, are introducedin a similarfashion: Perungo te chrismasancti-

1o for
tatis, example, precedes the laving formulain the Missale Gothicum; PL., LXXII, 275C.
tureof caput submittere quasi deo praesenti,"incliningthehead underthe
quasi-presentGod," of which otherexamplesare known."03What matters
here is that Ambroseof Milan himself,at varioustimes,interpretedthe
meaningof the baptismalFeet-washing,and thathis remarksshed all the
lightwe may desire on our presentproblem."'0 Ambrose,too, considered
the lavingabove all an act of humilityand charity;but he saw more in it
than that.He held thatChristnot only humiliatedhimselfby givingthe
exampleof mutuallove,but thathe also washed the venenaserpentis,the
"poisonsof the snake,"fromhis disciplesby cleansingthem.'05He further
comparedthe reluctanceof Peterto be laved by his Masterwiththereluc-
tance of Johnthe Baptistto performthe lavingin JordanforChristand
therebyestablishedan interrelation betweenthe lavingon Epiphanyand
the lavingon MaundyThursday.l"'FinallyAmbrose,while defendingthe
baptismalessence of the Feet-washing,enlargedupon the differences pre-
vailingbetweentheliturgicaluses of Rome and Milan.
We know verywell that this custom [of washingthe feet at baptism] is not observed
by the Roman Church whose type and formin all otherrespectswe follow; but this
rite of feet-washingRome has not. Perhaps Rome avoided [its introduction]on ac-
countof the crowds.Nonetheless,thereare thosewho dare excuse [thatomission]and
maintainthatthe laving shall be performednot at the Mystery,not at Baptism,not at
the Regeneration,because the washing of the feet should be offeredonly,as it were,
to a guest.107
0"'Stiefenhofer, "Liturgische Fusswaschung"(above, n. 13), 327, sumsup the material

fromBeroldus,ed. M. Magistretti, Beroldussive EcclesiaeAmbrosianae Mediolanensis kalen-
dariumet ordinessaec. XII (Milan,1894); inaccessible to me was JosephVisconti, De antiquis
baptismiritibuset caeremoniis (presumably in his Observationes ecclesiasticae[Milan,1615-
1626]), Lib. II, c. 17-20,wheretheritesas mentioned abovearedescribed.On HolySaturday,
theArchbishop of Milanhimself baptizesthreeboys,namingthemPeter,Paul,and John(see,
fora similarpracticein Rome,M. Andrieu,Le Pontifical romainau moyen-dge, I [Vatican
City,1938], 245, with n. 24), and washes theirfeet afterthe fashiondescribed. See, forcaput
submittere, F. J. D61ger,Sol Salutis (Liturgiegeschichtliche Forschungen, 4-5; 2nd ed.
Munster,1925), 7 ff.
o The passagesare collectedby Quasten,Monumentaeucharistica, 128, n. 1. J. Huhn,
Die Bedeutungdes WortesSacramentum bei dem Kirchenvater Ambrosius(Fulda, 1928),
33-43 (inaccessibleto me), seemsto holdthatAmbrosedefendedthepedilaviumas a "sacra-
mental,"and notas a "sacrament"; see, however,the reviewof Karl Adam,in Theologische
Quartalschrift, CX (1929), 177-179,who, on the contrary, stressesvigorously its character
as a sacrament. Cf. Duncan,Aphraates, 72 ff;also above,n. 85, forthe BeneventanGradual:
Lavi pedes tuos, discipule;feci te testemsacramentimei, and the rubricResponsorium
Ambrosianum.
1"oAmbrose, De Sacramentis, III, 1, 7, Quasten,p. 153: Lavas ergopedes,ut lavesvenena
serpentis;also In Psalmum48, n. 8: Unde dominusdiscipulispedes lavit,ut lavaretvenena
serpentis; PL., XIV, 1215A;Quasten,128, n. 1. The metaphor was verycommonbothin the
East and theWest.
o00See above, n. 16.
De Sacramentis,
107
quod ecclesiaRomanahanc
III, 1, 5, ed. Quasten,152: Non ignoramus
consuetudinemnon habeat,cuiustypumin omnibussequimuret formam;hanc tamencon-
It will not be superfluousto add the remarkhere thateven the ordinary
lavatiopedumof theclericson MaundyThursdayis notattestedto in Rome
priorto the twelfthor thirteenthcentury;108 and we may wonderwhether
Augustine'sremarkabout the attitudeof some churcheswhich foundit
"safer"not to introducethe layvingat all, was not made in referenceto
Rome.lo' What SaintAmbrosestressed, however,was thedifference
between
theMilanesesacramentalconceptofthelavingand theRomancharitableor
hospitableconceptof thatceremony.Nor was Ambrosetheman to content
himselfwithmerehints.He was, in fact,extraordinarily outspoken,as he
continued:
One thing is humility,another is sanctification.Now listen why [the laving] is a
mysteryand a sanctification: "Unless I wash thyfeet,thou wilthave no partwithme."
This I say not to rebukeothers,but to recommendmy own way of officiating. In every
respect I am desirous to follow the Roman Church. Yet, we too are men having our
senses. Hence, what is retainedmore correctlyin otherplaces, that more correctlywe
too shall retain."1
Those werestrongwordsdirectedagainstRomeand Romanusage,and not

withoutironyAmbroseconcludedhis diatribe,saying:
WE followthe Apostle Peterhimself.WE cling to his devotion.What says the Roman
Churchnow? For to us the ApostlePeterhimselfis the authorof our assertion,he who
was a priestof the Roman Church.Peterhimselfsaid: "Lord, notmyfeetonly,but also
myhandsandmyhead"- nonsolumpedes,sed etiammanuset caput.
AndAmbrose
added:
Notice the faith.What firsthe objected to, was a matterof his
humility;what after-
wards he offered,was a matterof his devotionand faith."'
suetudinem nonhabet,ut pedes lavet.Vide ergo,forteproptermultitudinem declinavit.Sunt

tamen,qui dicant et excusareconentur,quia hoc non in mysterio faciendumest, non in
baptismate, nonin regeneratione,sed quasi hospitipedeslavandisint.
See Ordo RomanusX, c. 12, PL., LXXVIII, 1013A; accordingto the new edition
1o8 by
Andrieu,Pontifical romain,II, 464 and 552 (PontificaleRomanaeCuriae,saec. XIII, Ordo
XLII, c. 31), theOrdoX doesnotseemto antedatethethirteenth century. See alsoEisenhofer,
Liturgik, II, 523, n. 77.
See above, n. 72.
10
1oDe Sacramentis,III, 1, 5, Quasten,152,23 ff:Aliudesthumilitatis, aliudsanctificationis.

Denique audi, quia mysterium est et sanctificatio:
'Nisilaverotibipedes,nonhabebismecum
partem.'Hoc ideo dico, non quod alios reprehendam, sed mea officiaipse commendem. In
omnibuscupiosequi ecclesiamRomanam;sed tamenet nos hominessensumhabemus;ideo,
quod alibi rectiusservatur,et nos rectiuscustodimus. Strangelyenoughthispassage served
Pope NicholasII, in a letterto the Milanese,as proofof Ambrose'sconformity withRome:
Unde et ipse S. Ambrosius se in omnibus sequi magistramsanctam Romanam
profitetur
ecclesiam- a passage incorporated
into Gratian'sDecretum,c. 1, D.XXII, ed.
Friedberg,
I, 73 (withn. 3).
"' De Sacramentis,III, 1, 6, Quasten, 152, 30
if: Ipsum sequimur apostolum Petrum,
ipsiusinhaeremus
devotioni.Ad hoc ecclesiaRomanaquid respondet? Utiqueipse auctorest
nobishuiusadsertionis
Petrusapostolus,qui sacerdosfuitecclesiaeRomanae.Ipse Petrusait:
The difference betweentheMilanesesacramentaland theRomancharitable
conceptsof thepedilaviummaybe reducedto a different emphasislaid on
versiclesof the FourthGospel. Ambrose,conceivingof the Feet-
different
washingas a "mystery" and baptismal"sanctification,"stressedthe (so to
speak) positive versicles: the hidden promise contained in the words
"UnlessI wash thyfeet,thouwilthave no partwithme,"and Peter'sdevo-
tion and faith- as distinguishedfromhis humility 112 - when he said:
"Lord, not my feetonly,but also my hands and my head." Contrariwise,

Rome,seeingin the ceremonyonlythe expressionof humilityand charity,
stressedthe (so to speak) negativeversiclesin whichPeterremonstrated:
"Dost thouwash myfeet?"and "Thou shaltneverwash myfeet."Those are
twodifferent conceptsofwhichAmbroseon the one hand and theAfricans
on theotherare thechiefexponents.
In whateverfashionone maywishto explaintheoriginofthisdichotomy,
aboutitsexistencetherecan be no doubt,especiallysinceourarchaeological
and iconographicevidencestrikingly supportsand illustratesthe dual con-
cept. This, of course would not implythat the antithesisof Roman and
Milaneseritescan be held responsibleforthediffering artisticconcepts,but
ratherthatbothartand liturgyreflectthesame conceptualdifference.
IV
In the Rossano Codex (fig. 17a) Peteris shownas he triesto keep his
Master fromhumiliatinghimself,and the disciple's beseeching gesture
seemsto say: "Dost thouwash myfeet?"This versionis foundsporadically
in theEast, in Byzantiumas well as in Syria.The LeningradLectionary, for
the of
example,shows mostimpressively gesture supremeembarrassment
and amazementon thepart of Peter (fig.31).113 We finda similargesture
also in a Syrianminiatureof the twelfthor thirteenth century(fig.32),114
although here the objectionsof Peter are less reproachfulthan theyare
categorical,as if he were saying: "Thou shalt neverwash my feet."This
gestureof amazementand reproachcoupledwithremonstrance and resist-
ance is iconographically veryold. In fact,it goes back to the veryfirst
representations oftheFeet-washingthatwe know:toa groupofearlyChris-
'Domine, non solum pedes, sed etiam manus et caput.' Vide fidem. Quod ante excusavit,
humilitatis
fuit;quod posteaobtulit, et fidei.
devotionis
"~ Above, n. 111; also 110: aliud . . . humilitatis,aliud sanctificationis.
113Leningrad, Public Library, MS. gr. 21, fol. 6'; photograph by courtesyof Professor
Weitzmann. See also Charles Rufus Morey, "Notes on East ChristianMiniatures,"Art Bul-
letin,XI (1929), fig. 96, p. 83 f. For other instances of that gesture in the East, see, e.g.,
Venice, San Giorgio dei Greci, Lectionary,fol. 274'.
"' Berlin,Staatsbibl. MS. Sachau, 304, fol. 89r.
tian sarcophagiof the fourthand fifthcenturies(figs.33, 34)."11 In those
sculptures,whichstillbreathethemoderationof late classicalworksof art,
the emotionsare tempered.Christ,humiliatedbeforethe enthronedPilate,
is counter-balanced by the Feet-washingChristhumiliating himselfbefore
the enthroneddisciple who will become the princepsapostolorum.The
latter'sgestureis one ofquietremonstrance, whichstillsurvivesin thetenth-
centuryivorycasketfromQuedlinburg(fig.35), as well as in the Gospels
ofEmperorHenryII (fig.36),"11 bothworksof art of the Ottonianperiod.
The gesturecame to the BritishIsles withthe Gospels of Saint Augustine
(seventhcentury),at the latest;117 and it is foundin the twelfth-century
PsalterfromSt. Swithin'sPrioryat Winchester(fig.37),"" whichstillre-
flectstheformercalmnessand balance of emotions.A centurylater,Peter's
reproachfulresistancewill be expressedmore vehemently;forbeforethe
thirteenth centuryone would hardlyexpectthe versicle"Dost thou wash
myfeet?"to be represented so drastically
as in thealtarfrontalfromCopen-
hagen,wherethe bewilderedapostlepointshis rightindexfingerat Christ
(fig.
38).119
MonsignoreWilpertwas inclinedto call thisgestureof humbleremon-
stranceand deprecationthe"Romangesture."12oIndeed, Romanit maybe
called, especiallywhen we rememberSt. Ambrose'santithesis:"One thing
is humility, anotheris sanctification."
For thoserepresentationsexpressthe
humility of boththelavatorand thelavatus,but theydo notreflecttheidea
of sanctification.And Romanit may be called foryet anotherreason: that
gestureis displayedin themostprominent place of theRomanworld,in the
CathedraPetriitself,at St. Peter'sin Rome,wherethethroneof thePrince
of Apostlesin its Berniniencasementhas its place in the centerof the
tribuna.Here,on one ofthebronzeside panels oftheseat
(fig.39), we find
Bernini'sreliefof the
Feet-washing.'21He showsthefamiliargestureof the
"1 J. Wilpert, I sarcofagi cristianiantichi, I (Rome, 1929-36), pl. xii, fig. 5 (Crypt of
St. Peter's in Rome) and fig.4 (Arles, Mus. Lapidaire).
.. Die Elfenbeinskulpturen
A. Goldschmidt, aus der Zeit der karolingischen
und otto-
nischen Kaiser, I (Berlin, 1914),
pl. LXII, fig. 147b; and Goldschmidt,German Illumination,
II (New York,n.d.), pl. 37 (Munich, Staatsbibliothek,Clm. 4452, fol. 105').
1 Francis Wormald, The Miniaturesin the Gospels of St. Augustine,Corpus ChristiCol-
lege MS. 286 (Cambridge, 1954), pl. I (cf. pl. 5), and p. 12 (with n. 1).
" Brit.
Mus., Cotton Nero C. IV, fol. 20r; see G. F. Warner, ReproductionsfromIllumi-
nated Manuscriptsin the BritishMuseum, III (London, 1910-28),
pl. vii.
"1 Poul Norlund, Gyldne altre: jysk metalkunstfra valdemarstiden(Copenhagen, 1926),
fig. 151 B.
'" Wilpert,Die r6mischenMosaiken und Malereien (Freiburg, 1916), p. 853.
"' Roberto Battaglia, La cattedra Berninianadi
San Pietro (Rome, 1943), pl. xxv (facing
p. 120) and pp. 106 f. See, forthe reductionto eleven apostles, above, n. 86, and the Sienese
panel of the earlyfourteenthcentury(fig.40).
disciplein an unfamiliar fashion:an almostterrified Peterremonstrates not

so much,it would seem,to the lavingitselfas to the passionatebaccio di
piede which,thoughnotmentionedin theGospel,has been takenoverfrom
boththebaptismallavingand thethencustomary MaundyThursdayritual
as influenced perhapsby monastic practice. The bearded apostleslikewise
are terrified or stunned,while the beardless youngestof the remaining
elevendisciples(Judasis absent),beingtheonlyone whoseeyespotentially
meettheMaster's,glidespast - almostfloats- behindSt. Peter,witha non-
chalantgestureofhis righthand.
As opposed to theRomangestureofremonstrance an iconographictype
was introducedwhich usually is called "Byzantine,"and of which our
earliestevidenceis probablythe ChludovPsalterof the ninthcentury(fig.
41).122 The characteristic featureof thattypeis the gestureof St. Peter: he
puts his righthand to his head, illustrating of coursethewords: "Not only
the feet,but also myhands and myhead." There are few variationsof this
gesturewhichactuallymay be considerablyolder than the ninthcentury,
since the masterof the ChludovPsalterwas certainlynot the firstpainter
to apply thattypewhen illustrating Psalm 50:9.123 SometimesPeterwould
onlypointat hishead,as in theBerlinGospelsor theSinai Sticherarion, both
of the thirteenth century(figs.43-44); 12' sometimeshe may mournfully
holdhis head, as in thetenth-century Gospel-bookfromPatmos(fig.42).125
The Roman"stand-off" gesture,to be sure,was notunknownin theEast -
it will sufficehere to recall the Rossanensisor the LeningradLectionary
(figs.17a; 31),126 but it is truenonethelessthatthe "hand to head" pictur-
ing of Peterremainedtypicalin Byzantineart,and in thatof the Eastern
Churchesin general: the authorof the Painter'sGuidebookfromMount
Athosmentionsthe gestureas the standardrepresentation of thatscene.127
Actually,theclingingto thatgesturecould lead to a genuinetourde force,
as in a curiousCoptic manuscriptof the thirteenth centuryin the Biblio-
theque Nationale:Peter,standing,holdshis head and awkwardlybalances
on one footwhile Christ,contraryto mostrepresentations, is seated (fig.
12" Moscow, HistoricalMuseum, Cod. 129, fol.50'.

123
See Tikkanen, "Psalter-Illustration,"(above, n. 47), 55, for Ps. 50:9, also for the
Chludov Psalter in general.
124
Berlin, Staatsbibl., MS. gr. qu. 66, fol. 314r; Sinai, MS. gr. 1216, fol. 203r, to which
ProfessorA. M. Friend kindlycalled my attention,is most peculiar because the Feet-washing
takes place in the open, and not in the Upper Chamber; notice also the figureof Judas.
12" Patmos, Libreria Monte Giovanni MS. 70, fol. 177'.
" See also above, n. 113.

127
7rj
ngtypaLKyI 7TfXvY: Das Handbuchder Malereivom BergeAthos,German
'EpeEvda
trsl.by 1855), 198 f.
G. Schifer (Trier,
45).128 To have Christseated- actuallyon a stooldecked veryimperially
witha roll-shapedcushion- and Peter standing,while the otherapostles
wait theirturnin file,mightbe meaningfulbecause it is reminiscent of
Byzantine courtceremonial. to the
According Codinus, emperor was seated
when on Maundy Thursdaytwelvewell-groomedpoor were led into his
chamberto gettheirrightfootwashed,wiped,and kissedby theemperor.'29
It is strange,however,that this usage should be reflectedin only one -
Coptic- manuscript even thoughattentionhas been called recentlyto cer-
tainsimilaritiesbetweenByzantineand Fatimidcourt
ceremonial.'3
The observationhas been made thatPeterholdinghis head sometimes
showsa face thatseemsto expresssorrow,distress,and pain; and we may
wonderwhetherthat gesturedid not originallyserve to express,purely
iconographically, real physicalpain. For indeed, Peter'sgestureseems to
have classical antecedents.'3'A warrior,probablya wounded Philoctetes,
embossedin the cheekpiece of a helmetfromMegara (fig.46), holds his
head withhis righthand, obviouslyexpressingthe pains he suffered from
128
Biblioth'que Nationale, MS. Copte 13, fol. 259'.
Codinos, De officialibus,c. 12, ed. I. Becker (Bonn, 1839), 70 f. The crucial place is
p. 70, 19 f: Kai ToVTro/JEV KaOloavTro,T70oS rpwTroTra . . .
Tr avayLwvo)KovTroKTA.
-'
The interpretationof the genetivus absolutus (Trorov eayykLov
v KaO'lavros) is difficultbecause it
might refer also to the firstof the twelve poor who entered with candles in their hands.
However, the parallelismof the one seated and the protopapas (roV'ToviuLv-
TroV8) leaves us
hardly a choice: the emperor is seated, the protopapas reads the Gospel - and who, if any
person, could be seated while the Gospel was read, but the emperor?This, at any rate, is the
interpretationof P6trides, "Lavement," %Echosd'Orient, III, 324 (Treitinger, Kaiser- und
Reichsidee, 126 f, unfortunately did not paraphrase this place). I am gratefulto Dr.
George
Stamires, of the Institute for Advanced Study, at Princeton,for giving me additional argu-
ments supportingthis interpretation, and to ProfessorR. J. H. Jenkins,of the
Universityof
London, for expressinghis opinion and for calling my attentionto the study quoted below,
n. 130.
.. See M.
Canard, "Le c6r6monial fatimiteet le c6rimonial byzantin: Essai de com-
paraison," Byzantion,XXI (1951), 355-420, who shows that there were similaritiesof cere-
monial between Fatimid Egypt and Byzantium,but admitsalso (418 ff) that these similarities
may just as well betraylittlemore than a commonorientalorigin.The question arises whether
in Coptic circles it could have been known what the
Feet-washing ceremonial was like in
Constantinople- provided that the interpretationof the Codinus passage be correct; for
Professor Milton Anastos kindly informedme that in his
opinion the genetivus absolutus
referredto the firstof the twelve poor men, and not to the
emperor.- In a Westernminiature
(Seligmann Sammlung, H. Paul and P. Graupe [Berlin, 1930], pl.
xLIv, fig. 140) Peter is
standing uprightwhile Christ performshis humble service with bended knees; but in this
picture,the ceremoniousdetails of B.N. Copte 13 are lacking.
13
Mrs. Dora Panofskywas kind enough to call my attentionto this fact, and to
place at
my disposal the iconographicmaterialcollected by her. The interrelations between the antique
medical scenes and the mediaeval ritual lavings have been noticed also
by Eitrem, "Sainte
ablution" (above, n. 14), 161, by Sudhoff(below, nos. 141, 143), and Miss Milne (see note
133).
a wound in his leg."13This maypromptus, forwhat it is worth,to inspect
the representations of medicaltreatments ofwoundsand diseasesin which
thevti7rnlp 7ro8avilTrr-p, foot-basin,oftendisplayed.
or the is
In the firstplace, we should recall that- verydifferent frommodern
customs- a footbathbelongedto thefurniture of an antique dining-room,
because banquet guestshad theirfeetwashedbeforetheylay down forthe
meal.'""On a Corinthianjar we see a servantperforming thatlowlyservice
to a diner (fig.48),13" and we may think of Plato's Symposium(175 a):
"ThenAgathon said to the servants:
'Wash Alcibiades,servants, thathe may
reclineas the thirdwithus.' " Not to mentionmanysimilarplaces in Greek
we need thinkonlyofHerodotus'famousstoryaboutthegolden
literature,'13
foot-bathof Amasis,which laterwas workedinto an image of a god - a
storyoftenreferredto by early Christianapologeticsin order to argue
againstimage worshipand prove the base natureof the pagan deitiesin
general136 - to understandthat a vierrnpnaturallywas foundalso in the
Upper Chamber,at least accordingto the reportof the Fourth Gospel.
That useful basin, however,also served medical purposes, as may be
gatherednot onlyfrominscriptions in Epidaurusbut also fromnumerous
pictures.'"' An aryballos,an oil-flask, in the Louvre displaysa fullclinical
scenewitha foot-bath in the center(fig.49).138A terracotta relieffromthe
necropolisof the Isola Sacra shows a completemedical instrumentarium
whilethephysiciantreatsthepatientwhosefootis in thebasin (fig.50). 3"
Our illustratedmedicalmanuscripts, it is true,are of a late date; but as in
theherbals,in astronomic-astrological and otherscientific works,themanu-
scriptillustrations were derivedfromlate antiquemodels.'4oIn a Viennese
L. von Sybel, "Zwei Bronzen," Jahrbuchdes deutschen Archdiologischen Instituts,II

1
(1887), 15 ff,and pl. i.
1' The remarksfollowing
here are drawn fromthe richmaterialcollected by Miss Marjorie
J. Milne, "A Greek Footbath in the Metropolitan Museum of Art," American Journalof
Archeology,XLVIII (1944), 26-63, esp. 30 ff; see 31, n. 40, for the footbathas "a piece of
dining room furniture."
"
Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum:Bibliothdque Nationale, fasc. 1, ed. S. Lambrino (Paris,
1930), pl. 17, 4; Milne, 56, No. 40.
*
Plato, Symp. 175A; Plutarch,Phocion, c. XX; Milne, 31, n. 39.
*
Herod., II, 172 f; see Milne, 32, and the passages fromChristianauthorscollected by
her in n. 44.
"' Milne, 31, n. 38.
* E.
Pottier,"Une clinique grecque au Ve siecle," MonumentsPiot, XIII (1906), 148 ff,
xiii,
pls. "' xiv, 1; Milne, 53, No. 13.
Guido Calza, La necropolidel Portodi Roma nell' Isola Sacra (Rome, 1940), 251,
fig.149.
1o For the general problem,
see Kurt Weitzmann, Greek Mythologyin Byzantine Art
(Princeton,1951), with the literatureon p. 4, n. 3; see also his study on "The Greek Sources
of Islamic ScientificIllustrations,"Archaeologica Orientalia in Memoriam Ernst Herzfeld
medical codex we see thephysiciankneadingthe leg of the patientover a
a motionfoundnot rarelyin representations of
roSavtmr)p(fig.47a-b),141
thepedilavium;forexample,in a paintingon a twelfth-century Pisan cruci-
fixwhere,as so often,Christratherkneadsthe leg thanwashes the footof
Peter (fig.52).142 And in the same Vienna medical codex we findnot only
the foot-basin, but also a patientholdinghis head while bathinghis feet
(fig.47c).143
It would be beside thepointto carrythe medicalrelationstoo far;yet
it notat all deviousto associatethemedicaltreatment
is withthe lavingon
MaundyThursday,whichwas, accordingto Origen,a washingof the"feet
of the soul.""144Holy Thursdaywas, if any day, the medical day of the
liturgicalyear,on whichChristusmedicuswas peculiarlypresent.God the
Physicianand Christas thelarpo' twrrip,theone "givingmedicaltreatment
to the sufferings of all souls and healingthe afflictions of thebodies,"were
invokedtimeand timeagain on thatday in the riteof the Consecrationof
the Holy Oils of theEasternChurch:Iarpe qvX(iV Kal 7 w (waOLt v . . .
6 06"vo" r,^v
4<vx<vTE KaL larpo', "Physicianof the souls and the bodies.
crotxTrwv
The onlyphysician ofsoulsandbodies"1"5 suchweretheinvocations
-
whichin greatvarietywere repeatedat the Maundyservice.'46 Also in the
(Locust Valley, N. Y., 1952), 244-266. See also Sudhoff (next note) p. 105: ". . . der
AntikeentstammendesurspriinglichesIllustrationsgut"(cf. p. 80).
"'Karl Sudhoff,"Szenen aus der Sprechstundeund. bei Krankenbesuchendes Arztes in
mittelalterlichenHandschriften,"Archiv
fiir Geschichte der Medizin, X (1917), 71 ff.and
105 ff; his material derives chieflyfromPseudo-Apuleius MSS,
especially fromthe Vienna,
Nat. Bibl., Cod. 93 (thirteenthcentury); see pl. ii, fig.5 (fol. 9v) and
pl. vi, fig.13 (fol. 43v).
4""Pisa, Museo Civico, rightarm of a Cross (twelfthor thirteenth
century); PrincetonArt
Department photograph.
"" Sudhoff,op. cit., pl. x, fig.62, and p. 122, where he mentionsthe connectionswith the
Feet-washingof the apostles.
"""Origen,On Jeremiah,1, 9 = Fragmente aus der Prophetenkatene,Nr. XXIII, ed.
Erich Klostermann (Origen, III = GCS., VI), 246:
ordSagrTy lvX/I'V daKa0apulav (Kat)
Origen speaks often about "the feet of our soul"; see, e.g., In Isaiam
SE81qOva rov^ 'Iyvcroo.
Homilia, VI, 3, ed. W. A. Baehrens (Origen, VIII = GCS., XXXIII), 273, 3: animae vestrae
pedes lavare; also In EzechielemHomilia,II, 4, ibid., p. 346, 15: firmosanimae pedes
habere. The expression passed on to the prayers; cf. Teodoro Minisci, "Le
preghiere
opisthambonoi," (above, n. 35), 61, no. 28, lines 16 ff: .. . dvvov . Ka
1vXKO
aorva
rKov' ?rVWas3. f70ro
"' Euchologion (Rome, 1873), 182 (the Kathisma): o
iarpogKal
po7at
#y ivErodvot.*
0 XvrprG7TgTe Kal TOrWpV EV VoaToL;alsop. 183 (theKontakion): ~WTEp /dVOF 7dvrYoW
la-rpvo)v7raryTE 7ToW
V XVYW. Kal
U-rat)JXT)V r OvvrplTPI'lara. . . See also Euchologion,
7 OdO". 190
f,
196, in the prayer of the priest. Actually the whole Akolouthia is interspersedwith medical
symbols.
" See also the
inscriptionof Timgad: Christe,tu solus medicus sanctis et penitentibus,
ed. P. Monceaux,in Comptesrendusde des Inscriptions
et Belles-Lettres
GAcademie (1920),
78 f, and its Greek parallel from
Frikyi, in Syria: iaTrpo Kat2AXv00KaKWv; see F. J.D61ger,
IX?Y?: Das in
Fischsymbol friihchristlicher Zeit, I (Rome, 1910), 253, n. 25. Both inscrip-
WesternChurchtheserviceson theFeria quintahave retainedsomeofthat
peculiarlymedical essence.4"'Moreover,Origen actuallysaid that at the
Feet-washingon Holy ThursdayChristacted like the wise physicianwho
firsttreatsthe sick needingtreatment most- thatis, Judas- and who last
treatsthepatientbeingin bestshape and therefore needingtreatment least:
Peter.48And in an anonymoussermonascribedto Fulgentius,Christasks
Peterwhyhe,stillbeingsick,wardsoffthehandofthephysician."4 It makes
no sense to press the medical metaphor and to overestimateits relevance.
When,however,thestatementis made thattheByzantinecustomof repre-
sentingPeterholdinghis head was "un-Roman"because thisgesturewas
"too poor and too paltryto be Roman," "0one may wonderwhetherthis
un-Romanpaltrinessdid not have its rootsin a stratumwhich Rome has
veryoftendisregardedor missed.
The so-calledByzantinegestureof Petermade its appearance earlyin
Westernart,aboutthelate tenthcentury, whenitis foundin an Antiphonary
of St. Gall (fig.54).'5 It is shown,aroundA.D.1050,in a CottonianPsalter
which stillreflectssome of the elegance,liveliness,and directnessof the
tions are quoted by R. Arbesmann,"The Concept of 'Christus Medicus' in St. Augustine,"

Traditio,X (1954), 1, n. 1.
".
See, for example, the Exorcismus olei in the Mozarabic rite; Liber Ordinum, ed.
Ferotin (Paris, 1904), 10: . . . nisi te, Christe, . . . peritissimummedicum te imploramus
S.Similarlyin the Leofric Missal, ed. F. E. Warren (Oxford, 1883), 257. See also Sacra-
. ed. 65 eius medere vulneribus);65 and 67: (et
mentariumGelasianum, Wilson, (Tu
medicinamtribuevulneratis).
4
1""Origen, In loannem, XXXII, ff (on John
13:6 ff), ed. Preuschen (GCS., X = Origen,
IV; Berlin, 1903), 433 ff,esp. 435,18 ff.The metaphorof Christthe Physician (see Matthew
9:12; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:31, etc.) is very common in Origen; see the passages collected in
the new editionof Marc le Diacre, Vie de Porphyre,eveque de Gaza, c. 29, by H. Gregoireand
M.-A. Kugener (Paris, 1930), 26 and 109, with additional passages contributedby A. Baum-
stark,in: Oriens Christianus,III. Ser., 9 (= vol. XXXI; 1934), 125. Also, Jerome,In Marcum,
1, 29, ed. G. Morin, Anecdota Maredsolana, 111:2 (Maredsou, 1897), 337,14, depends on
Origen:Egregiusmedicus[Jesus]et verusest archiater.MedicusMoyses,medicusEsaias,
medicusomnessancti.Sed iste archiaterest. See, in general,A. von Harnack,Die Mission
und Ausbreitungdes Christentums,I (4th ed., Leipzig, 1924), 129 ff; F. J. Dl61ger,"Der
Heiland," Antike und Christentum,VI (1950), 241 ff; Leonardo Olschki, "The Wise Men
of the East in Oriental Tradition: 1. Jesus the Physician,"Semitic and Oriental Studies Pre-
sented to William Popper, ed. Walther J. Fischel (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1951), 375-
381, with nos. 25 ff (on pages 391 f), who considersa possible later influenceof Manichean
before
concepts on St. Augustine; however, the Christus medicus image was currentlong
see also Arbesmann (above, n. 146), 1-28, esp. 27 f.
Augustine;
(Ps.-) Fulgentius,Sermo XXV ("De lavandis pedibus"), PL., LXV, 892A: Adhuc quasi
aegrotus[Petrus]repellismedicimanus?Curambonamvisrecusare?
"
delicatus
1 Wilpert, Die rdmischenMosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichenBauten (2nd ed.,
r6mischzu sein,
Freiburg, 1917), p. 853: "In der Tat ist er [der Gestus] zu kleinlich,um
und kommterst spiiterauf."
MS. 390-391 (Antiphonary); Adolf Merton,Die Buchmalerei
1"'St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek,
in St. Gallen vom neuntenbis zum elftenJahrhundert(Stuttgart,1912), pl. LXVIII,fig.2.
UtrechtPsalter(fig.53).152 And it was received,above all, by the artistsat
theabbey of MonteCassino whereGreekand Latin orbitsofcultureinter-
sected.We findthattype,forexample,in Formia,in the neighborhoodof
Monte Cassino (fig.51); 153 but above all we findit in the Casketof Farfa,
which is of peculiar interesthere because the Feet-washingappears in
closestconnectionwiththe Baptismof Christin Jordan(fig.57).1"' Those
two scenesappear also togetherin a portablealtar fromthe Rhine,of ca.
1160,wheretheyare connectedwiththe Crucifixion and the EmptyTomb
(fig.58).'"" Do we have to assume that in those cases thebaptismalconcept
of the laving still was cooperative,or that Ambrose'scomparisonof the
reluctantJohnthe Baptistwiththe reluctantPeterwas effective? Afterall,
the Ambrosianwritings,his De mysteriisand De Sacramentis,were not
forgotten.
In the later Middle Ages, the "Byzantine"gesturedominatedin the
West,whereasthe "Roman"gesturebecame comparatively rare.Again,it
wouldgo muchtoofarto claimwithoutqualification thatthisByzantinetype
was thatof"sanctification" in theAmbrosiansense,or that,especiallyin the
laterMiddle Ages,the artistswere stillaware of the factthatthisgesture
testifiedto Peter's"devotionand faith,"accordingto as distin-
Ambrose,l56
guished from humility and charity.Referring, however, as it does, to the
implicitpromise "If I wash theenot, thou wilt have no part with me,"and
to Peter'sensuingdemandto have also his handsand his head washed,the
Byzantinegesturestressesundoubtedlythe more affirmative aspects of
Peter'sattitude,whereastheRomangesturebroughtto theforethe
aspects
ofreluctanceand even resistanceon thepartof the This difference
disciple.
has been indicatedby the artistwho, in the twelfthor
early thirteenth
century, sculptured the reliefs of San Pietro in Spoleto (fig.55) whereboth
scenes are represented:in the first,Christis shown,
carryingbasin and
toweland approachingSt. Peterwho objectsand
modestlytriesto keep his
Masteraway; in the second,Christwashesthefeetof the
apostlewho now
demands also the washingof his head.'"' The firstscene may be called
'""BritishMuseum, CottonianMS. Tib. C. VI, fol. ln.
"13Sant' Angelo in Formis (near Capua), Fresco in the nave, South Wall (Photo Anderson
27185); see G. de Jerphanion,"Le cycle iconographiquede Sant' Angelo in Formis,"La voix
des monuments(Paris, 1930), pl. LVI,p. 279; see also HerbertBloch
(next note), 200, n. 114.
'"' Herbert Bloch, "Monte Cassino, Byzantium,and the West in the Earlier Middle
Ages,"
DumbartonOaks Papers, 3 (1946), 207 ffand
fig.253, withfullbibliographyin n. 144.
' Cf. Fritz Witte, Tausend Jahre deutscher Kunst am Rhein, I (Berlin, 1932), 56, and
II, pl. 47.
mAbove, n. 111.
m
PrincetonArt Departmentphotograph.The Church of St. Peter's in
Spoleto was partly
destroyedin 1329, but the sculpturesof the exteriorare obviouslyof an earlier date. See also
fig.15, the Biblia pauperum (above, n. 23), where Peter makes both gesturesat the same time.
"negative"and the second "positive";and togetheror in juxtapositionthey
renderan illustrationof Ambrose'swords: "One thingis humility, another
is sanctification."
However that may be, the two artisticformulaeimplyan antithesis
comparableto the one of "humility" of charitableand
and "sanctification,"
baptismalaspectsofthesame ritual,thoughit would be hazardousto iden-
tify,especiallyin the laterperiod,everyrepresentation of Peter "hand to
head" withthe baptismaland sacramentalinterpretation of the Feet-wash-
in
ing an earlyage. Iconographictypeshave a lifeoftheirown.Theysurvive
although(and sometimesbecause) theiroriginalmeaningis lost and for-
gotten;and in thatrespecticonographicformulaedo notdiffer considerably
fromliturgicalformulae.
V
Of the liturgicalstagingof the MaundyThursdaywashingtherehave
been handeddownto us vividdescriptions fromboththemediaevalEastern
Church,wherethatceremonyno longeris generallypracticed,'58 and the
mediaevalWesternChurch,wherethe Mandatumactuallyhas survived.'"'
The detailsof the ceremonial,interestingthoughtheyare, seem of minor
importancehere.While theGospel ofJohnwas read,theofficiating Church
dignitary- pope or bishopor abbot- re-enactedthe humbleservicesren-
dered by Christto his disciples,and a miniaturein the Bible moralisde
(fig.56) mayremindus once morethatemperorsand kingsalso washed on
thatday thefeetof twelvepoor menwho,in returnforlendingthemselves
to thatperformance, the MaundyPenny.'6o
receivedtheirpresbyterium,
""P6trides,"Lavement," Echos d'Orient,III, 321-326, gives a detailed description,chiefly
on the basis of the Typika, and believes that the rite was introduced to Byzantium from
Jerusalemin the tenth century.See Jean-BaptisteThibaut, Ordre des officesde la Semaine
Sainte d Jerusalem(Paris, 1926), 76 f, fora descriptionaccordingto the Typikonof Jerusalem
of 1122: the Patriarchis the lavator, the r6le of Peter is played by a metropolitan,and the
otherapostles are staged by two bishops, threepriests,three deacons, and three subdeacons;
one sings the polychronionto the Patriarch.The rite is still performedin Jerusalem,where
ProfessorCarl H. Kraeling,of the OrientalInstituteof the Universityof Chicago, attendedthe
performancein recent years, therebyobserving also the ceremoniousremoval of the green
wrapper of a cake of - very fittingly - Palmolive soap. According to P6trides,323, the cere-
mony is officiatedtoday in only three Greek churches,but it survived in Russia; see, e.g.,
Berkbeck and the Russian Church, ed. by AthelstanRiley (London and New York, 1917),
135 if, to which Dr. Schafer Williams, in Washington,kindly called my attention.As Pro-
fessor Der Nersessian informsme, the ceremonial Feet-washing continues to be performed
in the ArmenianChurch.
"
See, in general,Eisenhofer,Liturgik,I, 522 f, and, formany interestingdetails, Stiefen-
hofer,"LiturgischeFusswaschung" (above, n. 13).
160
Laborde, Bible moralise'e,III, pl. 485 (Brit. Mus., Harley MS. 1526-27, fol. 14').
For the royal ritual (practiced in Hapsburg Austriauntil the twentiethcentury), see, in gen-
We are interestednot so muchin the rituallavingitself,but ratherin
the antiphonswhich were sung while and afterthe officiating dignitary
performed his services."'The number of antiphons,their selectionand their
order,variedfromcathedralto cathedraland monastery to monastery. Saint-
Yrieix,an abbeyaffiliated to St. Martialin Limoges,had no less thantwenty-
nine antiphonssung on thatoccasion; othershad onlyseven or nine. Uni-
formity of textswas neverachievednoraspiredto duringthe Middle Ages,
thoughof coursecertainantiphonsbased on John13 or referring to Mary
Magdalen when anointing the feet of Christ,will be found almost every-
where. For all those individualpredilections,which resist any detailed
classification, twobasic setsof Maundyantiphonsyetstandout clearly:one
being, or graduallybecoming,the Roman vulgate valid throughoutthe
WesternChurch,and the other,followinga traditionapparentlyrestricted
to a fewFrenchand Englishchurches,whichmaybe called here the non-
Roman group.
It would be a mostcumbersometaskand perhapsnot even worththe
effort to investigatehistoryand transmission ofeveryindividualMandatum
antiphon,althoughoccasionallythe originof an antiphonmay be rather
telling.It willsufficeheretoindicatethehallmarksdistinguishing theRoman
vulgate form from thenon-Romansetsof antiphons.Two tables (A and B)
may illustrate the main features.In Table A six formsare foundwhich
represent,despite theirlack of uniformity, the customaryWesternusage.
The Liber responsalisis in manyrespectsnotat all characteristic of Roman
or even Italianpractice;but theMandatumantiphonsfallin withwhatlater
became the general custom,or perhaps was already
customaryat that
time."' The Lucca Missale of a Benedictineabbey has a "Beneventan"
eral, E. MartBne,De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus,III (Bassano, 1788), 100 (Lib. IV, c. XXII,
8, 3), whose earliestexample refersto King Robertof France (996-1031); see, forByzantium,
Treitinger(above, n. 129), 126 f, and, forthe West, a few remarksby Percy Ernst Schramm,
"Sacerdotiumund Regnum im AustauschihrerVorrechte,"Studi Gregoriani, (1947), 428
II f;
see, forthe English Maundy Pennies, Helen Farquhar, "Royal Charities,"BritishNumismatic
Journal,XVI (1921-22), 195 ff.See also H. A. Daniel, Codex liturgicus,II, 424, fora
incident in connection with princely strange
Feet-washing ceremonies: Duke Maurice William of
Sachsen-Zeitz,originallya Protestant,embraced the Catholic faith and now ordered
(April
14, 1718) twelve old men, who happened to be Lutherans,to appear forthe Feet-washing-
a repast following- in the princely
chapel at Weyda; the result was that the twelve poor
were punished and made to do public penitence in the Lutheran Church.
... This
subject has been carefullyinvestigated by Bukofzer, Studies in Mediaeval and
Renaissance Music, 230 if, and little more shall be done here than to
straightenout a few
items. Needless to say, with regard to all
musicological questions, I depend entirelyupon
the study of Bukofzer.See above, n. 2.
162
PL., LXXVIII, 848 f. Another set of antiphons is found at Mass on Holy
Thursday
(ibid., 766) which seems to me much more closely related to the conventionalsets than the
Mandatum set proper of the Liber responsalis:
peculiarity(No. 10: Cum recubuissetDominus) whichis interspersed into
a formotherwisecharacteristic of the Roman sets.'"3The Besanqon set is
conventionalwith one exception(No. 5), on which account it has been
selectedhere.'4 The customsof the papal Curia were not a determinant
factorbeforethe thirteenth century.Besides, the papal Curia, we recall,
introducedthe ceremoniousFeet-washingon Holy Thursdayapparently
onlyat a late date,and in theRomanOrdinesit firstappearsin the twelfth
century.'5Unfortunately, the antiphonsare not enumeratedin thoselater
mediaevalRomanOrdines,'"" justas theyare lackingin theOrdo Lateranen-
sis '" and in the PontificaleRomanae Curiae of the thirteenth century.'68
For the later Middle Ages, however,the Missale Romanumof 1474 may
serveas a patternhere;"16 it does not differsubstantiallyfromthe current
use whichhas one antiphon(No. 7: Maneantin vobis) in commonwitha
probablyItalianset of thefifteenth century."'x
1. Coenantibusautem,accepitJesuspanem
2. Acceptopane JudastradiditDominum
3. Si malelocutussum,perhibetestimonium (John18:23)
4. Coena factaest,dixitJesusdiscipulis
5. Mandatumnovum
6. Diligamusnos invicem,quia charitasex Deo est
7. Si ego Dominus
8. In diebusillismulier
9. Postquamsurrexit
10. Ubi fratresin unumglorificant
Dominum
11. Congregavit nos Christus
The firstthreeversicles,of course, referto the Last Supper and to the treason of Judas who,
by the way, has received the bread (accepto pane). On the other hand, the Feet-washing
takes place afterthe Last Supper and afterJudashas left (see above, nos. 81-85).
.. For the
manuscript,see Ebner, Missale Romanum, 65 f. For the Mandatum and the
Beneventan Vaticanefondslatin(XI' siecle):
see Le Codex10673de la Bibliothbque
features,
Graduel Bne'ventain (Paleographie Musicale, XIV [1931]), 284 if, pls. xxxvii-xxxviiI.
1' E. Martene,De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus (Bassano, 1788), III, 110.
1'6
See above, n. 108, forthe Ordo Romanus X. The Feet-washing,however,is mentioned
also in the Ordines of Benedict of St. Peter's (chap. 4) and of Cencius Savelli (c. 25); PL.,
LXXVIII, 1040 f, 1074.
1.. Ordo XIII, c. 22, Ordo XIV, c. 84 (cf. c. 91), Ordo XV, c. 69, PL., LXXVIII, 1118D,
1207C (1210D), 1311C.
ed. Fischer, has both a Mandatumpauperum(c. 118, p. 46) and a
Ordo Lateranensis,
17
Mandatum fratrum(c. 133, p. 53); but only for the Mandatum pauperum is mentionmade
of antiphons,beginningMandatum novum do vobis.
.08Above, n. 108; Andrieu,Pontificalromain,II, 464, 552; also the Pontificalof Durandus
mentionsonly the Mandatum novum antiphon; see Andrieu,III, 581.
" Missale Romanum Mediolani, 1474, ed. R.
Lippe (Henry Bradshaw Society, XVII;
London, 1899), 159 f, where the caput versicle is contained in the antiphonQuod ego facio
(p. 160, 22).
o17 Bukofzer,Studies, 234 f.
,YL
.
.k
- ?FZr
m-71
iPt
.-'IN
............ .-C'i.
1\IN .. ~., ,=
- ,..,;-,
I'\,i'
".", . .....(s~c
..,.
nm",.~~~wsh~w.... -Z . .~
it.-
oA
....... . .. .. ..
14. BibleofFloreffe. Brit.Mus.,Add.MS. 17738,fol.4
.i 4
~ ~
,,> .. .
~
?~ , ~"t"
.,
' .:
,
'
o ' i
111 :i .,- .,":"
_i -
?r'i I'.?, ,"'
"---I - ._- .
I* i t
I
": -..o..
I..
..
* t.
.y. - ,
r?T.
?
I "'
? '" \I-
'I-? : , ,
./., . ..
?.. '
.. t.:
,... ".
,. .. ...
?, . ,:; . : ,( : _
.,..
/ ?7 . " ...: .
15. Bibliapauperum. Munich,Cgm.20, fol.10 16. New York,PierpontMorganLibrary,MS. 645,fol.4'
20I
,..
tt?, ,' .'';, " .,,
. r-777- /''c'.
14 j'
C.0
:l,,I??
'r,
Ile
J
17a. Fol.8
18a. Fol. 127
ni,
i
- ~"
?E 4
'1 I
i
jR ig"
- I'I
~I
L;'?
:t ?I
?' ?'
?I~
'*':: '$?
D i"? "
.
.]?3
* " L7
?CT;rb.
" 'I
h
I ?1
~SY.:I
'*~ 'C
i
1
I '. Il
.*. I1(1 1,V
r?-
?,,
'?I?- "';II
g:: :~e
?, IF ?: LI'
i
r r?
?-
'j.
fI i;IJ
.
17b. Fol,
18b. Fol. 12
:. .... -,.
,.
*ti , IV
,,mp? o:
,,,l
P ' ~~ ~ ~ " ,?
!, ,,jd.ri,
; .. ,a"
AV"'
..i.:.. .",.. J ",.
.
1. .L,
.; . ..m
i. .. . . .
17o. Fol.4 18c. Fol.

Codexpurpureus
Cathedral,
Rossano, VaticanSyr
.
, .
- ~ ~ ~ ..?
.
.;
~~~?
? '',;
r; ! ...5 i??j
iir
.. ,'.i!. . Q' . t'.. O
".. ..
;,r, ""
i,.i
r. ...(,!i". ' : '
,,.
i?".
?
" ' .....
-,? : . .".J i*
i""- ' i'""
.:..'l ....
", '
i " " "..... .....
?~. -, . ., :-"....
" '1 ." :.'
,Z... .. .-".;
,,_#s,#' '* :' " j.-.
'
T
-'-. ...... :,..... . . .. . .. . . .. .:.,._-
...-
. . ': "-
"
... . .. . ... . .
)...}'-
>,..
. .
...,..,:,... ill
. ." - . . . . . . .
; -... .' .. f'-
'. .': .E?;.. . . 2_.. .
.
:. .. ... ',,7."7
. .
. ,,
.."o..,
:...v .%-.,: .'.-", ... : , .
..... ..
..
I,' ''-3?"
EiNA
CY1-r''S
~L~dlDVMVM
19a. 19b.
Enamelcasket.
or
Huy-sur-Meuse
=r
.. -4
. 1t
1
.. .
. . .
7.7.
i TT5
.i
?wai
-wo
s.-A II
i
-
, -?I . --'2
IeO ---4
-,-- c,',
20. Ivrea,Bibl.Capit.,86, fol.50' 21. Gnesen,ChapterLibr.,MS. l

E ,r
I?1
re
I ?~
?
I
01.,
01
J~i / J, , ,-1411%
'"~d~?) .. 1?
??,
- 1 1
O I
.r
3~
A. 1 ?:
i~-??1,
..i... 1
~
.fl
IF_'~V I' , w,,
h' r i: ii'.
: i
L i. III ''
r 1
;'4 , ~~
?,??.
d. ?'1.,.?:
?~1.
i ??~.:. ,...:
I: ill~
''
%,i s
I 1
;I iC3JI
I ,1
?j
C ?4~?~
c
I?C!
:0:
L
131 r
71pI
I r??hil
''
I
t O
I
~a~-~c~ -'aw~i~ul~Ol
~~f3~
~U
22. Brit,Mus.,RoyalMS. 1.D.X.,fol.4 23. M

Eri7
..
,
:
I
fi
ee
,~!L=OF
.,
!J
r-rr' NN WM
-i Ii Cr-j'
.... r
I
?. J
?, ?
.,
-/.i i_.., . ,.
?
,
"ii ' r
?
~~441
"l .
AURWA.A
,
.,c ,%I 4.
-',..'
--"t "" h.1
,"-C ... " ----,-
'ii:
?t 21i 'r~~
?r,-
J XF
-X
F' I '
I "
,,A .... .. ,
PembrokeCollegeMS. 120,fol.83
24. Cambridge, 25. Gospelsof Matildaof Tuscany. New York,Pierpo
fol.100'
ii
''
_L?
:
e~r~L~ i'~ !'E;-L~ ~?~1~5- ~Cd I-'I
I
,,
.,,
Z-,
*'"1P
?C
.~..._
26. Wilten Chalice. Vienna, K sthistsche Samm-

lung
27. PsalterofSt. Louis.

Paris,Arsenal,MS. lat. 1186,foL22
-t ?)
,1
:.
r " ,,
1
- 1
,r-f *"
-_.. 711
..-..a
i
" ..f
.
..-A
.
28. Ivorydiptych. Paris,CollectionReubell 29. Ivorydiptych,leftwing. Paris,Muse'

deChmluny
'j4I'j K77
,?- __ __________
... K... .-_.j - .
$A 4
:--'.' i-
~-tt :.j . ...;.-. !.. -. ... .,,)
" I'
". -' ' q!
1 "~(
'.. .14
. -~ II
, A?.' '
--- e
- , <~-/I-.I- "-/,, t '

V " ..-
.
A
-?>
r .
i1.
/
i"i : -. ?..?
"
.it-
-'
:-<,-:
" ' a .ct
.4-..\/ -\\
, .. ,7. ,.-:.-.
?L ; '' % -'"
., '-
:..,:h ,- ',,_f,.-s -:" ;-.. ? ,' ",6--'' " ."; " . ..:-- 'r, '
i:i , ,
I,, . ... . k.- - ' ,/ ,/
,,....., , -,
, >'.::' [,, II
J,' it -
. '.--. - - '' i'. - ? . - .
' ,.I, i
;IF
i ,,i;!-i~V ,
; ..',i~r'f-"? . , ;. ,,. .. .,I
.. ',".
l.
' 1". -' ..2 ',' '
U,-.../;/
""
"i{",<"
\L_ '-' .
30. Cologne,St. Caecilia,choir,fresco
?.* "
3jrr
'
"
. 'a
'
:1J
31
,.,.:.L Ciir" AIV
.. ~-e.__..?~,
... .
... .. . .
N. ':
~ ?Y
?..--
:''
_~~~.,,.,,_.-,_.
?S ?(..'''
.
" ~
-4 ."
-w. .
-Mir" .---.---..
p.~g
1
.? ".4.,t
7"a, ...'
t. 4c"b =.
I
ih ..
.
. .
\ 4-.
-i -
"
I A-,
..._.. .. , W. ..... :. : ,r , /..-

. ..
" .
/;t
' -
'I
,: .r. ", , o
-qm1/t tA/t
r., r<.
\ , ,
31. Leningrad,PublicLibr.,MS. gr.21, fol.6' 32. Berlin,Staatsbibl.,

SachauMS. 304, fol.89
lf
"
qFp "
,*
4"0
33. EarlyChristian ofSt.Peter's

sarcophagus.Rome,Crypt 1
fi
.4tw
.JD A
0?Amok
j..:IzC' I'
4 .\..;
-
'd.-r,~ OF
34. EarlyChristian MusheLapidaire

sarcophagus.Ariles, 35. Ivoryc
i
'I
rr
Vic
1r
: I
, 11l
.
~t4i?
illYIIIII~,,
-.I
f
LB,~GC19,?
j ;
,,-
. !t , /"
"'i.
fit
d
na n
-.
36. GospelsofHenryII. Munich,Clm.4452,fol.105T 37. Br

L~ ~
"r5~ -~?+-
*
,i~j~F+
sR tr-?C f~Lj --_t
'f
Ar~
,I 4~
c
1
'L~
ii ~C~ ,, i T
=Ir 4F4
f; *t
V WC? . ~ ?
?~Ei '
~ -- 1
i;
5`
)In
~L~~L~f
_t
38. Altarfrontal. Copenhagen,Mus. Nat
?~E~~j
i~ji
~S~?~-?lk ~~ L~-~-~~
~
39. Bernni,CathedraPetri,side panel Rome,St Peter's
t i~~Jrm:t
L t -?ii??'
4r4
-;-?I?
----V?W -,VFWs
40. Duccio,retable. Siena,MuseoOperadelDuomo

KID
si
I? . " ? i;"
Oili i
A Ak 31
.
-j,.%
Eww
.%..
.Kafl"a
"Orb 42. Patmos,Mon.Giovanni,MS. 70, fol.177'

ON.
?7-tn~'T<' ce-o e E:, '? v",4'i P Ii- a
41. ChludovPsalter,fol.50
i
"Li 2
i. ?, ?.
?
"
It ?' A <AA A't ?? .,..

. .
Irk) in
IIr
t, . cAn
..., A,,T .
? 1 :?" ?
.-~~--,.~~
x... ,:,.~rl- ,-1 :-e . 1C
?.
.- . ".41fol.
,'-- , .
MS. gr.1216,fol20
.Sinai, 44. Berlin,Staatsbibl.,
gr.qu. 66,fol.314
I._cf
-x-
r dL 'IN
e. ,L.-
iil .
-- ;
., .. ,'
21
'K1?" yY
t\iI
}'"i
LJ
II
(3 e.s r.
45. Paris,Bibl.Nat.,Copte 13,fol.259'

I
C
...
1 .. ?-
II~- Ii .-
. ,
...
; - ._ , : . ..
,'V -: ":L:"-
. -,
'?
--., .-;' -r ~
?~'
r
t : : ir " :,: -.:.. .........__
.r I
,, r J:
;I
Ic ?- ~
ru.v
;-r ~y~?
.r
" . "
~
l
.Z
r-
'r'
5" ?'+
I __ .s .'.
;: - .., .,L
%?
*, p
yr
r~ r31 -
--
.
EI
~tr
L*; :r-r ~ ~. c;.--?-?
? -
k:
'i .. -'' . -
?--- ?-
r?r~ ~tr;T ?:
-. -._--...-.:.. :;. -.
-* rL c
?-
,, ~~RI~T~S~
L_&
I= (
r ~
R 47a. FoL 9T
b-.-~ ,I
f i-
_r L` r
\V.
-e
IN
46. Helmetfrm Megara,cheekpiece

*? V ,
Ii
?:3'
47b. FoL 431
I'I
lb0.
r im
04
I'
~tiAd L r
1-~A
jar fromCorinth. Paris,BibL Nationale

48. Black-figured 47c. FoL 109T
Vienna,Nat BibL.,Cod. 93
i1
t
t?
'U.4.
SW1C
7-c,
49. Aryballos. Louvre
arir~cli?,
rbjy~~iI?
.5.? .1~ *1
;iE*l; w Iot
*' *r~'Ar
~
~
~
40L
1:
.*, "NI
?I ZeL
*-
t~~Ao _'$??5-ql
from
50. Tombrelief IsolaSacra
theNecropolis,
.*
I ~ rc~fruu mlC .~~s"
1410
I ; ~
i
:?;??K
i' Al,,
,. .,o
'5
4' .. . ..,..o.c?
,,, . '. (
._. ::"-
"- . .. ..; ?
: d: .?., .., ,'
i .
a
U.1 ? f' 'Ii , .-T
. ."
, t'?!A N
.
..ib,, , ,,.
?.
.
jc
o:!..,,
.
? ,
ft qc"!Jim
.I ac
io'?
..., . , .. .. ...,
~..
Ct?i~
4*4
51. Sant'Angeloin Formis,nave,southwall
,r
i' t
)~~' " -. I'; i
C :
' ,
'i;:.~
L '
'
r'
C>
,
j
. .,r
o .. . C
4r
1
~I~
,. T~c~C-
.,
*;
i,
t i
'"
.
i ? it.L.,i 6A
1.I.
INN-
rF,
I
~
1.~~ il
AY L
%lot '44
52. Crucifix, arm. Pisa,MuseoCivico

right 53. B
u Lh,
,7 t ~E~ i ;p~..c?-? ??
-.I.
~NIVN
r ~1"
i~7f:r~5~-%E-~ ? CC1C~ EECIII i
I~ 1 ?3
'"~T~ i'; I;
?'.r? i
". ?C
a':"' T5CI
Ka 97iia1i-
( ?i;'P f ~
i ~t~r:'
s-~
r~4;t:
i
?f,
r
b
Y'' I
?~c~/P? .I
;r
";: .??-
~ IYql.
1l~t~F~ .'F I~ i
,.?
I?1;I , ...; ,J~
.t-? :ir? ~jc~r~ie;ia~g~

,I?..
?.. 'L~(y~S~S~C~L(r
t~cr 1' .i t
f. ? ~ r*
i
k~t
~-tn~-~$ r ::i
42- k rx j??f?i?-?_
- .;...
~n~
?~ 1J~?*p~~~r,. rh?.; ?~??~I
55. Spoleto,San Pietro,westfagade
Y
4L-wart-kC
MS. 390-391
54. St. Gall,Stiftsbibl., . ..... 'm .
?I???" r
,...
.
..i .t,,:?.
1: ~ rl r*
.
-: ,.-
, . .. i
B~?;:... '.: ," . :
- :. ,o -. .-, .
.:. ' r
jL'.
E:
"HTI~
,l~ :.
.* ., .
56. Brit.Mus.,HarleyMS. 1526-27,fol.14' 57. CasketofFarfa. Rome,S. Paolo fuorile mura

d -.Idi;
'?- L~4t i: J'% r.-IN
58. PortablealtarfromSiegburg,Rhine
A
-a
do & aall
V A
S1- . to
*
,t "c "- 'a r
?-
12I. 17
59. GradualfromSaint-Yrieix.Paris,Bibl. Nat, lat. 903

Ebt a
4.
-*" .-
.-. .,
w ?nno i W
--jig
In - - -
--.t*-----,.----.- .-i -
ft- '
.
.1 -a T W W&8Aut
,. ' " " " ?
u "-
...
A .. .
h.
i
4. ,,. ...r..t: latitahttaXt
-It=1MMe-tt
At #m f iu
fttat totfdtfotpl4An
Vewumarnwmw
' & jn
i:Nrnm
a f~
--------,--
-- . .. 0Zrt-
, -
1. ...1...'. . 4,
.
. .. .. .
-F?-'4
e
} - +i
- .~~~A ........
-r -..............f .- -"
lim a .... ...... ................. .to.. ... at..; n
- ..Ifi",- al
'm_._.'_.L . ;
I.". W
.
pt-i-n.t .,,..
r- ._,. +.
-.......
~ _.,_.., .atIWpNWNSrWttVbt;r
. 1-
,V
_._.*__ ...
trhtrrtwaoftrtuiuntzafmnuwe
a, -,.. .....-! , . ......
-- 8 - 4 - _ -
T-----
-- --" . ..& . --.A
. ----oL -.?- . .
-;.___. _.
JohnRylandsLibr.,MS. lat.24, fol.90

60. SarumMissal. Manchester,
TABLE A
Liber responsaliss. IX Lucca MS. 606 s. X-XI Besangons. XI
1. Mandatum novumr 1. Postquam surrexit 1. Mandatumnovum
2. Postquam surrexit 2. Tu mihi lavas 2. Ante diem festum
3. Cum surrexisset 3. Mandatumnovum 3. Postquam surrexit
4. In diebus illis 4. Si ego 4. Domine, tu mihi
5. Diligamus nos 5. In hoc cognoscent 5. DMe,nontantum
pedes
6. Si ego Dominus 6. In diebus illis 6. Si ego Dominus
7. In hoc cognoscent 7. Sinitemulierem 7. Diligamus nos
8. Locutus est omnipo- 8. Diligamus nos 8. In diebus illis
tens 9. Mandatumnovum 9. Ubi caritas
9. Discumbens Dfis ac- Post lavatum 10. Christusdescendit
cepit panem 10. Cum recubuissetDfis
10. Locutus est Dominus 11. Ubi caritaset amor
11. Ubi est charitas et
dilectio
12. Domine tu mihilavas
13. Domine, non tantum
pedes
14. Vos vocatis me Magis-
ter
15. Muller quae erat
16. Maria autem unxit
17. Congregavitnos Chris-
tus
RomanMissalof1474 Italians. XV RomanCurrentUse

1. Postquam surrexit 1. Dominus Jesus 1. Mandatumnovum
2. Dominus Jesus 2. Postquam surrexit 2. Postquam surrexit
3. BenedixistiDomine 3. Si ego Dominus 3. Dominus Jesus
4. Exemplumenimdedi 4. Vos vocatis me Magis- 4. Domine tu mihi
5. Quam dilecta ter 5. Si ego Dominus
6. Deus miseriatur 5. Mandatum novum 6. In hoc cognoscent
7. Congregavitnos 6. In hoc cognoscent 7. Maneant in vobis
8. Mulier quae erat 7. In diebus illis 8. Benedicta sit s. Trin.
9. Domine, tu mihi 8. Maria ergo unxit 9. Ubi caritaset amor
10. Quod ego facio 9. Domine, tu mihi
11. Si ego Dominus 10. Caritas est summum
12. In hoc cognoscent 11. Ubi est caritas
13. Benedicta sit Trinitas 11a. Christusdescendit
14. Ubi caritaset amor 12. Diligamus nos
13. Ubi fratresin unum
14. Congregavit nos in
unum
15. Maneant in nobis
16. Benedicat nos Deus
Great thoughthe varietyof these antiphonsis, the sets have certain
featuresin common.There are the "historical"antiphonsreferring, as is
natural,to John13 and to its parallel,Mary Magdalen anointingthe feet
of Christ(John12:1-8). Characteristically, however,thefullemphasiswas
laid not on the historicalevents,but on the moregeneralidea of Caritas,
whichin turnled to a selectionof antiphonshavingnothingto do withthe
lavingitself.
The lastthreeantiphonsofthecurrentRomanMissalexhibitthisfeature
veryclearly.Maneantin vobisfides,spes, caritas,triahaec, whichis found
in earlytimesas a pedilaviumantiphon,is takenfromI Corinthians18:18.
It wouldbe tempting to assumethatthewordstriahaec promptedtheselec-
tionof theensuingantiphonBenedictasitsanctaTrinitas,whichformsalso
the Introitof the Feast of Holy Trinity."'7 However,the Trinityantiphon
probablycame intotheMaundyritesforotherand betterreasonsand from
anothersource.Above all, it shouldnotbe separatedfromthelast antiphon
ofthepresentriteto whichit originally belonged: Ubi caritaset amor,Deus
ibi est. This antiphon,ancientand beautifulas it is, is (so to speak) the
It is takenfroma chantwhichcan
Song of Songs of the idea of charity.'72
be traced back to Carolingiantimes,"" when it still containeda Multos
annosacclamationfortheemperor.For, Ubi caritaset amorbelongedto the
Caritaschantssung in the refectory, when the monksunitedfora caritas,
an extraallotmentof wine grantedto themon certainfeastdays and anni-
versaries- the so-calledcaritasin refectorio. Obviously,caritashad in this
case a totallydifferentmeaning:it was a grantto themonkson special oc-
casionsand ithad,all byitself,nothingto do withthe"New Commandment"
of mutuallove of whichthe FourthGospel speaks.However,the caritasin
refectorio is yetlinkedto theidea of CharityofJohn13; forthe extrawine
allotmentwas grantedto themonksespeciallyaftertheweeklywashingof
the feetof the poor,and afterthe Mandatumproperon Holy Thursday."74
"' See, e.g., below, Table B., Saint-Yrieix,No. 8, for Maneant in vobis; for the Trinity
236.
Introit,see Bukofzer,
"2 Bernhard Bischoff,"Caritas-Lieder," Liber Floridus: MittellateinischeStudien Paul
Lehmann . . . dargebracht (Erzabtei St. Ottilien, 1950), 165-186, has excellentlydemon-
of Mandatumand Caritaschant;see p. 167,n. 9, fortheTrinity.
stratedtheconnection
of thatchant,see Dom AndreWilmart,
For thehistory
173 "L'hymnede la charit6pourle
Jeudi-Saint,"reprintedin his Auteursspirituelset textesde'votsdu moyen-dge(Paris, 1932),
26-36.
17"The acclamatorylast versicleoriginallyran:
Et pro vita dominorum exoremus
Multos ut cum ipsis annos gaudeamus,
Propter quorum hic amorem congregamur.
on theoccasionof a specialrefectiograntedto the
170. It was obviously
Cf. Bischoff,
This explainswhy,forexample,in the Lucca manuscriptthe antiphonUbi
caritaset amorfollowsaftertherubricPostlavatum- thatis, as a transition
to or in anticipationof the caritasin refectorio when the whole chantwas
sung.It explainsalso whythisantiphonhas invariablyconcludedtheRoman
setseversince thelaterMiddle Ages,and sporadicallyalso in earliertimes,
even thoughit may not always be recognizable: the antiphonChristus
descendit,for example,which concludesthe Besanqon set, is simplythe
continuation of Ubi caritaset amor.But whateverthe originof the whole
chantmaybe, theantiphon- blending,as it were,thecaritasoffered to the
poor and the caritasin refectorioofferedto the monks- stressespower-
fullythe conceptof charityitselfwhich,as St. Ambroseconfirms, was in
Rome themaincontentofthepedilavium.
This impression is corroborated by thechoiceofhistoricantiphons:they,
too,emphasizetheaspectsof charityand humility. To be sure,theantiphon
Domine,tu mihilavas pedes? is takenfromthedialoguebetweenChristand
Peter,and theLiber responsalisas well as Besangonstillinserttheantiphon
Domine,non tantumpedes. On the whole,however,the Romanusage se-
lectedtheversicleswhich,accordingto Ambrose,testified to Peter'shumil-
ity. And is it not like unto a projectionof that ancient fourth-century
controversy between Milan and Rome when we find that the versicleof
Peter's"devotionand faith,"bymeansofwhichAmbrosetriedto defendthe
baptismalessenceof the laving,is omittedentirelyin the Roman Missals?
For in the antiphonJohn13:6-8 the Roman Missal,
includingthe current
use, verystrangelyskipsthe decisiveversicle:Non solumpedes, sed etiam
manuset caput.
While thisversiclewas, we mightsay, neglectedor even
conspicuous
foritsabsencefromRomanusage,it was forits
conspicuous presencein the
usage of some French and English churchesand monasteries.The pecu-
liarityof the non-Roman sets of antiphonscan be easilygatheredfromthe
formsassembledin Table B: the Gradual of Saint-Yrieixof the eleventh
century,""' the Gradual fromRouen of the thirteenth a Paris
century,"'6
Missalofthesame date,"77and theSarumMissalofthethirteenth
century."'
monks for theirprayerson royal anniversaries(not
only anniversariesof the death, but also
of coronations,anointments,birth-and
wedding-days), that those acclamations were voiced
in the refectory.I shall treat the
very complex problem separately.
15 Le Codex 903 de la Bibl.Nat. de Paris: Graduel de Saint-Yrieix
(PalBographiemusicale,
XIII; [Tournay, 1925]), fol. 134.
"' Le
Graduel de l'eglise cath~drale de Rouen au XIIIe sidcle, ed. by V. H. Loriquet, Dom
Pothier et Abb6 Colette (Rouen, 1907), II, fol. 89.
1"'Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. lat. 1112, fol. 90v; Bukofzer,231 and 234.
171J.Wickham Legg, The Sarum Missal
(Oxford, 1916), 108; see Bukofzer,232, for a
great numberof Sarum manuscriptsand later prints.See also Walter Howard Frere, The Use
TABLE B
Saint-Yrieixs. XI
1. Mandatum novum 17. Congregavitnos Chris-
2. Postquam surrexit tus
3. Si ego Dominus 18. Congregavit nos in
4. Domine, tu mihi lavas unum
5. In diebus illis 19. Caritas est summum
6. Diligamus nos 20. SurgitJesus
7. Ubi fratresin unum 21. Vos vocatis me magis-
8. Maneant in nobis ter
9. Manete autem 22. Misit denique
10. In hoc cognoscent 23. Postquam ergo
11. Deus caritas est 24. Coena facta
12. Ubi est caritas 25. Ante diem festum
13. Tune percinxitse 26. Venit ad Petrum
14. Mulier quae erat 27. Benedicat Dominus
15. Maria ergo unxit 28. Tellus ac aethera
16. Dixit autem Jesus 29. Domum istam
Rouen s. XIII Paris s. XIII Sarum s. XIII

1. Mandatum novum 1. Mandatum novum 1. Mandatum novum
2. Si ego Dominus 2. Diligamus nos 2. Diligamus nos
3. Vos vocatis me magis- 3. Postquam surrexit 3. In diebus illis
ter 4. In diebus illis 4. Maria ergo unxit
4. In hoc cognoscent 5. Si ego Dominus 5. Postquam surrexit
5. In diebus illis 6. In hoc cognoscent 6. Vos vocatisme magister
6. Maria ergo unxit 7. Vos vocatisme magister 7. Si ego Dominus
7. Diligamus nos 8. Ante diem festum 8. Ante diem festum
8. Ubi fratresin unum 9. Venit ad Petrum 9. Venit ad Petrum
9. Ubi est caritas
10. Domine, tu mihi lavas
11. Ante diem festum
12. Venit ad Petrum
The outstandingmarkof distinctionof these sets of antiphonsis, of

course,thattheyend invariablyin theversiclesAntediemfestumand Venit
ad Petrum.This is also truewithregardto theset of Saint-Yrieix;
forTellus
ac aetheraiubilentis a hymn,and notan antiphonproper,whichwas very
popularin thetwelfth centuryat theeulogyaftertheMandatum,'79 whereas
Domumistamis an intention forthehouse,themonastery, whichis an addi-
of II 1901), 164, forthe OrdinaleSarumaccordingto whichthe Ante

Sarurm, (Cambridge,
diemfestumantiphonswere to be sung"si necessefuerit. . . Sin autempretermittantur."
For a facsimile,see Frere,GradualeSarisburiense(Brit. Mus., MS. Add. 12194; London,
1894), fol. 48".
' See
169,n. 22; Bukofzer,
Bischoff, 237.
tion frequentlyfound in the monastic liturgies; finally,Benedicat
8o
Dominusis a quite generalrequestforthedivineblessings.'"'Moreover,the
second antiphon- Venitad Petrum- containsthe versicleSi non lavero
te,nonhabebispartemmecum,and it endsin theversicleDomine,nontan-
tumpedes meos sed et manuset caput,thatis, in thosestatementswhich
AmbroseconsidereddecisiveforthesacramentalmeaningoftheFeet-wash-
ing and which,accordingto him,Romeregardednottoohighly.Hence, the
whole ceremonyof the Mandatumended in thatline testifying to Peter's
"devotionand faith"and, morespecifically, in the word caput, a versicle
whichthe Roman sets treatednegligentlyor omittedcompletelyin favor
of thelinestestifyingto Peter'shumilityand to caritasin general.It should
be mentionedalso thatin the non-Romansets the Caritasidea is definitely
ofsecondaryimportance:in thesetsofParisand SarumtheCaritaschantis
absent and the idea is touchedupon onlyin the second antiphon- Dili-
gamusnos invicemquia caritasex Deo est.ls2
The mostobviousfeaturedistinguishing thenon-RomanfromtheRoman
sets,however,remainsthe couple of antiphonsconcludingthe Frenchand
English series: Ante diem festumand Venitad Petrum.When,how, and
wherethesetwo antiphonswerefirstlinkedtogetherto formthe end of the
Mandatumceremonyremainsto be ascertained.The scheme,however,is
foundmainlyin France- in Saint-Yrieix, Paris,and Rouen- and in Eng-
land in theriteof Sarum (Salisbury) on whichEnglishchurchesand mon-
asteriesdependedin everincreasingnumbers.The customsof Sarum"were
as the sun in the heavens whose rays shed lightupon other churches,"
claimedBishopAegidiusof Salisbury(1256), and
consequentlythe Sarum
set of antiphonswill be found,duringand afterthe thirteenth in
century,
verymanyEnglishliturgicalmanuscripts.'83 Liturgicalconnections between
Rouen and Sarum are well known,and liturgicalinterrelations between
Sarum,Normandy,and Sicilyare likewiseon record,as in the case of a
peculiarExultetfinale.'"'More recentlycertainsimilaritiesbetweenSarum
and theriteofAquileia have been All these how-
indicated.'"8 observations,
'" See, e.g., the Laudes of St. Gall forthe imprecationIstam congregationem;Kantorowicz,
Laudes regiae (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1946), 124, n. 37; or the line Istam
sedem for
the episcopalLaudes; ibid.,113 f.
18 The versicle takes the place of the Benedictio super Populum, that is, at the
of the holy action. very end
2 See Wilmart,"L'hymne de la charit6" (above, n. 173), 29, who noticed the absence of
the Caritas hymnin France.
'
Bukofzer,232.
1' Kantorowicz,"A Norman Finale of the Exultet and the Rite of Sarum," Harvard Theo-
logicalReview,XXXIV (1941), 129-143.
18 Tommaso Leccissotti, "I1 'Missale monasticumsecundum morem et ritum Casinensis
ever,do notoffera clue fortheoriginofthecoupleofantiphonsconcluding
the Mandatum,and no more can be said than that apparentlythe non-
Romanseriesoriginatedin France.
What mattershere is not only the similarityof textualarrangements
characterizing theFrench,Norman,and EnglishMandatumantiphons,but
also - and above all - the stressby whichthatconcludingcouple of anti-
phons is distinguished,and which is completelylacking in the Roman
usage."Stress,"in thatcase,is notused in a figurative
senseand subjectively,
but in a literalsense and objectively.For in thosenon-Romanconcluding
antiphonssomethingis added that is most curious.Melismata- that is,
richlyornamentedcantillations - are as commonlyfoundat the beginning
of a musicalphraseas theyare rarelyfoundat the end of a chantor on the
lastword.'8 It is all themoreremarkable, therefore,thatin thenon-Roman
setsofantiphonsthenaturalstress,whichconcludingversiclesbear anyhow,
is multipliedby finalmelismata.That is to say,in the antiphonAntediem
festumthe concludingword discipulorumis distinguished by a long me-
lisma,just as in the finalantiphonof the whole performance, Venit ad
Petrum,thelastword,caput,carriesa melisma(figs.59 and 60). To distin-
guisha wordby a melismawouldnormally implythatthewordwas deemed
particularly important. The musicalstresslaid by the melismaon the word
caput findsan explanationin the iconographyof the Feet-washing,and it
may be usefulto look once more at the pictorialrepresentations of that
scene.The "Roman"gestureof St. Peter,e.g.,in the Gospel-bookof Henry
II (fig.36), would hardlyhave suggesteda melismaon caput. Contrari-
wise,the"Byzantine"gestureshowingPeterpointingat his head, a gesture
whichbegan to spread to the West in the late tenthcenturyand became
dominantin the laterMiddle Ages,makesit veryobvioushow it happened
thatthewordcaputwas also musicallysetoffbythatspecialemphasiswhich
a melismaconveys.For unknownreasonstheantiphonVenitad Petrumwas,
in the non-Romansets of antiphons,always coupled with the preceding
Antediem festum.Apparentlythe two antiphonswere treatedalike musi-
cally,resultingin a melismaon the last wordof the penultimateantiphon,
discipulorum.The musical adornmentof caput, and in its wake discipu-
lorum,is all themorestartling sincenone oftheotherMandatumantiphons
has a melisma.In whateverway it be explainedthatonlythe concluding
couple of non-Romanantiphonsshows this musical ornamentation, the
Congregationisalias Sanctelustine',"MiscellaneaGiovanniMercati,V (Studi e Testi, 125;

Vatican,1946), 368, 372, 373, n. 20.
'1 Bukofzer,238, whomI followthroughout in thepresentsection.
emphasislaid on the word caput should not be severedfromthe icono-
graphicevidence.
It was the caput melismawhichProfessorBukofzerchancedupon in a

HuntingtonLibrarymanuscript, and whichgave rise to his questionabout
the meaningof the Feet-washingon MaundyThursday,and therewithto
the presentinvestigation. His finding,on the otherhand, ended the long
guessingamongmusicologiststryingto discoverwhence Dufay, Obrecht,
and Okeghemborrowedthecantusfirmus fortheirCaput Masses.It became
strikingly clear that the non-Roman antiphonVenit ad Petrumwas the
sourceof Dufay'sMissa Caput, whereasthe two otherNetherlandish com-
posersfollowedDufay. That Dufay had takenthe caput melismanot from
Paris or Rouen (not to mentionSaint-Yrieix),but fromSarum,was more
thanlikelyanyhow.The Englishoriginof Dufay'scantusfirmus, however,
has since been ascertainedby new findings,'8and therebya new linkhas
been establishedbetween the Netherlandishcomposersof the fifteenth
centuryand theEnglandof Dunstable.
It is a longway fromOrigento Dufay,fromtheBaptismof theApostles
to the Netherlandish Missa Caput. It would be ridiculousto maintainthat
the Netherlandishcomposers,when selectingthe caput melismafortheir
cantusfirmus, had the slightestnotionof how it happenedthata melisma
adornedthewordcaput.Norwould thelate mediaevalpainters,who
simply
continuedan ancientand,by theirtimes,traditional iconographictype,have
knownthatSt. Peter'sgesture"hand to head" originally
perhapsreflected
a non-Romanor Orientalinterpretation of the MaundyThursdayrites.The
dichotomy betweennon-Romanand Romanpractices,so voiced
powerfully
in thefourthcenturyby both St. Ambroseand St. Augustine,and of some
importancein theirday, was no longerrationalized.Nevertheless,those
early-Christian antinomieshave lefttheirmarks,even thoughit is
onlyby
usingmanyoddlyshaped stepping-stones quarriedfromEasternand West-
ernrites,fromarchaeologyand iconography, fromtheologyand law, from
liturgyand musicology, thatwe can tracethesurvivalofexegeticdifferences
to a substratum ofwhichanysinglesourcewould be silent.
THE INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STDY
N. J.
Princeton,
18 Cf. Bukofzer,
"Caput redivivum:A new SourceforDufay'sMissa Caput,"Journalof
theAmericanMusicologicalSociety,IV (1951), 97-110.

Baptism of Apostles

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Baptism of Apostles

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Baptism of the Apostles

Author(s): Ernst H. Kantorowicz

ISee below, n. 160.

EasternElementsin WesternChant (MonumentaMusicaeByzantinae,SubsidiaII; Oxford,

participation in baptism,thento all appearancesthedominicalprescription

Zusammenstoss Jesumitdem pharisiiischen Oberpriesterauf dem Tempelplatz:Zu Pap. Ox.

In a similarvein Origen,a centurybeforeAphraates,had alreadyinter-

If by "dominicalsacrament"the Eucharistwas meant,then indeed the

' Brit. Mus., Add. MS. 17737-8, fol. 4'.

Aphraatesfurtherpointed out what the baptismallaving of the apostles

No doubtcould ariseforCyrillonasthattheFeet-washingwas theprepara-

AnastasiusSinaita,who laterexercisedconsiderableinfluenceon theRussian

To "illuminate"(cortELtw)means to baptize,and the "basin of the meal"

' Rituale ed. F. C. Conybeare(Oxford,1905), 219.

referring to the crossingof theJordanunderJoshua.41 While normallyboth

57; G. B. Ladner,"Die italienische Malereiim11. Jahrhundert," Jahrbuch derkunsthistorischen

Fulgentius XXVI Missale Gothicum

are implied already in Ephrem,

" Wilmart, "Les ordresdu Christ"(above,n. 43), has carefully inspectedthetextsreferred

Other actions,to be sure, are introducedin a similarfashion: Perungo te chrismasancti-

0"'Stiefenhofer, "Liturgische Fusswaschung"(above, n. 13), 327, sumsup the material

Those werestrongwordsdirectedagainstRomeand Romanusage,and not

suetudinem nonhabet,ut pedes lavet.Vide ergo,forteproptermultitudinem declinavit.Sunt

1oDe Sacramentis,III, 1, 5, Quasten,152,23 ff:Aliudesthumilitatis, aliudsanctificationis.

"Lord, not my feetonly,but also my hands and my head." Contrariwise,

disciplein an unfamiliar fashion:an almostterrified Peterremonstrates not

12" Moscow, HistoricalMuseum, Cod. 129, fol.50'.

" See also above, n. 113.

L. von Sybel, "Zwei Bronzen," Jahrbuchdes deutschen Archdiologischen Instituts,II

whichin greatvarietywere repeatedat the Maundyservice.'46 Also in the

tions are quoted by R. Arbesmann,"The Concept of 'Christus Medicus' in St. Augustine,"

14. BibleofFloreffe. Brit.Mus.,Add.MS. 17738,fol.4

17o. Fol.4 18c. Fol.

20. Ivrea,Bibl.Capit.,86, fol.50' 21. Gnesen,ChapterLibr.,MS. l

22. Brit,Mus.,RoyalMS. 1.D.X.,fol.4 23. M

26. Wilten Chalice. Vienna, K sthistsche Samm-

27. PsalterofSt. Louis.

28. Ivorydiptych. Paris,CollectionReubell 29. Ivorydiptych,leftwing. Paris,Muse'

- , <~-/I-.I- "-/,, t '

..._.. .. , W. ..... :. : ,r , /..-

31. Leningrad,PublicLibr.,MS. gr.21, fol.6' 32. Berlin,Staatsbibl.,

33. EarlyChristian ofSt.Peter's

34. EarlyChristian MusheLapidaire

36. GospelsofHenryII. Munich,Clm.4452,fol.105T 37. Br

40. Duccio,retable. Siena,MuseoOperadelDuomo

"Orb 42. Patmos,Mon.Giovanni,MS. 70, fol.177'

?7-tn~'T<' ce-o e E:, '? v",4'i P Ii- a

It ?' A <AA A't ?? .,..

45. Paris,Bibl.Nat.,Copte 13,fol.259'

46. Helmetfrm Megara,cheekpiece

47b. FoL 431

jar fromCorinth. Paris,BibL Nationale

49. Aryballos. Louvre

U.1 ? f' 'Ii , .-T

52. Crucifix, arm. Pisa,MuseoCivico

.t-? :ir? ~jc~r~ie;ia~g~

55. Spoleto,San Pietro,westfagade

56. Brit.Mus.,HarleyMS. 1526-27,fol.14' 57. CasketofFarfa. Rome,S. Paolo fuorile mura

'?- L~4t i: J'% r.-IN

59. GradualfromSaint-Yrieix.Paris,Bibl. Nat, lat. 903

JohnRylandsLibr.,MS. lat.24, fol.90

RomanMissalof1474 Italians. XV RomanCurrentUse

Rouen s. XIII Paris s. XIII Sarum s. XIII