Lübeck's Dance of Death

Is Dodendantz older than Des dodes dantz?

Summary: The book Dodendantz from 1520 is an extract of Des dodes dantz from 1489 (and not the other way around).

Des dodes dantz was printed in Lübeck in 1489 and consists of 1686 lines. Dodendantz was printed 1520 by the same printery and consists of 424 lines, two thirds of which are taken more or less verbatim from Des dodes dantz. The same pictures are used - except that Death-with-an-arrow seems to have disappeared.

Dodendantz 1520, Title page.
Dodendantz 1520, title page

Therefore it's natural to think of Dodendantz as an abbreviation of Des dodes dantz. Hermann Baethcke in the book Des dodes danz from 1876 mentions Dodendantz in passing as "Ein ziemlich ungeschickter auszug aus unserem texte" (=a rather clumsy extract of our text).

Apparently this simple fact is too simple for some art historians - among these Meyer and Seelmann.(1) They suggest that it is actually the other way around: Maybe the copy of Dodendantz from 1520 is simply a late re-print? Maybe it was originally published in 1487, and maybe Des dodes dantz is really an expansion of Dodendantz and the picture of Death with an arrow is an addition?

These unfounded speculations are then parroted by other writers: James M. Clark writes as if it were an undisputed fact, "This second Dance of Death is a new edition of a lost work printed between 1487 and 1489" And likewise Léonard P. Kurtz, "In fact it [Dodendantz] lay before the composer and the printer of the Dance of 1489 who borrowed many verses from it and used its wood blocks".

To support this strange claim, there are basically only two arguments. The one is that in Dodendantz each verse is precisely 6 lines - as if the text had stood under a painting - whereas the verses in Des Dodes Dantz are much longer and of varying length.

The other argument is that both books quote a third book named Zwiegespräches zwischen dem Leben und dem Tode from 1484, and Dodendantz in particular quotes this book very closely:

Zwiegespräch (1484)Des Dodes Dantz (1489)Dodendantz (1520)
God sprack mit synem hilligen munde:
Waket unde bedet to aller stunde,
De dod sendet ju neynnen breff,
Mer he kummet slikende alse eyn deff.


Hirumme waket, wente de dot sendet ju nenen bref,
He kumt sliken recht so ein def.
God sprickt mit synem hilgen munde:
Waket unde bedet to aller stunde,
De dot sendet juw nenen bref,
He kumpt slyken recht so eyn deff.
Neen, ik wyl dy noch anders spreken,
Ick wil dy dyn herte thobreken.
Hir en mach nemant wedder spreken,
Einem isliken wil ik sin herte tobreken.
Men ik wil dy anders to sprecken:
Holth an, ik wil dyn herte to breken

As one can see, the quotes in Dodendantz (1520) are longer and more verbatim than they are in Des Dodes Dantz (1489), and therefore (the argument goes) Dodendantz cannot be a copy of Des Dodes Dantz. But there's nothing to have prevented the author of Dodendantz (1520) to have obtained a copy of Zwiegespräch himself.

Those were the arguments, and it's evident that the people behind this theory have never held a facsimile copy of Dodendantz in their hands.(2) There's much to be said against the theory:

Des dodes dantz, title page.
Des dodes dantz, title page

Let us finish with two places in Dodendantz where Death speaks some very strange lines. The first one is when Death greets the canon by saying:

The Canon
The canon

Her domhere, proficiat! bona dies!
Wordestu vorgetten, dat were wat nyes!

 

Mr Canon, proficiat! bona dies!
If you became forgotten that would be something new!

This makes little sense and the sentence gets curiouser and curiouser in Copenhagen's Dance of Death where the translator has replaced "you" with "it" (this error is corrected in Dødedantz):

Her Domherre, Proficiat, Bona dies
bliffuer det forglemt her vorder nogit nyes

 

Mr Canon, proficiat! bona dies!
If it becomes forgotten - here will be something new

The explanation is found in Des dodes dantz where the canon (who speaks before Death) says:

Bischop to werden dat mochte mi ôk noch wol beschên,
Wolde de dôt noch lenger hebben mit mi oversên.

 

Bishop to become - that might also happen to me,
would Death still longer fail to see me.

... to which Death answers brutally:

Her dômhere, proficiat bona dies
Wan du vorgetten wordest van mi, dat were wat nies.

 

Mr Canon, proficiat! bona dies!
If you were forgotten by me, that would be something new.

So the "new" thing was that Death should have overlooked somebody. The sentence makes no sense in the two other books, proving that Des dodes dantz is the original.

The other weird expression is when Death tells the knight that the bread is up.

Further information

Footnotes: (1) (2) (3)

Wilhelm Seelmann's book from 1893 can be downloaded from The Internet Archive: Wilhelm Seelmann, Totentänze des Mittelalters
Meyer writes in his introduction that he uses a transcript of Dodendantz. Meyer's introduction has been converted to HTML in the Danish version of this site.

Seelmann writes (page 42), that there wasn't (then) any facsimiles of Dodendantz, and that he uses a description by Massmann: »Von dem Lübecker Drucke von 1520, der sich in Oxford befindet, sind keine Facsimile hergestellt, doch ist mit Hilfe der von Massmann gegebenen Beschreibung zu folgern, dass seine Holzschnitte identisch einerseits mit denen des dänischen Druckes, anderseits mit denen der Drucke von 1489 und 1496 sind.«

A minute comparison can be found in the book Totentänze by Brigitte Schulte.

Up to Dances of Death manuscripts