Plays based on the parable of the Prodigal Son enjoyed widespread popularity in sixteenth century Europe. Some of the primary issues in these plays are generation conflict, marital quarrels and lecherous lifestyle. In this paper we analyse how this biblical theme is dealt with in Catalan drama of medieval tradition. Two plays on the subject (one of them unpublished) are to be found in the important Llabrés manuscript (Ms. 1139, Biblioteca de Catalunya). We propose to compare these plays with European dramas on the same subject and to study the evolution of the drama, both from a textual and a scenic point of view.

Among the Catalan plays based on the New Testament, which until present have attracted very little scholarly attention, the two plays of the Prodigal Son from the important Majorcan dramatic repertory, contained in the Llabrés manuscript (copied between 1598 and 1599), represent a subgroup we consider differentiated enough to deserve special attention and a detailed study. In contrast with the manuscript's other plays based on the New Testament, the ones we analyse here do not deal with evangelical episodes of Jesus' life, but they stage a parable which - due to the absence of holy characters - is closer to the profane than the religious theatre. At the same time, it has an allegorical meaning and a didactic objective, characteristic for morality plays.

The story of the Prodigal Son was not the only parable that was considered to be stageworthy. The first verified use of the vernacular language in Christian theatre was a dramatisation of this kind: the Sponsus (end of the 11th century) which, half in Latin half in Occitan, is based on the parable of the Wise and the Foolish Virgins (Henrard 1998:15-28). One of the most famous stagings of this subject from the New Testament is, without doubt, the one performed by the Dominicans at the Tiergarten in Eisenach in 1321. According to the Cronica S. Petri Erfordensis Moderna (14th century), the Landgrave Frederick of Thuringia was so moved when he saw the foolish virgins punished that he left the performance prematurely and suffered a heart attack that his contemporaries attributed to the impact the drama had had on him. Other parables staged were: Lazarus and the rich man, who in some versions is called Nabal, Christi Vinea, that is to say, the parable of the workers in the vineyard and the biblical theme of the two paths: the broad one that leads to perdition and the narrow one that leads to salvation.

Originally, these plays were not staged in isolation: they either formed part of a festive context in the form of a tableau vivant, like the one performed on the occasion of the entry of Philip the Good in Ghent on 28 April 1458 (Rouanet 1901, IV: 264) or they served as a prologue to the main performance, as in the case of the Passion of Frankfurt of 1498, which was preceded by four dramatic pieces (Vorspiel), among which we find a divitis et pauperis Lazari and another filii perditionis (Froning 1892:542). Moreover, the latter are documented among the Sacre rappresentazioni in 15th century Florence (Bartolomaeis 1943, Kindermann 1980:211), as well as among the mystery plays staged during the Corpus Christ Procession in Valencia in 1571 (Fill pròdich) and in 1583 (Rich Avarient) (Corbató 1932-1933:153-154). Also on the occasion of the festivity of Corpus, El fill pròdig was performed in 1540, on a scaffold set up on the Plaça del blat in Cervera.

What differentiates the plays dealing with the parable of the Prodigal Son from other plays on subjects from the New Testament is that these plays, although they deal with a biblical theme, have much in common with the profane theatre in the tradition of Plautus and Terence, probably because it was easy to develop the range of characters and the plot independently of their original context.

The dramatic use of the parable of the Prodigal Son started to develop around 1200 with the dramatic poem Courtois d'Arras, which gives a detailed description of the protagonist's lecherous lifestyle, only touched upon in the biblical narration. Reference to the first dramatic version of the Prodigal Son is made only two centuries later. This was a performance of the Spel van dem Verloren Zoon in 1420 at Dendermonde (Flandern), "up stellinghen biweerds den kerchove de priestren ende capellane van der hoogher kerken". The title helps us to identify this staging as being really inspired by the biblical theme, that is to say, that it does not refer to a play which simply shares some thematic elements with the parable. We consider it important to point this out, because during the 14th and 15th century there is record of some Italian stagings that included elements from the parable like that of the contrasting brothers or subjects like the dissolute lifestyle, but which in spite of the similarities cannot be considered stagings of the biblical story.

Nevertheless, there is reason to suppose that the parable of the Prodigal Son was used in theatre before the Flemish play of 1420. We refer to the stained glass windows in the cathedrals of Bourges, Chartres and Sens (13th century), which include scenes absent from the Gospel's story, but which are to be found in many plays on the subject. There are, for example, the characters of the unloyal servant or the false friend, who accompanies the protagonist when he leaves home, hunting as a pastime of the prodigal son, the scene of gambling with dice leading to the final loss of his clothes, the expulsion from the inn for lack of money, the banquet to welcome home the prodigal in presence of the mother and, finally, the reconciliation of the brothers on the father's initiative. All these elements are more detailed than the biblical story and might reflect a dramatic practice familiar to the authors of the stained glass windows.

Whereas little can be said about the origins of the dramatisation of the parable of the Prodigal Son, its flowering in European drama is clearly situated in the 16th century, as we can see from the large number of plays on the subject, recorded during this century. In some cases, the theme's popularity even lasted until the nineteenth century, in the form of both operas and plays.

The biblical story (Luke 15, 11-32) that serves as a starting point for the dramatisation contains the following elements: (a) A father has two sons (v. 11), (b) the younger one claims his part of the inheritance and receives it (v. 12); (c) he leaves his father's house and wastes his money far away from home (v. 13); (d) he sinks into poverty (v. 14), (e) works as a swineherd (v. 15); (f) repents (vs. 17-19); (g) returns home and is forgiven by his father, who organises a banquet (vs. 20-24), whereas (h) the elder son shows his indignation and is finally calmed down by the father (vs. 25-32).

As the first part of the parable (vs. 1-17) is much more summarily described than the second one, which contains many passages in direct speech, the amplifications that are necessary for dramaturgic purposes and concentrated in the initial part of the play. The questions that the biblical story leaves open, but that needs to be answered in order to give dramatical cohesion to the play, are, for example: Why does the younger son claim his part of the inheritance? What is the father's immediate reaction when he hears his son's demand? Is the mother also present and if so, how does she take part in the action? How does the prodigal son lose his money? What effect does the father's conciliatory words have on the elder son?

The plays on the parable of the Prodigal Son differ in the way they answer these questions, in the way they organise the dramatic material and in the range of characters that take part in the action.

In 16th century Europe, the subject was used not only for the creation of edifying and didactical plays, in the tradition of religious theatre, but also for plays with many comical and popular elements, characteristic of profane theatre. Comparing the texts which have come down to us from this rich dramatic heritage, we observe that in the first case, the aim to proselytise or to manifest the religious discord prevails over the aim to entertain the spectators, whereas in the second case, the aim of attracting and amusing the audience can be considered as important as the didactic purpose.

In this regard, one of the main differences between the plays of these two dramatic traditions is the portrayal of the father, who, in the first case, is clearly a symbol of the Heavenly Father, whereas in the second he is portrayed as a humane, pious and, sometimes, even weak figure. This difference in the portrayal of the father can also be observed in the two Majorcan plays on the parable of the Prodigal Son: In the consueta, No. 13 (320 verses), the biblical model is closely adhered to the characterisation of the father and the presence of allegorical figures, and so the moralising and didactical objectives prevail over entertainment. The sobriety of this play contrasts with play No. 14 (591 versos), where all the characters are profane and where the entertainment is more important than edification, as we see, for example, in the short dialogue where the father is quarrelling with his wife about the education of the depraved son (vs. 66-101).

A play where the two tendencies - the religious and the profane - coexist is L'enfant prodigue, an anonymous French play, dated around 1510 by its editor Giuseppe Macrí (1982:48), who classifies it, according to the definition of L. Petit de Julleville, as a morality play, "in base all'allegorismo della trama e dei personaggi, e alla mescolanza del motivo religioso con lo svolgimento profano." However, more than a mixture it seems to combine two different lines of dramatic development. In fact, the play is divided into two clearly discernible parts: one which comprises the first 1461 versos and which, according to Macrí (1982:8), "seems to be a farce both for the material as for its structure", and a second one which is "purely edifying". It comprises the remaining 686 verses and closes with a brief sermon which illustrates the play's allegorical meaning.

Unlike the biblical story, most dramatisations of the parable show the prodigal son not simply as a youngster who wishes to become emancipated, but also in conflict with his family because of his lecherous lifestyle. In the French drama, L'enfant prodigue, the protagonist - apart from being portrayed as a careless and wasteful person - sneaks into his father's house to steal some valuable objects in order to pay his gambling debts.

Another constant element, which the biblical story does not explain in detail, is the bad company, which helps to ruin the young adventurer. Thus, in the French drama, the prodigal son is corrupted by two scoundrels, l'Enfant gasté and Le Rustre, who with the help of the "madam", La Macquerelle, and two prostitutes, Fin Cueur Doux and La Gorrière, manage to make him lose his money gambling.

The role of the elder son is also worth mentioning. Whereas in the Gospel this character does not intervene in the action until the end, in the plays he usually involved in it from the beginning. In the French drama, for example, the elder son's criticism of his brother's lifestyle is the reason why the younger wishes to leave. The origin of the conflict lies in the rivalry between the brothers and in the tense atmosphere that persists in spite of the father's attempts to conciliate.

The excesses of the prodigal son, which finally ruin him, are only mentioned in passing in the biblical text in the words of the elder brother: "devoravit substantium suam cum meretricibus" (Luke 15, 30). In staging how the prodigal son wastes his money in exchange for a life of pleasure, some plays are more explicit than others. The anonymous French playwright, for example, sets much of the action against a background of vice, and unlike the biblical model the prodigal son already indulges in the joys of wine, women, gluttony and gambling even before claiming his inheritance. The two Majorcan plays and authors like Gnaphaeus, Macropedius, Holle and Castellani do not show these scenes but the audience can imagine them because of the allusions that the characters make to them.

As for the mother's role, inexistent in the parable, this absence is explained in L'Enfant prodigue by the father's widowhood. This is revealed when the prodigal son expresses his intention to spend the wealth inherited by his mother, speculating that on his father's death he will receive another part of the inheritance.

After these scenes, which are prior to the prodigal's taking his inheritance and comprise the first 1043 verses, the remaining 1104 verses mainly follow the biblical story. This second part is structured by the intervention of the figure called L'Acteur, who periodically sums up the scenes, paraphrasing the biblical verses.

L'Enfant prodigue presents a variation when the owner of the swine questions the prodigal son on his past and advises him to return home. This good counsellor stands in contrast to the bad company who contributes to the protagonist's ruin.

A character added to the original story is the neighbour who in the French play is called Amy de Bonne Foy. On behalf of the prodigal son, he goes to the father to bring him the news of his son’s repentance. Moreover, the final reconciliation of the brothers is accomplished thanks to the active participation of this character.

Comparing the elements of the short biblical story with the more detailed stage representations, we observe that the French play only begins to coincide with the parable from v. 1044 onwards. The dramatic action prior to this verse is independent of the biblical tradition and constitutes a framework that the playwright creates in order to justify the son's decision to leave his father's home. According to the Ciceronian definition that comedy has to be "humanae vitae speculum", this part of the play presents everyday questions, like the rivalry between brothers, generation conflict and lecherous lifestyle.

The Dutch version of 1540 differs from its French model by including an introductory passage in prose that sums up the action up to the moment when the prodigal son sneaks into his father's home to steal valuable objects in order to pay off his debts.

The most widespread use of the parable of the Prodigal Son in 16th century Europe is to be found in German-speaking areas, where the biblical argument was used, during the first third of the century by Protestants and to a lesser degree by Catholics, in order to defend the validity of their theory of justification before God. Thus, according to the Lutheran postulate of sola fide, the reformists emphasised the idea that the sinner, symbolised by the prodigal son, is only saved by his faith, in contrast to the one who relies on his good works, thinking that they lead him to salvation, and who appears in the parable as the elder son, who disdains his father's mercy towards the repentant son. In some plays the attack on the Catholic theory of justification was even reinforced by an attack against the religious orders and monastic life. Thus, as an amplification of the biblical story, the elder son, furious about his father's apparent injustice, becomes a Carthusian and sins against humility, thinking that he can achieve salvation on his own. In contrast to reformists' interpretation of the parable, the playwrights of the Counter-reformation emphasised aspects such as the sinner's need to repent and the belief in God's mercy, personified in the father, who treats his repentant son with mercy.

Most of German dramatisations of the parable of the Prodigal Son follow the Neolatin model of Asotus by Gnaphaeus, which we will comment on later. However, there is a still earlier version in Low German, of 2031 verses, which is considered to be one of the finest pieces of German drama of the 16th century. The play entitled De parabell vam vorlorn Szohn Luce am XV. gespelet vnnd Christlick gehandelt, nha ynnholt des Textes, ordentlick na dem geystlicken vorstande sambt aller vmstendicheit vthgelacht, was staged on 17 February 1527 in Riga, possibly directed by its author, Burkhard Waldis, a former Thuringian Franciscan who came into contact with Protestantism on a papal mission to the capital of Letonia. After two years imprisoned in the Baltic city, he embraced the new doctrine and began his activity as a playwright and director of the Fastnachtspiele (carnival plays), of which the Vorlorn Szohn is the first and most important.

The play begins with a speech by the character of the Actor, who explains that the play will demonstrate the postulate that only faith and not good works can give salvation. Then a child recites the passage from the Gospel according to Luke in the Lutheran translation. In the next speech of the Actor, Waldis declares his conviction that the biblical story has to be transmitted in an austere style and not as a fairy tale. Moreover, he expresses his determination to use his play to fight against the Pope, against the doctrine of justification through good works and against the celebration of Carnival in Rome, which he considers "pagan idolatry".

The Lutheran choral "Nun bitten wir den heiligen Geist" precedes the protagonist's initial monologue, in which he complains of having to obey his father. When he sees his brother's lack of understanding, he decides to leave and to claim his part of the inheritance. His father does not manage to make him change his mind and finally yields to his son's wish. The following scene takes place in an inn, where the innkeeper blames his lack of clients on Luther's sermons. A rascal promises to help him and returns with the prodigal son, who surrenders to the temptations of wine, food, music and song, flirting with women and gambling with dice. When the protagonist accuses the innkeeper of cheating, a scuffle breaks out, and finally the prodigal son has to flee barefoot and half-naked. He becomes a swineherd and is chased away for having laid hands on the swine's fodder. The lamentation of the prodigal son is followed by a parenetic passage in which the Actor explains that conversion is necessary both for the elder son, who considers himself just because of his good works, as for the younger son, who is a slave of his vices.

In the second part of the play, which begins with liturgical songs, the prodigal's homecoming is staged in line with the biblical story, except that the elder son, instead of taking part in the banquet, leaves home in fury and decides to enter a religious order. Once more, the Actor insists on the idea that faith is more important than good works; an idea which is exemplified by the conversion of the innkeeper and the disdain of the elder son, who feels superior to the sinner, an attitude which is criticised by the Actor. Finally, the child, who in the beginning recited the Gospel, says a benediction in verse and the play ends with the singing of half a dozen of psalms, including one that Luther had recommended especially to the Christians of Riga. None of the later dramatisations of the parable promotes the Protestant doctrine of sola fide as fervently as this play by Waldis.

Chronologically, the next play we know of was published in 1537 under the title Eyn Parabel oder glichnus, vß dem Euangelio Luce am 15. von dem verlorenen, oder Güdigen Sun mit sprüchen anzeygt nutzlich vnd kurtzwylig zu lesen, by Hans Salat, director of the first stagings of the Passion plays on the Weinmarkt of Lucerne.

Assuming that the play Der verlorene Sohn was written to be performed in the same place as the Passion, Schweckendiek (1930:31-39) reconstructs a possible staging of the parable in the following way: As the father symbolises God Father, his house has to be set up in the same place where, during the Passion play, Paradise was situated, namely, in the eastern part of the square, where the House of the Sun stands (Haus zur Sonnen). In the opposite side, on a scaffold that covered the fountain, where, during the Passion play the Sepulchre was situated, we would find the Inn, where the prodigal son's riotous living would be shown. The placement of Hell, although not mentioned explicitly in the play, is deduced by the presence of two devils on stage (v. 755) and would coincide with the Hell of the Passion play, in the northwestern side of the square, next to the fountain. In spite of the coherence of this proposal, Stumpfl (1931:472-479) rejects it as implausible, not only as far as the site is concerned, which he considers too spacious for a staging of something much more modest than the Passion play, but also because of a rubric which seems to point to successive scenes with different meanings in the same place rather than to the use of the medieval simultaneous stage.

Michael (1984:183) discounts the possibility that Salat's play was a Catholic reply to Waldis' belligerent version, as Spengler (1888:12) and Schweckendiek (1930:3) suppose. Considering the important differences between the author's dialects, he reckons that it is more likely that both plays were conceived independently from each other.

A Protestant version of the parable was written by the author of the famous Carnival plays of Nuremberg, Hans Sachs. His play, Comedia. Mit Neun personen. Der verlorn Son (1556), coincides with Waldis' work when it comes to the irreconcilable attitude of the elder brother, who becomes a Carthusian in order to protest against his father's mercy. Other characters, who appear in the play, although they are not mentioned explicitly in the parable, are two prostitutes, Dulceda and Hilla, and the sponger, Wolff, who instigates the prodigal son to claim his inheritance and then abandons him when he is reduced to poverty. A character of particular interest is the malicious stepmother. She is the reason why the prodigal son wants to leave home, and this particular variation on the parable is only found in this play.

From the last third of the 14th century onwards and during the 15th century, the Italian humanist circles produced comedies in Latin that took situations, subjects and characters from Plautus and Terence and combined them with scenes from contemporary life. At the beginning of the 16th century, students from aristocratic backgrounds, educated in Italy, introduced the comoedia palliata to German theatre (Borcherdt 1939:153). Thus it is not surprising that the humanist plays based on the parable reflect works like Heautontimorumenos and Eunuchus by Terence, or Mostellaria and Captivi by Plautus. These stagings, carried out by students, fulfilled a triple objective: the training of memory, the practice of Latin and the exercise of declamation. Following the model of the Neolatin comedies, vernacular versions sprang up all around Europe.

Among the playwrights most successful in synthesising the classical comedy and the biblical theme, we find the Dutch schoolmaster Willem de Volder (1493-1568), who, under the name of Gulielmus Gnaphaeus, published in 1529 in Antwerp his Acolastus sive de filio prodigo, in Latin, which not only ran to around sixty editions during the 16th century but was widely translated.

Apart from the prodigal son (Acolastus), the father (Pelargus) and the owner of the swine (Chremes), a number of additional characters appear in the play: the good counsellor of the father (Eubulus), the bad counsellor (Philautus) and the good angel of the prodigal son (Genius), plus a number of characters taken from the commedia palliata, like the leno (Sanno), the parasitus (Pamphagus), the scurra (Pantolabus), the servus (Syrus), the ancillae (Bromia and Syra) and the meretrix (Lais). On the other hand, the biblical character of the elder son is absent in this play, that directly or indirectly served as a model for various vernacular dramatisations of the parable.

Kindermann (1986:70) attributes Acolastus' enormous success to the fact that, unlike other playwrights, Gnaphaeus kept out of the doctrinal controversy, that is to say, he refrained from using drama to promote the doctrine of the sola fide. In this way, supporters of both positions were able to use this play written by a Protestant author for their purposes. In the second half of the 16th century the Jesuits staged the play in Vienna.

Less influential than Gnaphaeus was the headmaster of the college of Utrecht, Joris van Langhveldt (Georgius Macropedius) who wrote his Asotus evangelicus, seu evangelica de filio prodigo parabola. This play, written in Latin in 1510, was not published until 1537. Apart from the biblical characters, the son (Asotus), the father (Eumenius) and the elder son (Philaetius), there are four servi frugi (Tribonius, Merimnus, Cometa, Thryptus), two servi nequam (Comasta, Daetrus), a parasitus (Colax), two meretrices (Planesium, Margaenium), an ancilla, four lorarii and two devils (Belial and Astaroth).

Spengler (1888:37-50) detects more influence by Plautus than Terence; he points out the play's considerable literary quality and attributes its lack of continuity to its complexity in comparison to the Acolastus. As far as the dramatic development is concerned, in the Asotus, as well as in L'Enfant prodigue (ca. 1510), the scenes of dissolute life take place before the claim for the inheritance, whereas the prodigal son's perdition after leaving home is not shown on stage but is reported by a foreigner to the father. It is a dramatic solution not taken up in other plays on this subject. On the other hand, the devil, which we find for the first time in Asotus, also appears in later plays that are based on the parable.

Apart from the plays by these two Dutch schoolmasters, there are two other Latin versions of this story which might have exercised some influence on later vernacular plays: the Filius prodigus by Antonio Viperano, published in 1593 in Naples (Rouanet 1901, IV: 267) and an anonymous Comoedia prodigi filii from the 16th century.

During the 16th century the story of the Prodigal Son continued to be staged throughout Europe, especially in German-speaking areas, in the form of vernacular plays devised in imitation of the humanist erudite comedies.

Thus in 1535, Georg Binder, a friend and collaborator of the reformer Zwingli, published and staged in Zurich his Acolastus. Ein Comoedia von dem Verlorne Sun. It is a translation of Gnaphaeus's play, that follows the Latin play closely, except for the amplification at the end in form of the homecoming banquet, at which the mother expresses her guilt for having spoiled her son. As in the Majorcan play No. 14 (vs. 568-575) and in the Hijo pródigo by Alonso Remón (vs. 1349-1396), the play ends with the brothers' reconciliation thanks to the father, as shown on the stained glass window in the cathedral of Bourges mentioned earlier.

Another play that follows the Acolastus by Gnaphaeus, yet not as closely as the Comoedia by Binder, is the version by Johann Ackermann, staged in Zwickau (Saxony) in 1536 with the title Ein Schönes Geistliches und fast nutzliches Spiel vom verlornen Son. The characters are taken from the Latin model, except for the addition of the elder son and the mother, and the absence of the bad counsellor, Philautus. In contrast to Binder, who includes the mother only in the final scene, Ackermann includes her from the beginning, making her responsible for her son's misbehaviour. Yet the person, who reproaches the mother of her excessive leniency towards her son, is not the husband, as in the Majorcan play No. 14 (vs. 76-77), but a neighbour called upon by the father to bring the prodigal son to his senses. Shortly before the protagonist returns home, this character appears once again, following the model provided by the Acolastus, and consoles the father, who is afflicted because he does not know what has happened to his son. As far as the end of the play is concerned, Ackermann, instead of following Gnaphaeus, shows the elder son's indignation at the father's compassion.

Another play on the subject is Ein schönes Evangelisch Spil von dem verlornen Sun, staged in Colmar (Alsacia) in 1540. The author, Georg Wickram, uses 32 characters, many more than his predecessors, something which Holstein (1880:25) thinks is due to the fact that it was not a play to be performed at a college but by town and it had to allow a greater community participation. The author's desire to satisfy the demand of those who wanted to take part in the staging would explain the inclusion of many secondary characters, like the jester Nebulus or the caretaker, the cook and the butcher, as well as the multiplication of characters like the neighbour, called Eubulus in Binder's play, that Wickram turns into four friends who advise the father. In regard to the elaboration of the characters, Spengler (1888:69) criticises the way that the author, in many cases confines himself to multiplying the characters provided by his models, Gnaphaeus, Binder and Ackermann, instead of giving them a proper identity. In the same way as the Asotus by Macropedius, L'enfant prodigue and the Majorcan play No. 14, the prodigal son in Wickram's play is already leading a dissolute life before he claims his inheritance. What differentiates this play from the others is that the parents, despite their anxiety, greet their son's plea with understanding.

While the authorship of most German plays of the Prodigal Son is clear, nothing is known about the author of the play Der verloren sun, published in 1541. Michael (1984:245) points out that, other than taking the characters' names from the Acolastus, the play develops the subject in its own way, without any detectable influences from other versions. Here we find, for example, as a newly invented character a sister of the opposing brothers. Another character without biblical correspondence is the disloyal servant who accompanies the prodigal son when he leaves home and then abandons him when he has lost his fortune.

Among the plays that follow the Acolastus one worthy of comment was written by Wolfgang Schmeltzl and published in 1545 with the title Comedia des verlornen Sons (ed. Rössler 1955). Five years earlier, the author had staged Binder's play with a group of students in the Scottish college of Vienna, and when wrote his own version, he considerably reduced the number of verses. Schmeltzl eliminates the figure of the mother and confines the elder son's intervention to the final scene, including the brothers' reconciliation at the request of the father.

Another adaptation of Binder's Acolastus is the Palatine version, copied in 1556 by the son of the duke Wolfgang of Zweibrücken. Going by the fact that the cast list of characters assigns the role of the neighbour Eubulus and the epilogue to the duke, the editor Schmidt (1906:234) supposes that Wolfgang took part in the play together with the schoolmates of his son Phillip, aged only eight when he copied the text. Nevertheless, Buttmann (1909:23) considers an earlier staging, before 1540, when the duke was still a child, more plausible. Thus, the blank space in the manuscript, where the date of staging should have been indicated, could be explained by the fact that Wolfgang was not able to remember it exactly.

According to the comparative study by Schmidt (1906:245-254), the variations in respect to Binder and Schmeltzl are mainly formal. The anonymous adaptator improves some of the rhymes and changes the metre of some verses. Other modifications are the inclusion of the character of the housemaid, also found in the Majorcan play No. 14, and the suppression of some passages that, according to Schmidt, the adaptador did not consider suitable for children.

In 1586, Nicolaus Risleben published and staged his Asotus. Comoedia. Vom verloren Son, aus dem funffzehenden Capitel S. Lucae at the college he directed in Salzwedel (Magdeburg), taking as a model Macropedius's plays. Except for the names of Eubulus, Philautus and Pamphagus, taken from Gnaphaeus, Risleben follows his model nearly literally on the basis of the translation by Ackermann (Spengler 1888:56). Like the plays by Gnaphaeus, Salat and Wickram, the cast list of characters also includes a jester, named Morio, who has a moralising function. Moreover, we should mention the invention of two devils, called Lorcaballus and Marcolappus, who try to make the desperate protagonist commit suicide, until the archangel Raphael chases them away.

Apart from the cited works, there are still some plays based on the parable that should be mentioned, even if the texts have not come down to us: a Ladinian version, written in 1542 by Johannes Travers from Zutz (Engadine) (Spengler 1888:161); two German plays, the Historie vom verlohrnen Sohn, written around 1570 by Hans Wilhelm Kirchhof for the Landgrave Wilhelm de Hesse (Holstein 1880:31) and the Asotus poenitens, eine Comedy, darin nicht allein die große Vnart der boesen Jugendt, sondern auch das gantze Leben des armen Sünders, vor vnd nach der Bekerung zu Gott, fein artig abgemahlt wird, by Christian Schön, published in 1599 in Wittenberg (Holstein 1880:33) and a Portuguese play, entitled O Pródigo, written in verse and prose by Joao Lopes de Oliveira and approved by the tribunal of inquisition of Evora on 25 August 1590 (Rouanet 1901, IV:263).

There are many references to stagings of anonymous versions from the 16th century. Even if the great majority are German plays, there are also, for example, two French stagings in Laval (1504) and Beveren (1550) (Spengler 1888:172); two Czech stagings in Eger (O ztraceném synovi, 1537) and Olmütz (O marnotratném synovi, 1574) (Kindermann 1986, II: 147, 240); a Spanish staging on the occasion of Corpus Christi in Seville (1559); an English staging in London (1559); and a staging of the Acolastus in Danish in Ribe (1571) (Kindermann 1986, II: 136).

Whereas in the German speaking areas most of the plays on the parable of the Prodigal Son follow the model provided by the Dutch schoolmasters, the plays in Romance languages are independent of this tradition. That is to say that the plays in Catalan, Spanish, French and Italian make use if the parable in a different way than the plays in German, which as, we have seen, are mainly inspired by the Acolastus by Gnaphaeus.

From 16th century Spanish stagings, three versions of the subject have come down to us: the Aucto del hijo pródigo (No. 48), published by Rouanet (1901:IV, 294-313), which comprises 570 verses, is preceded by a Loa (vs. 1- 26) and begins with the father's lamentation on his son's disobedience and the reproach that the mother has spoiled him with her indulgence (vs. 27-51), an element that we also find in the Majorcan play No. 14 (vs. 76-77) and in the plays by Wickram (vs. 1108-1121) and Ackermann (Spengler 1888:28). The son enters stage, richly dressed, ignores his father's criticism and claims his portion of the inheritance (vs. 52-102). Then comes the jester, who compromises the son in his father eyes by revealing that two women desire to see him (vs. 103-131). The mother, upset by the discussion between father and son, defies her husband and both end up blaming each other for their son's misbehaviour. Deaf to their entreaties, the boy finally leaves them alone with their grief (vs. 132-186). In the following scenes, the prodigal son is shown to be a spendthrift, a philanderer and a gambler. First, he meets a Portuguese dog salesman (vs. 187-291) and then he comes across a young woman, a prostitute and a servant called Sedulo (vs. 292-371). As ruin is not long in coming, the protagonist soon finds himself obliged to beg for work (vs. 372-435). Demoralised and repentant, he decides to return home, where unexpectedly he is received joyfully by his father (vs. 436-521), who also manages to dissipate the jealousy of the elder son. The play ends with the jester's farewell speech (vs. 522-571).

Alenda y Mira (1918:104) points out that the anonymous playwright creates characters that clearly belong to the 16th century, Flecniakoska (1961:316) interprets the play as a satirical work that criticises the fashions that fatally attracted youth during this period and De los Reyes (1988, II: 569) emphasises that the play should not to be considered a simple recreation of the biblical story but a contemporary parable set in a specific historical moment. Yet to our mind, none of the dramatisations of the parable merely "recreate" on stage the short biblical text. We believe that the changes in the Spanish auto stem not so much from the playwright's wish to set the story in a contemporary context than from a dramatic imperative.

A play, which does seem to be draw on a specific sociocultural background is the Comedia pródiga by Luis de Miranda (1554, ed. Pérez Gómez 1953): it offers a realistic interpretation of the biblical story and places the action and the characters in a historical context. According to Pérez Priego (1998:63), this 3000-odd-verse play with a large cast is clearly inspired by De Rojas' Celestina. It shows the miserable life led by the soldiers, the lack of loyalty of the servants and the venality of justice.

A third Spanish play from the 16th century is the Auto del hijo pródigo by Alonso Remón, written in 1599 (Biblioteca Nacional of Madrid, Ms. 15312) (ed. Fernández Nieto 1974). Whereas Dietz (1961:37) points to the resemblance between this play and the Auto No. 48 from the Codice de Autos Viejos (CAV), De los Reyes (1988, II: 638) argues that the similarities are limited to the subject and the presence of two women. Moreover, he remarks that in comparison with the Auto No. 58, the play by Alonso Remón is much more detailed, uses a much more sophisticated scenery and has a larger cast.

One of the most remarkable aspects in this play is the appearance of two allegorical characters, Despair and Confidence. The rubric indicates:

For this surprising scene, two scenic devices, characteristic for medieval theatre, are necessary: the mouth of hell from which the malicious figure steps out and some kind of aerial artefact for the celestial appearance. The scene ends as follows:

Another interesting aspect is the disguise used by the disloyal servant Servio to frighten people and to rob them. He appears covered by a bearskin and wears the head of a boar making the prodigal son shudder. There is no other play on the subject with such a scene.

The Italian stage was among the first to use the theme of the Prodigal Son. Not only are plays on the parable documented among the 15th century Florentine Sacre rappresentazioni (Bartholomaeis 1943; Kindermann 1980:211), but one of the earliest dramatisations by a known author is a Florentine play from the end of the 15th century: the Rappresentazione del figliuol prodigo, a play written by Antonia Gianotti Pulci, married to Bernardo Pulci and one of the first known female playwrights in the history of theatre. The play comprises 556 verses, was written before 1496 and went through of a dozen editions by 1627 (Spengler 1888:156). Like L'enfant prodigue, the protagonist loses his money by playing cards before he claims his inheritance. It is worth mentioning that the prodigal son, having left his father's home, is accompanied by an allegorical representation of the seven deadly sins. As we have seen in other cases, the Rappresentazione ends with the brothers' reconciliation.

At the beginning of the 16th century, there is another Rappresentazione del figliuol prodigo, written by Pierozzo Castellano de Castellani (1461-1519). It portrays the son as a youngster who is corrupted by bad company. As in L'enfant prodigue, the Italian play begins before the prodigal claims his inheritance and shows him surrounded by scoundrels who end up ruining him. One of the play's peculiarities is that the licentious scenes are not shown explicitly but the audience can imagine them because of the father's lamentations about his son's misbehaviour. Note also that Castellani refrains from characterising the elder son as jealous and resentful.

A play which is quite distant from the biblical text and from other plays on the same subject is Il Figliuol prodigo, commedia di cinque atti in prosa (ed. Milanesi 1856), written by the Florentine playwright Gianmaria Cecchi (1518-87), following the model of the commoedia palliata. In spite of the title, the prodigal son, called Panfilo, is not the principal character in the play but appears only as the friend of the hero, Polibio. In fact, the only coincidence between Cecchi's play and the parable is the scene that shows the homecoming of the repentant son.

Finally, we should also cite the Rappresentazione del figliuolo prodigo by Mauritio Moro, published in Venice in 1585 (Holstein 1880:51). According to the description by Spengler (1888:160), the play follows the parable very closely and contains long rhetorical passages, spoken by the father and the prodigal son. Apart from the biblical characters (the father, the two sons and a citizen), the play includes a scoundrel, an innkeeper and two merchants. A peculiarity of the play is that instead of showing how the prodigal son wastes his money, we only see him entering the inn, accompanied by the scoundrel.

The two Majorcan plays based on the parable of the Prodigal Son are the earliest surviving Catalan dramatic texts on this subject. However, it is known that the theme was already present in the Catalan speaking areas before the Llabrés manuscript was written, but of the above mentioned staging in Cervera (1540) there is no documented text and as far as the play from the Corpus Christi Play from Valencia (1571) is concerned, Romeu (1995, II: 24n) counts it among the plays that "must have been much more curtailed, or maybe simply showing living images with some figurant parts".

As to the persistence of the theme in Catalan theatre, we should first cite the Comèdia del Fill pròdig, in a Majorcan manuscript from the 18th century, which reproduces nearly entirely the role of Vanity from the Majorcan play No. 13 (Mas 1996:96). A version which is different from the Majorcan one, not only with regard to the characters but also as far as the scenic development is concerned, is one from the Arxiu Municipal of Palafrugell, described by Angulo (1992:256-257) and published with amplifications in Barcelona (19th century) and Girona (1900).

Whereas the other plays based on the New Testament in the Llabrés manuscript deal with episodes from the life of Jesus, the two plays of the Prodigal Son stage a biblical theme without the intervention of sacred characters. In contrast to the plays about the birth of Christ, the Saints' Lives or Holy Week, these plays are not linked to any specific liturgical period. Nevertheless, we know that the staging of the parable of the Prodigal Son was sometimes paired with the Passion Play, as in Frankfurt (1498), or that it could also be part of the Corpus Christi festivities, as in Cervera (1540), Seville (1559) and Valencia (1571). Moreover, it is documented that in German-speaking areas, the theme of the Prodigal Son was also present in the Carnival plays, examples being Bremen (1537), Zwickau (1549), Heiligenstadt (1582) and Zeitz (1582) (Spengler 1888:171-173).

The rubrics of the Majorcan plays based in the Old and the New Testament usually do not specify the occasion for which they were written. Moreover, there are also very few recorded references to stagings of the rich dramatic repertory, discovered by Llabrés (cf. Llompart 1980). Yet after studying all the plays from the manuscript, Romeu (1994, I: 149) considers that the pieces that go from Abraham to the Final Judgement belong to the Passion Cycle. In the same way, the editors of the first Majorcan play on the Prodigal Son see the plays from the Ms 1139 that are based on the New Testament as an "ideal prologue to the Easter Cycle" (Cenoz/Huerta 1986:261).

Where were they staged? Romeu (1995, II: 52) deduces from a comparative analysis of the rubrics that most of these Majorcan plays must have been staged in churches. However, neither of the two plays on the Prodigal Son contains any rubrics to confirm this assertion.

The disposition of the scenery is not specified in the rubrics of the first play. Yet the need for different loca can easily be deduced from the text. We suppose that the initial dialogue in which the prodigal son claims his inheritance (vs. 1-52) takes place in the space that at the end of the play (v. 275r) is identified as "the house". From here, the prodigal son goes on to a place where he meets the allegorical character of Vanity. This place must be at a certain distance from the first one because the protagonist says: "I come from far away" (v. 92) and "I've been looking for you for a long time and I've walked a long way" (vs. 102/103). After this dialogue between the prodigal son and Vanity (vs. 53-128), not only do they step aside, as the rubric indicates (v. 128r), but have to leave the stage so that the protagonist can change his clothes without being seen by the spectators.

Meanwhile the action goes on with the dialogue between the father and the elder son probably in the first scenic place (vs. 129-144). The following change of position is announced, when the father sends the obedient son to their "property" (v. 137), asking him to look after the "cultivation" (v. 138) and to supervise the workers. Trying to interpret this reference, Cenoz and Huerta (1986:269) point out that maybe the field with some people at work was represented on stage. We think that this new focus of interest would have attracted the spectator's attention too much and that, as a consequence, it would have diminished the impact of the unexpected arrival of the prodigal son "dressed in old and shabby clothes" (v. 156r) and complaining about his misfortune (vs. 157-169); a scene which is one of the crucial moments in the play.

When suddenly the desperate young man comes across the Devil, "in the shape of a knight", (v. 169r), Cenoz and Huerta (1986:270) suppose that this happens "where previously Vanity had met the prodigal". But the rubrics do not contain any reference to this and, for this reason, that the conversation between the prodigal son and the Devil (vs. 170-180) might take place in any other part of the stage. From this point, Lucifer sends the prodigal son to look after the swine in a "great forest" (v. 178), that is to say some part of the scenery decorated with trees and other plants.

The prodigal son accepts the offer (v. 180) and goes to the place indicated by the devil, which pronounces a monologue revealing his identity (vs. 181-192). From the protagonist's words "I should rise up and go [...]" (v. 196), we deduce that during the devil's speech he must have been sitting or lying in some corner of the stage.

At the end of his reflections (vs. 193-208), he starts back home and runs across his father, who is hurrying to embrace him (vs. 209-216r). Touched by his son's repentance, the father expresses the love and tenderness he feels for him (vs. 217-224). Then he sends the servants to bring clothes for the prodigal son and to prepare the banquet (vs. 225-264). When the prodigal son is richly dressed, the father tells the servants to finish the preparations for the joyful reception (vs. 265-267). And when father and son are approaching their home, the music starts playing (vs. 268-276).

Finally, the elder son arrives "from the property" (v. 276r); he is told by one of the servants what has happened in the meantime (vs. 277-288) and he objects to the invitation to enter the house, which is probably a conventional construction with an open front side, so that the scenes in its interior are visible to the audience (vs. 289-292). Then follows a short dialogue in which the servant informs the father that the elder son "is outside and declines to come in" (v. 291).

Next, the father goes out and manages to convince his son to join the celebration (vs. 293-308) and the final scene takes place inside the house, where the father admonishes his sons to love each other and to obey him. The play ends with the sons' promises to fulfil these wishes (vs. 309-320).

Although the rubrics are not explicit in this respect, we can deduce from the movements of the characters that the play was to be staged on a single scaffold with at least three different loca: the father's house, the place where the prodigal son meets Vanity (and which later on could be used as the place where the protagonist meets the Devil) and the place designed as "the woods", where the prodigal son would sit or lie down just before returning home. Although it does not seem to be absolutely necessary, we admit there might be a fourth locus, which stands for the father's property and where the elder son would stay until the end of the play.

The second Majorcan play begins with the father's lamentation about his wayward son (vs. 1-24). After his initial monologue, the father calls the housemaid, Isabeleta and asks her to tell him where his son is. When she gives him an evasive answer, he sends her to call for his wife (vs. 25-59). After a short dialogue between the two women (v. 60-65), the mother goes to the place where her husband is waiting. Then the parents argue about who is to blame for the son's irresponsible behaviour (vs. 66-101).

Although the rubrics do not specify where these verses are spoken, we suppose that the initial scenes take place at the locus which represents the house and which would have two zones: an exterior one (where the father is standing) and a more remote one (where the mother is talking to the house-maid).

When the father asks the young woman to make the prodigal son come and she finally accepts to do so (vs. 102-103), nothing is said about the place where the prodigal son is up to this moment. The house does not seem to be his hiding place because the father says that he has not seen him for three days (v. 14) and also because the housemaid says that he has gone out (v. 33). Nevertheless, the father suspects that Isabeleta knows where the boy is, and in fact he is right about this. At her request (vs. 104-107), the prodigal son goes to see his father, tells him that he went out "for a walk" (v. 110) and starts arguing (vs. 108-135). When the mother takes sides with her son, the father gets even angrier, the conflict reaches its climax and the prodigal son claims his inheritance (vs. 136-159). At first, the father turns down the demand but finally he resigns himself and draws up a bill for his son. Then the boy leaves home and, according to the rubrics, the parents "sit down" (v. 179r), that is to say, that they stay on stage, according to the medieval tradition of the simultaneous stage.

The prodigal son joyfully sends his servant Gimel to get the bill cashed but then he seems to distrust him and wants to send the other servant, called Alep, to supervise the transaction. Yet it is not necessary, because at this very moment, Gimel comes back with the money and the three of them start singing (vs. 180-219). Then the prodigal son expresses his wish to be richly dressed and, accompanied by his servants; he goes to see a tailor (vs. 220-231).

For a short moment, the action returns to the place where the father is standing in grief because his son has left him without even saying good-bye (vs. 232-239). It is worth mentioning that the mother does not intervene any more in the action, which makes us think that the initial scenes were probably added to a previous version in which, like the biblical model, the mother is absent.

The following scenes show the prodigal son's adventures far away from home. The first to appear on stage are his two servants, who according to the rubrics are "carrying pieces of luggage as if they have disembarked" (v. 239r). As they are in charge of looking for lodging in a place that Gimel refers to as a "very pleasing city" (v. 240); they hurry away when they see the prodigal son coming. Then they reach a scaffold where they find what they have been looking for. The innkeeper makes them come in, inviting them to see the "beautiful room" (v. 256) that is at their disposal.

When Alep sees that the prodigal son is near, he exhorts Gimel to go and join him, but at this moment the protagonists arrives at the scaffold and starts talking to the innkeeper (vs. 260-267). As the servants only meet with their superior later on, they have to go away in one direction, whereas the prodigal son and the innkeeper enter on the other side. Nevertheless, it is not clear where Gimel and Alep exchange some words about the protagonist (vs. 268-271). Yet there is no doubt about the fact that they both have to be outside the inn when the innkeeper comes out to while the prodigal son stays inside (v. 271r). The innkeeper tells them about the pleasures that the prodigal son has asked him for; he leaves and returns shortly afterwards (vs. 272-283r).

Then the servants want to see what their superior is doing but they do not find him in his room (v. 290). The innkeeper return and tells them that the prodigal son has gone away "in search of happiness and pleasure" (v. 293-295). Concerned at these words, the servants fear that it will not be long until he is ruined (vs. 296-306). Although the rubrics do not indicate anything here, the innkeeper has to enter the room, while Alep and Gimel go on speculating about their uncertain future (vs. 3078-311). The innkeeper calls them to come inside to listen to the conversation he has with the prodigal son about the money he owes him. Finally, the innkeeper agrees to accept the money obtained from selling the prodigal son's clothes in payment (vs. 314-327).

Yet, when the innkeeper is once again alone with the servants, he asks them to steal the prodigal son's clothes while he is sleeping. Alep and Gimel agree to this plan (vs. 328-338) and the innkeeper goes to see the prodigal son once again and tells him about the allegedly insufficient profit from the sale of the clothes. The prodigal son promises to pay off his debts (vs. 339-347) and when he is alone with his servants he asks them to convince the innkeeper to let them stay a little longer (vs. 348-355). The disloyal servants fake their intention to help him but, behind his back, they reaffirm the pact with the innkeeper (vs. 356-365), they steal the clothes (v. 366-371) and run away with the loot (vs. 372-375). Once that he has discovered the betrayal, the innkeeper tries to get rid of the prodigal son as soon as possible and sends him away, covered in rags (vs. 376-387).

Complaining of his fate, the prodigal son roams around (vs. 388-411), until he comes across a citizen who is willing to let him keep his pigs (vs. 412-439) and offers him the "thousands of good herbs" that he will find in the fields (v. 430). The prodigal son accepts the work, talks himself into repentance about his past (vs. 440-451), and when he arrives at the indicated place he "lies down under some branches" (v. 451r).

This is the moment when the father appears once again. He is anxious to know what has happened to his son and asks God not to let him die without getting news (vs. 452-463).

Following the biblical story, the prodigal son regrets what he has done and decides to return home (vs. 464-473). On the way back to his father's house, he thinks about a way to explain to his father his repentance (vs. 474-483). Meanwhile, the father has gone out "for a walk" (v. 483r), he is still worried about his son's destiny and prays to God for help (v. 484-495).

Finally, the father sees his son and hurries to embrace him (vs. 496-503) but the boy falls to his knees and expresses his contrition (vs. 504-507). Then the prodigal son thanks God for having recovered his son. He asks the servants to bring clothes, to kill a calf and to prepare the banquet (vs. 508-519).

They dress the prodigal son and walk to the scaffold where, according to the rubrics, there is "a table and musicians" (v. 523r). The father asks them to start playing their instruments (vs. 524-527) and then, the elder son arrives and is surprised by the commotion (vs. 528-535). He asks one of the servants and is hurt when he learns about the reason for the celebration (vs. 537-543). Next, the servant informs the father that the elder son refuses to come in (vs. 544-545) and the father says that he will make him "come up" to them (v. 546). This reference indicates that the ground level was also used for the staging. The father goes down, listens to his son's complaints and manages to convince him to put aside his anger (vs. 548-571). Both enter the scaffold, the brothers embrace and the play ends with a song of thanks (vs. 572-591).

In contrast to the first play, the second one contains rubrics that reveal the existence of two scaffolds. On the first one (v. 261r), we find a conventional construction, that is to say without a front and with an interior room, which cannot be seen by the audience. The second one represents the father's house and is a less complex construction than the first. This second scaffold is used for the banquet scene and also for the first scenes of the play (v. 523r). Moreover, we can deduce from the text the existence of two different levels: one that corresponds to the scaffolds and one that corresponds to the ground level, which is also used during the action, for example, during the conversation between the father and the elder son (v. 546).

Comparing the way in which the two plays dramatise the parable, we find that the first emphasises the symbolic character of the story, whereas the second presents a much more realistic development of the action and is closer to profane theatre. Play No. 13 includes the allegorical character of Vanity who tempts the prodigal son and it also assigns to Lucifer the role of owner of the swine. Play No. 14 enlarges the family background with the inclusion of the mother and some servants.

Another difference is that in the first play the circumstances under which the prodigal son loses his fortune are not shown, whereas in the second play the innkeeper plays an important role, because the prodigal son asks him to provide him with women, gambling, banquets and rich clothing (vs. 276-279).

CONCLUSIONS

We draw the following conclusions from the comparative study of dramatisations of the parable of the Prodigal Son in 16th century Europe:

1. The iconographic representation of the parable of the Prodigal Son in the stained glass windows of the French cathedrals of Bourges, Sens and Chartres include scenes that are absent from the biblical story but that appear frequently in the plays on this subject. Based on this observation, we situate the genesis of the dramatisation of the biblical story in the 13th century, two centuries earlier than the first documented staging of this kind: a Flemish play staged in 1420 in Dendermonde.

2. The most widespread dramatic use of the subject of the Prodigal Son was in the 16th century, as we can see from the numerous plays that have come down to us from this period all around Europe, especially in the German-speaking areas. This popularity lasted until the 19th century in some cases, with not only the creation of plays but also operas based on the subject.

3. In the 16th century, the biblical theme of the Prodigal Son can be found on the European stage: a) as a play midway between religious and profane theatre, b) as a weapon in the religious battle between Protestants and Catholics, c) as an erudite comedy in Latin and d) as a vernacular comedy. Yet we see that at the end of the century the emphasis is clearly put on the moralising purpose with the inclusion of allegorical characters and more didactic speeches, characteristic of the morality plays.

4. In German-speaking areas, most of the plays on the parable of the Prodigal Son follow the model of the Dutch schoolmasters: the Asotus (1510) by Macropedius and, above all, the Acolastus (1529) by Gnaphaeus. The plays in Romance languages are independent of these Neolatin comedies.

5. Because of their edifying subject, their didactic purpose and, in the case of the two Majorcan plays also for the type of staging, the plays based on the parable of the Prodigal Son are clearly in the medieval tradition of religious theatre. What differentiates them from other plays based on the New Testament is that instead of sacred characters, we find archetypes (pater, filius, meretrix, servus, etc.) taken from the commedia palliata.

6. The two plays of the Prodigal Son in the Llabrés manuscript exemplify the two tendencies that we observe in the dramatisation of the parable in 16th century Europe: whereas the first play belongs in the line of edifying and didactic plays, in the tradition of religious theatre, the second presents comical and popular elements typical of profane theatre. The way in which the two plays most differ from each other is the portrayal of the father. In the first, he appears idealised and symbolises God Father, whereas in the second, he has human frailties.

ALENDA Y MIRA, Jenaro, "Catálogo de autos sacramentales historiales y alegóricos", Boletín de la Real Academia Española, V, 1918, p. 104.

ANGULO, Rosa M., "Una nova <Història del Fill Pròdig>", Els balls parlats a la Catalunya Nova (Teatre popular català), El Mèdol, Tarragona, 1992, pp. 256-257.

AVALLE-ARCE, Juan Bautista (ed.), Lope de Vega, El peregrino en su patria, Editorial Castalia, Madrid 1973.

BARTHOLOMAEIS, Vicenzo de (edit.), Laude drammatiche e rappresentazioni sacre, 3 vols., Florència, 1943.

BOLTE, Johannes (ed.), Georg Wickrams Werke, Litterarischer Verein in Stuttgart, Tübingen, 1903.

BORCHERDT, Hans Heinrich, "Das deutsche Theater im 16. Jahrhundert", Das europäische Theater im Mittelalter und in der Renaissance, J.J.Weber, Leipzig, 1939, pp. 147-193.

BRETTSCHNEIDER, Werner, Die Parabel vom verlorenen Sohn. Das biblische Gleichnis in der Entwicklung der europäischen Literatur, Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin, 1978.

BUTTMANN, Rudolf, "Das Spiel vom verlornen Sohn am Zweibrücker Hof", Westpfälzische Geschichtsblätter, 6, Juni 1909, pp. 22-23.

CENOZ, G./HUERTA, F.; "La <Consueta del Fill Pròdich>, peça núm. 13 del Ms. 1139 de la Biblioteca de Catalunya", Estudis de literatura catalana en honor de Josep Romeu i Figueras, I, Publicacions de l'Abadia de Montserrat, Barcelona, 1986, pàgs. 259-288.

COOK, James Wyatt (ed.), Florentine Drama for Convent and Festival, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996.

CORBATÓ, Hermenegildo, Los misterios del Corpus de Valencia, University of California, Publications in Modern Philology, 16, 1932-1933.

DE LOS REYES PEñA, Mercedes, "El Aucto del Hijo prodigo", El códice de autos viejos, Un estudio de historia literaria, vol. II, Ediciones Alfar, Sevilla, 1988, pp. 562-570.

DIETZ, Donald Thaddeus, The Auto Sacramental and the Parable in Spanish Golden Age Literature, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, U.N.C, 1973 ("Studies in the Romance Languages and Literatures", 132).

FERNÁNDEZ NIETO, Manuel, Investigaciones sobre Alonso Remón, dramaturgo desconocido del siglo XVII. Con dos comedias inéditas, Madrid, Retorno Ediciones, 1974.

FLECNIAKOSKA, J.L., La formation de l'<auto> religieux en Espagne avant Calderón, 1550-1635, Imp. P. Déhan, Montpellier, 1961, p. 316.

FRONING, Richard (ed.), Das Drama des Mittalters, Stuttgart, 1892, (Deutsche Nationalliteratur, 14); fotomechanischer Abdruck, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, 1964.

HENRARD, Nadine, Le théâtre religieux médiéval en langue d'oc, Droz, Ginebra, 1998, pp. 15-28.

HOLSTEIN, Hugo, "Das Drama vom verlornen Sohn. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Dramas", Programm des Progymnasiums zu Geestemünde, Remmler v. Vengerow, Geestemünde, 1880.

- Dramen von Ackermann und Voith, Bibliothek des literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, 170, Tübingen, 1884.

HUERTA, Ferran (ed.), Teatre bíblic, Antic Testament, Editorial Barcino, Barcelona, 1976.

KINDERMANN, Heinz, Das Theaterpublikum des Mittelalters, Otto Müller Verlag, Salzburg, 1980.

- Das Theaterpublikum der Renaissance, 2 vols., Otto Müller Verlag, Salzburg, 1986.

LINKE, Hans Jürgen, "Drama und Theater", Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart. Die deutsche Literatur im späten Mittelalter 1250-1370, III/2, de Boor, H., Newald, R. (ed.), München, 1986.

LLABRÉS, Gabriel, "Repertorio de Consuetas representadas en las iglesias de Mallorca (siglos XV y XVI)", Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, V, 1901, pp. 920-927 i VI, 1902, pp. 456-466.

LLOMPART, Gabriel, "Les representacions de teatre religiós mallorquí en temps de Diego de Arnedo", Randa, 10, 1980, pp. 99-105.

MACRÍ, Giuseppe (ed.), L'Enfant Prodigue. Moralità del sec. XVI, Adriatica Editrice Salentina, Lecce, 1982.

MASSIP, Francesc, "El repertorio musical en el teatro medieval catalán, Revista de Musicología, vol. X, núm. 3, 1988, pp. 721-752.

- "La recerca en la història del teatre: el cas de l'espectacle medieval, Actes del I Seminari de l'Història de l'Espectacle Teatral, Universitat d'Alacant, 1997, pp. 11-45.

MAS VIVES, Joan, "El gènere de la <Moralitat> en el teatre català antic", Llengua & Literatura, 7, 1996, pp. 91-104.

MICHAEL, Wolfgang, Das deutsche Drama der Reformationszeit, Bern, 1984.

MILANESI, Gaetano (ed.), "Il Figliuol prodigo. Commedia di cinque atti in prosa", Commedie di Giovammaria Cecchi Notaio fiorentino del Secolo XVI, vol. I, Florència, 1856, pp. 1-59.

MIRÓ, Ramón, La processó de Corpus i els entremesos. Cervera, segles XIV-XIX, Curial Edicions Catalanes, Barcelona, 1998, p. 183.

PÉREZ GÓMEZ, Antonio (ed.), Luis de Miranda, Comedia pródiga (Sevilla, 1554), València, 1953.

PÉREZ PRIEGO, Miguel Ángel, Estudios sobre teatro del Renacimiento, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid, 1998.

RÖSSLER, Alice, (ed.), Wolfgang Schmeltzl, Komödie des verlorenen Sohnes, Neudrucke deutscher Literaturwerke des frühen 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts, Nachwort von Henrik Becker, Max Niemeyer Verlag, Halle, 1955.

ROMEU I FIGUERAS, Josep, (ed.), Teatre hagiogràfic, 3 vols., Editorial Barcino, Barcelona, 1957.

- (ed.), Teatre profà, 2 vols., Editorial Barcino, Barcelona, 1962.

- (ed.), Teatre català antic, 3 vols., a cura de Francesc Massip i Pep Vila, Curial Edicions Catalanes, Barcelona, 1994-1995.

ROUANET, Léo, Colección de Autos, Farsas y Coloquios del siglo XVI, L'Avenç, Barcelona, 1901.

SCHMIDT, P. Expeditus, "Ein Spiel vom Verlorenen Sohne am Pfalz-Zweibrückener Hofe", nach der Handschrift des Pfalzgrafen Philipp Ludwig im K. Geheimen Hausarchiv zu München, Analecta Germanica Hermann Paul zum 7. August 1906, Amberg, 1906, pp. 171-260.

SCHWECKENDIEK, Adolf, "Bühnengeschichte des verlorenen Sohnes in Deutschland", Theatergeschichtliche Forschungen, Band 40, Verlag von Leopold Voss, Leipzig, 1930.

SPENGLER, Franz, Der verlorene Sohn im Drama des 16. Jahrhunderts, Innsbruck, 1888.

STOCKUM, Th. C. van, "Das Jedermann-Motiv und das Motiv des verlorenen Sohnes im niederländischen und im niederdeutschen Drama", Nieuwe Reeks, Deel 21, no. 7, N.v. Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij, Amsterdam, 1958.

STUMPFL, Robert, "Schweckendieks Bühnengeschichte des Verlorenen Sohnes in Deutschland", Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie, LVI, 1931, pp. 472-479.

ZUMTHOR, Paul, La letra y la voz de la <literatura> medieval, Ediciones Cátedra, Madrid, 1989 (La lettre et la voix. De la <litterature> médiévale, Éditions du Seuil, Paris, 1987).